📋 Shiur Overview
Summary of Shiur on Hilchos Shvisas Asor — Chapter 1
—
Introduction: The Name “Shvisas Asor”
The Rambam calls these laws “Hilchos Shvisas Asor” — not “Hilchos Yom HaKippurim.”
Explanation: The Rambam deals here only with the shevisa-aspect of Yom Kippur — not the avodah (which is in Hilchos Avodas Yom HaKippurim in Sefer Avodah) and not the tefillos (which is in Hilchos Tefillah).
Insights and Explanations:
1. The Rambam’s System of “Shevisa”: The Rambam connects all yamim tovim under the theme of shevisa — Shabbos, Yom Tov, and Yom Kippur. He even calls the taanis (fast) a “shevisa” — shevisa from eating, not just shevisa from melacha. “Shevisa” is a broader concept — stopping regular life.
2. “Asor” as a Unique Name: The name “asor” (the tenth) is unusual — it doesn’t appear as a standard term for Yom Kippur in other sefarim. In the Minyan HaMitzvos HaKatzar, the Rambam writes “lehisanos ba’asiri” (in the context of chodesh hashevi’i), and then “lishbos b’yom hatzom.” The name comes from the pasuk “ach ba’asor lachodesh hashevi’i.”
3. Perhaps the Rambam Wants to Emphasize that Shevisa is Not Dependent on Kapparah: Through the name “Shvisas Asor” (not “Shvisas Yom HaKippurim”), the Rambam may be hinting that the shevisa is a separate mitzvah of the tenth day as a Yom Tov, distinct from the kapparah-aspect. However, this is not definitively answered.
4. Practical Reason — Short Chapter Names: The Rambam generally doesn’t like long names for halachos chapters. “Shvisas Asor” (two words) is shorter than “Shvisas Yom HaKippurim” (three words). Parallel: Shabbos is called “Hilchos Shabbos” (not “Shvisas HaShevi’i”), because there he includes all matters (zachor, shamor, oneg Shabbos).
5. Parallel to Maseches Yoma: The Gemara calls Yom Kippur “Yoma” — simply “the day.” Maseches Yoma is also sometimes called “Maseches Yom HaKippurim.”
—
Halacha 1 — Mitzvas Aseh to Rest from Melacha on Yom Kippur
A) The Four Mitzvos of Shvisas Asor
“Mitzvas aseh lishbos mimelachos ba’asor lachodesh hashevi’i shene’emar Shabbas Shabbason hu lachem. V’chol ha’oseh bo melacha bitel mitzvas aseh v’avar al lo sa’aseh shene’emar kol melacha lo sa’asu.”
Explanation: The Rambam counts four mitzvos — two asehs and two lo sa’asehs: (1) aseh: lishbos mimelachah; (2) lo sa’aseh: shelo la’asos melacha; (3) aseh: lehisanos bo; (4) lo sa’aseh: shelo le’echol v’lishtos bo.
Insights:
The Rambam says explicitly “shelo le’echol v’lishtos bo” — only eating and drinking is d’Oraisa. The other chamisha inuyim (rechitzah, sicha, ne’ilas hasandal, tashmish hamitah) are not on the same d’Oraisa level. This is perhaps different from other Rishonim.
—
B) Punishments — Kares, Chatas, Sekilah
“Im asah birtzon b’zadon chayav kares, v’im asah b’shogeg chayav korban chatas kevuah.”
Explanation:
– Birtzon = to exclude ones (a non-Jew forces him — he knows what he’s doing but doesn’t want it).
– B’zadon = to exclude shogeg (he knows it’s Yom Kippur and it’s forbidden).
– Chatas kevuah = not oleh v’yored (not dependent on rich/poor).
—
C) Which Melachos are Forbidden?
“Kol melacha shechayavin al zedonah b’Shabbos sekilah, chayavin al zedonah b’Yom HaKippurim kares… v’chol shechayavin alav korban chatas b’Shabbos chayavin alav korban chatas b’Yom HaKippurim.”
Explanation: All 39 melachos with their toldos that are forbidden on Shabbos are also forbidden on Yom Kippur. The only difference is the punishment: Shabbos = sekilah (with witnesses and warning) + kares (without witnesses); Yom Kippur = only kares (no sekilah). B’shogeg — both chatas.
Insights:
1. The Rambam quotes the Mishnah in Makkos: “Ein bein Shabbos l’Yom HaKippurim ela shezeh zedono b’chares v’zeh zedono b’yedei adam” — the only difference is that Shabbos has beis din shel matah (sekilah), and Yom Kippur has only beis din shel ma’alah (kares).
2. The Rambam’s language — first “kol melacha shechayavin al zedonah b’Shabbos sekilah… chayavin alav b’Yom HaKippurim kares” and then “kol shechayavin alav chatas b’Shabbos chayavin alav chatas b’Yom HaKippurim” — is seemingly redundant, because one could have simply said that all melachos are the same. But the Rambam wants to emphasize the parallel systematically — both for meizid and for shogeg.
—
D) D’Rabbanans — Shevus, Muktzeh, Issurei Amirah, Lechatchilah
“Kol she’asur la’asoso b’Shabbos mishum shevus, im asah makin oso makas mardus k’derech shemakin oso b’Shabbos. Kol she’eino metalteil b’Shabbos eino metalteil b’Yom HaKippurim. V’chol she’asur l’omro o la’asoso lechatchilah b’Shabbos, kach b’Yom HaKippurim. Ein bein Shabbos l’Yom HaKippurim b’inyanim eilu ela shezeh b’misah v’zeh b’chares.”
Explanation: All issurei d’Rabbanan of Shabbos — shevus, muktzeh, issurei amirah/asiyah lechatchilah — also apply to Yom Kippur. The only difference between Shabbos and Yom Kippur is the punishment for melacha d’Oraisa: Shabbos — misah, Yom Kippur — kares.
Insights and Explanations:
1. Four Distinct Categories of D’Rabbanans: The Rambam lists: (a) Shevus — things that are similar to melacha or lead to melacha (as detailed in Chapter 20 of Hilchos Shabbos); (b) Tiltul/Muktzeh; (c) Issurei Amirah — “shelo yehei diburcha shel Shabbos k’diburcha shel chol”; (d) Things one may not do lechatchilah. The Rambam writes each category separately, which shows he holds they are not the same — one cannot derive one from the other.
2. The Chiddush that “Lechatchilah” is a Separate Category: It is discussed what “la’asoso lechatchilah” means. One explanation: preparation for motzaei Shabbos (mishum mimtzo cheftzecha). Another explanation: things one may not do lechatchilah, but b’dieved there is no punishment (no makas mardus). Yet another explanation: “lechatchilah” means things that in times of need the Rabbanan are lenient — every d’Rabbanan that one may not do only lechatchilah is permitted in times of need.
3. A Chiddush Regarding Makas Mardus: The Rambam says makas mardus only on shevus (similar to melacha), but does not say it explicitly on muktzeh or on issurei amirah/lechatchilah. This is precise — it seems that not all d’Rabbanans have the same status of makas mardus. On muktzeh and on “lechatchilah”-things there is perhaps no makas mardus.
4. Back to Hilchos Shabbos Chapter 1: The Rambam says there: “Kol makom shene’emar she’oseh davar zeh patur aval asur harei zeh asur midivrei sofrim, v’chen kol makom shene’emar ein osin kach v’kach” — different expressions all mean d’Rabbanan. But from Chapter 24 (Hilchos Shabbos) we see that there are things that are forbidden even though they are not similar or lead to melacha, and on them one doesn’t get makas mardus. The Rambam didn’t say it very clearly in Hilchos Shabbos, but here in Hilchos Yom HaKippurim we see it.
—
Halacha 2 — Permitted to Prepare Vegetables on Yom Kippur from Minchah and Onward
“Mutar lekanev es hayerek b’Yom HaKippurim min haminchah ul’ma’alah. Mah hi hakenuvah? Sheyasir es he’alin hameyubashin v’yiktzatz hashe’ar v’yesaken oso la’achilah. V’chen mefatze’in b’egozim umefarerim rimonim min haminchah ul’ma’alah, mipnei agmas nefesh.”
“K’var nahagu ha’am b’Shin’ar uv’Ma’arav shelo ya’asu echad mikol eileh b’yom hatzom, ela harei hu k’Shabbos l’chol.”
Explanation: From minchah and onward on Yom Kippur one may prepare vegetables (remove dry leaves, cut), crack nuts, and remove seeds from pomegranates — because one has agmas nefesh from the fast. But the custom in Bavel (Shin’ar) and Ma’arav was not to do it, rather to conduct oneself entirely like Shabbos.
Insights and Explanations:
1. What is the Issur Being Permitted? The Rambam lists three actions in kenivas hayerek: (a) “yasir es he’alin hameyubashin” — similar to borer (removing waste from food); (b) “yiktzatz hashe’ar” — similar to tochen (cutting); (c) “v’yesaken oso la’achilah” — similar to metaken. All three would have been forbidden on Shabbos (at least d’Rabbanan), but on Yom Kippur they permitted it mipnei agmas nefesh.
2. The Basis of the Kula — Agmas Nefesh: On Yom Kippur from minchah and onward one is already very hungry. If one won’t be able to prepare the food until after Yom Kippur, it will take more time until one can eat, and one will have to fast also on motzaei Yom Kippur. This is agmas nefesh — the distress of knowing that one won’t be able to eat for a long time. Therefore the Chachamim were lenient with certain issurei d’Rabbanan.
3. The Difficulty with Kenivas Yerek: If kenivas yerek is an issur d’Oraisa (borer), how can it be permitted on Yom Kippur? And if it’s only d’Rabbanan, why shouldn’t it also be permitted on Shabbos (close to eating)? Mefarshim on the Rambam have already struggled with this problem. The Rambam adds the explanation (“mah hi hakenuvah?”) to clarify that we’re not talking about borer d’Oraisa, and perhaps not even a real issur d’Rabbanan — it could be something less than that. This is unusual for the Rambam, who generally doesn’t bring explanations of Gemara expressions in Mishneh Torah.
4. The Matter of “Lo Nicha” on Yom Kippur: On Shabbos one may crack nuts simply because one can always eat (it’s always “close to eating”). But Yom Kippur, where one doesn’t eat, is “lo nicha” — one is preparing for later, which is a matter of hachanah. One would have thought that afternoon of Yom Kippur is already “close to eating” (for motzaei Yom Kippur), but early in the day it’s for the night — that’s too far. Shabbos has a different problem: one may not prepare from Shabbos for motzaei Shabbos.
5. The Custom as an Answer: The custom in Shin’ar and Ma’arav comes to solve a practical problem — so that people shouldn’t get confused between things that are permitted on Yom Kippur but forbidden on Shabbos, they adopted the custom to conduct themselves entirely like Shabbos.
6. L’Ma’aseh: Both the Rambam and the Shulchan Aruch rule that the custom is not to do kenivas yerek on Yom Kippur, so it’s not relevant l’ma’aseh.
7. [Digression: Hachanah on Yom Kippur] The Belzer Rav would ask the gabbai before Ne’ilah to take out the milk from the freezer, so it wouldn’t be too cold for his coffee on motzaei Yom Kippur, and he said that with this he fulfills the matter of kenivas yerek. This shows that for something that is only a matter of hachanah (not really an issur), Yom Kippur one may. In all shuls they already prepare the break-fast, even though it’s a question of hachanah — it seems that the heter applies to such things.
—
Halacha 3 — Mitzvas Aseh of Inuy on Yom Kippur (Eating and Drinking)
“Mitzvas aseh acheres yesh b’Yom HaKippurim, v’hi lishbos bo me’achilah u’shtiyah… umipei hashemu’ah lamedu she’inuy shehu lanefesh zeh hatzom… v’chol hatzam bo kiyeim mitzvas aseh, v’chol ha’ochel v’shoteh bo bitel mitzvas aseh v’avar al lo sa’aseh, shene’emar ki chol hanefesh asher lo se’uneh v’nichresah.”
“Me’achar she’inish hakasuv kares l’mi shelo yis’aneh, lamadnu she’anu muzharim bo al achilah u’shtiyah.”
Explanation: There is a separate mitzvas aseh on Yom Kippur — shevisa from eating and drinking. The source is “v’inisem es nafshoseichem,” and mipei hashemu’ah we learned that inuy hanefesh means fasting. Whoever fasts is mekayeim mitzvas aseh; whoever eats or drinks is mevatel mitzvas aseh and transgresses a lo sa’aseh. B’shogeg — chayav korban chatas kevuah.
Insights and Explanations:
1. The Rambam’s Language of “Shevisa” on Inuy: The Rambam calls the inuy by the name “shevisa” — “lishbos bo me’achilah u’shtiyah” — even though the Torah uses the language “te’anu.” The Rambam uses “shevisa” not only for resting from melachos like Shabbos, but also for stopping from eating — just as he says “shoves mei’aveirah.”
2. The Source from Sefer HaMitzvos: The Rambam in Sefer HaMitzvos interprets the pasuk in Parshas Emor “Shabbas Shabbason hu lachem v’inisem es nafshoseichem” that the “Shabbason” also applies to “v’inisem” — one should be shoves from everything: from melachos and from eating. But here in Mishneh Torah he doesn’t bring that pasuk from Emor, rather the pasuk from Acharei Mos.
3. “Mipei Hashemu’ah Lamedu” — Why Do We Need Halacha L’Moshe MiSinai: The pasuk says “v’inisem es nafshoseichem” — this could mean different types of affliction (standing on one foot, hitting oneself, etc.). The Rambam explains that mipei hashemu’ah we learned that “inuy shehu lanefesh” — an inuy that is specifically for the “nefesh” — this is the fast. The word “nefesh” in the pasuk is interpreted as a hint to the life of the nefesh, which depends on eating and drinking (a matter that involves loss of life). Even though it doesn’t say “inuy shel nefesh” but rather “v’inisem es nafshoseichem” (afflict your souls), Chazal added mipei hashemu’ah the interpretation that it means a nefesh-related inuy — meaning not eating.
4. Lav Without Explicit Language of “Lo Sa’aseh”: The Rambam’s approach is that there doesn’t need to be explicitly written “lo sochlu” in order to have a lav. The mere fact that the Torah punishes with kares (“ki chol hanefesh asher lo se’uneh v’nichresah”) automatically shows that there is a lav. This is an interesting principle — kares implies a lav.
5. Difficulty from the Gemara: In the learning of the Gemara it’s not simple that every time there’s a punishment it’s already enough without a separate lav. Many times one needs to find a specific lav. The Gemara brings a gezeirah shavah — just as on eating there is a lav with a punishment, so too on melacha. The Lechem Mishneh brings this from the Gemara and says that the Rambam means this.
6. The Rambam’s Approach to Pesukim: The Rambam doesn’t necessarily follow the rules of drashos from the Gemara. He brings a pasuk according to logic — if there’s kares, there’s certainly a lav — not necessarily in the Gemara’s calculations. This is consistent with the Rambam’s approach that he often brings an interpretation close to the plain meaning, not necessarily exactly as the Gemara derives it.
—
Halacha 4 — The Other Four Inuyim (Rechitzah, Sicha, Ne’ilas HaSandal, Tashmish HaMitah)
“V’chen lamedu mipei hashemu’ah she’asur lirchotz bo, o lasuch, o lin’ol es hasandal, o lavo al ishto. U’mitzvah lishbos mikol eilu k’derech sheshoves me’achilah u’shtiyah, shene’emar ‘Shabbas Shabbason’ — Shabbas l’inyan melacha, v’Shabbason l’inyanim eilu.”
“V’ein chayavim kares o korban ela al achilah u’shtiyah bilvad, aval [al rechitzah, sicha, ne’ilas hasandal, v’tashmish] makin oso makas mardus.”
Explanation: Mipei hashemu’ah we learn that one may not wash, anoint, wear shoes, or have relations. One must be shoves from all these pleasures just as from eating and drinking. The pasuk “Shabbas Shabbason” is divided: “Shabbas” — on melacha, “Shabbason” — on the four inuyim. Kares and korban is only on eating and drinking; on the other four inuyim one receives only makas mardus.
Insights and Explanations:
1. Two Sources for Two Categories: The Rambam makes a clear division in sources: eating and drinking we learn from “te’anu es nafshoseichem,” and the other four inuyim we learn from “Shabbason.” It’s not that everything comes from one pasuk.
2. Major Question — D’Oraisa or D’Rabbanan? This is the main point of the discussion. There is an apparent contradiction in the Rambam:
– Proofs that it’s d’Oraisa: (a) He says “lamedu mipei hashemu’ah” — which by the Rambam usually means halacha l’Moshe miSinai, which is d’Oraisa. (b) He brings a pasuk “Shabbason” as a source — a pasuk usually makes it d’Oraisa. (c) He says it’s a “mitzvah lishbos” — implying a mitzvas aseh mid’Oraisa.
– Proof that it’s d’Rabbanan: He says “makas mardus” — which is usually the punishment for d’Rabbanan, not for d’Oraisa.
3. Parallel to Shevusos Shabbos: This is similar to the Rambam’s approach in Hilchos Shabbos Chapter 21, where he says “ne’emar baTorah ’tishbos’ afilu midvarim she’einan melacha” — and this is certainly d’Rabbanan, because he’s talking about shevusos on which one receives makas mardus. The structure is very similar: a pasuk (“Shabbason”/”tishbos”), but the punishment is only makas mardus. Perhaps this is the Rambam’s approach — a pasuk can serve as an asmachta for a d’Rabbanan.
4. Question on the D’Oraisa Learning: If it’s d’Oraisa, it’s difficult to understand why “v’inisem es nafshoseichem” means only eating and drinking. By the mitzvas aseh (Shabbason) all bodily pleasures are included. Why should “inuy nefesh” — which is also a matter of bodily distress — not also include rechitzah, sicha, etc.? All these things are “close cousins” — all are bodily pleasures. But the Rambam says clearly that “inuy nefesh” means specifically eating and drinking, and the others come from a separate source.
5. Possibility: Aseh Without Punishment: It’s possible that it’s d’Oraisa — an issur aseh — but without a punishment of kares. There is such a thing in the Torah that two details in one mitzvah, one is an issur of kares (eating and drinking) and one is only a chiyuv aseh (the other inuyim). A parallel is mechamair on Shabbos — the Rambam says clearly that it’s an issur aseh mid’Oraisa, but it doesn’t get malkus mid’Oraisa, only makas mardus mid’Rabbanan.
6. The Rambam’s Perush HaMishnah on Yoma: The Rambam in Perush HaMishnah on Yoma says that because it says “asur,” he learns that one receives makas mardus, but “ikar isuran kabalah” — the whole thing is from kabalah. “Kabalah” means the same as “mipei hashemu’ah” — we received it from Moshe Rabbeinu. The Gemara’s hints from pesukim are only asmachtos, but the essence is kabalah. The Perush HaMishnah does not make the distinction between “shevisa” and “inuy” that the Rambam makes here in Mishneh Torah.
[Digression: What Does “Kabalah” Mean?] There was a discussion whether “kabalah” means divrei kabalah (= d’Rabbanan, like Nevi’im), or kabalah from Moshe Rabbeinu (= d’Oraisa). The conclusion is that here kabalah means that we received from Moshe Rabbeinu that “Shabbason” and “inuy” mean the specific things — this is a d’Oraisa tradition.
7. Makas Mardus — Source: The Rambam’s proof for makas mardus on the other inuyim comes from the word “asid” in Mishnah Yoma — he interpreted the word “asid” as a basis for makas mardus. Also: in the Mishnah it says “asur” (not just “ein osin”), and the Rambam interprets — “v’zeh inyan omro asur” — that this language “asur” shows that one receives makas mardus. Not every issur aseh brings makas mardus, but this language “asur” in the Mishnah made the Rambam decide that here there is makas mardus.
8. The Rambam Has No Problem with Two Levels: We see that the Rambam has no problem that some inuyim should be with an issur aseh (without kares), and others should be more stringent. The kabalah/tradition is that there are two types of inuyim: (1) eating and drinking — stringent, one receives kares; (2) the other inuyim — less stringent, without kares.
9. Chiddush Regarding the “Lav” of Eating and Drinking: If there were a clear lav on the less-stringent inuyim, one could ask why on one there is a lav and on others only an aseh. But since the “lav” of “v’inisem” is miklal kares (not a real separate lav, but included in kares), one can understand — the Torah didn’t go as strictly as kares on all inuyim, and automatically where there is kares there is also a lav. But on the other inuyim — it can be d’Oraisa but without punishment.
—
Halacha 5 — Inuy Both Day and Night
“K’shem sheshoves mimelachah bo bein bayom bein balailah, kach shoves mikol eilu bein bayom bein balailah.”
Explanation: Just as melacha is forbidden both day and night, so too inuy is both day and night.
Insights:
1. The Chiddush of Inuy at Night: By melacha everyone understands that Yom Kippur (like Shabbos) is 24 hours. The chiddush is that also by inuy, where a person would have thought that at night it’s not noticeable (because one sleeps anyway, one doesn’t eat anyway), it also applies from night. We see from ta’aniyos d’Rabbanan that there is a fast where one eats all night until alos hashachar. The chiddush is that by Yom Kippur one must begin all five inuyim from night.
2. [Digression: How Do We Know that Shabbos is Day and Night?] From the pasuk itself it’s not clear that “yom” always means 24 hours. By Yom Kippur it says explicitly “me’erev ad erev,” by Pesach it says “ba’erev tochlu matzos” — we see clearly that it begins from evening. This implies that normally when it says “bayom” it doesn’t begin in the evening. Or conversely — only when it says “b’etzem hayom” does it mean specifically during the day, but plain “yom” means also night. It’s not a clear thing from the plain meaning of Scripture.
3. [Digression: Sheshes Yemei Bereishis] According to the plain meaning in Bereishis, Hashem only worked during the day — “vayehi erev vayehi voker” — at night He didn’t work. This isn’t so simple, because “vayehi erev” — when was the evening? Torah commentators say “k’var hayah erev” earlier. From this comes the Rashbam with the Ibn Ezra and their dispute. The simple plain meaning would have been that at night is not a time of work, therefore when Shabbos begins, the night is already part of the long rest.
—
Halacha 6 — Tosefes Yom HaKippurim: Adding from Weekday to Holy
“V’tzarich l’hosif meichol al hakodesh bichniaso uvitzioso. Shene’emar v’inisem es nafshoseichem b’tish’ah lachodesh ba’erev… me’erev ad erev tishb’su Shabbaschem. K’lomar, satchil v’sis’aneh me’at me’erev tish’ah samuach la’asiri, v’chen b’yitzioso shehu b’inuy me’at mileil achad asar samuach la’asiri.”
Explanation: One must begin fasting a bit before the start of Yom Kippur (still in erev Yom Kippur = tish’i b’Tishrei), and one must finish a bit later after motzaei Yom Kippur (into leil 11 Tishrei).
Insights and Explanations:
1. How Do We Learn This Pasuk? The learning is: “b’tish’ah lachodesh ba’erev” — “ba’erev” means still from evening, before the night, not when it’s already leil asiri. “Me’erev ad erev” — “me’erev” means one should begin early (before the night), “ad erev” means one should finish late (into the night). As if “me’erev ad erev” means ad v’ad bichlal — one goes a bit over on both sides.
2. Question Raised: The Rambam says this only regarding taanis/inuy, not regarding melacha. Why?
3. Normal Plain Meaning of the Pasuk: Normally one would have interpreted that the pasuk only comes to say that Yom Kippur is 24 hours — one begins at night (not like a regular fast which is only during the day). But the Chachamim derived from it that one must add a bit.
4. A New Approach in Understanding Tosefes: The Gemara learns from the pasuk “v’inisem es nafshoseichem b’tish’ah lachodesh” that one should eat on erev Yom Kippur (“kol ha’ochel v’shoteh bateshi’i”). But the pasuk is difficult: why does it say “b’tish’ah lachodesh” when Yom Kippur is “ba’a
sor”? The answer is that “tish’ah lachodesh ba’erev” means: from the evening when tish’ah lachodesh ends, until the evening when asor lachodesh ends.
The Chiddush: We see from this pasuk that the obligation of inuy already begins with the departure of tish’ah — the end of tish’ah is already obligating. This means that tosefes Yom HaKippurim is not merely an addition to the day (as by Shabbos), but something inherent in the obligation of inuy itself. By Shabbos no one would think that Yom Shishi is already obligating with Shabbos — as long as it’s still Yom Shishi, one is exempt. But here tish’ah lachodesh already brings with it the mitzvah of “v’inisem.” This means that even erev asor has within it something of an obligation.
5. Yom Kippur = All of Asor + A Drop of Tish’ah + A Drop of 11: According to this approach, Yom Kippur’s fasting time is: all of asor, plus a bit from the end of tish’ah, plus a bit from the beginning of 11. This only makes sense because one needs a “complete day” — if it would begin only in the morning or in the middle of the night, there would be no logic for tosefes.
6. Tosefes is Only on Inuy, Not on Melacha — According to the Rambam: The Rambam rules clearly that tosefes Yom HaKippurim is only on the fast (inuy — eating and drinking), not on shevisa from melacha. The Maggid Mishneh brings that it’s implied in the Gemara that there is a dispute about this. The Rambam says “latzeis melo hata’aniyos” — which means all five inuyim, but certainly not shevisa from melacha.
7. Dispute of Rishonim: Ran vs. Rambam: The Ran and other Rishonim hold that tosefes also applies to shevisa from melacha, and therefore there is also tosefes on Shabbos. Their source: the pasuk says “Shabbaschem” — a hint to Shabbos. But according to the Rambam, since tosefes is only a law in fasting (inuy), Shabbos is a completely different world.
8. Tosefes vs. Bein Hashmashos — Stringency by Yom Kippur: If one makes the addition only during bein hashmashos itself, one is not yotzei, because if it’s a d’Oraisa obligation from a pasuk, it must be when it’s still certainly day (before bein hashmashos). By Shabbos one is lenient with bein hashmashos (because safek d’Rabbanan l’kula). But by Yom Kippur one cannot be lenient with bein hashmashos on inuyim — even though the Chachamim are generally lenient in a place of distress, and every inuy is a place of distress, nevertheless one must be stringent. This shows that the halacha is d’Oraisa.
9. Is Tosefes Yom HaKippurim D’Oraisa or D’Rabbanan? The Rambam does not say clearly. He brings a pasuk, which would imply d’Oraisa. But he doesn’t say any measure for the addition, and not what the minimum is.
—
Halacha 7 — Women Who Eat and Drink Until Dark
“Nashim she’ochlos v’shotos ad shechashechah, v’hen einan yod’os shemitzvah l’hosif meichol al hakodesh — ein momchin b’yadan, shelo yavo’u la’asos b’zadon, she’ein efshar sheyihyeh shoter b’veis kol echad v’echad l’hazhir… v’ein lach lahem sheyeid’u v’yishmeru es atzman.”
Explanation: Women who eat until it gets dark (without tosefes), because they don’t know about the mitzvah of tosefes meichol al hakodesh — one should not protest against them, so they won’t come to do it b’zadon. One cannot place a guard in every house.
Insights and Explanations:
1. Comparison with Erev Shabbos — Why There Yes Protest? On erev Shabbos there is an obligation to announce in the house (“b’soch beiso tzarich lomar”), even though bein hashmashos of Shabbos is only d’Rabbanan. By Yom Kippur, where tosefes is d’Oraisa, the Rambam says one does not protest! The distinction: by Shabbos we’re talking about preparing for the house — lighting candles, other people, blowing shofar for the entire community. This is not a personal protest on an issur, but a practical announcement that the house should be Shabbos-ready. By tosefes Yom Kippur we’re talking about an individual mitzvah that has nothing to do with another person.
2. “Ein Momchin” — We’re Talking About Beis Din, Not the Husband: The Rambam’s language “she’ein efshar sheyihyeh shoter b’veis kol echad v’echad” means: the beis din cannot send guards to every house. It’s not talking about the husband being a “guard” — a normal husband doesn’t go take away his wife’s food. “Shoter” means that the beis din doesn’t have enough police power to enforce this.
3. Why Won’t They Listen? — The Rashba’s Distinction: The Rashba argued that the distinction is: tosefes meichol al hakodesh is not stated explicitly in the Torah — it’s only a learning that the Chachamim understood from pesukim. When one goes to tell it to simple people (not bnei Torah), they won’t take it seriously. This is similar to “davar sheshoggin” — things that people do b’shogeg, we leave them, because if we tell them, they’ll do it b’meizid.
4. The Faith in Honest Jewish Women: The Rambam goes with an assumption that the women won’t stop eating on Yom Kippur itself — they are pious women, they fast on Yom Kippur, it gets dark, they stop eating. The problem is only with the tosefes beforehand — that’s a higher level that they don’t know about. This is an interesting faith in Klal Yisrael’s basic piety.
5. “Mecha’ah” — Not the Same as “Saying”: “Ein momchin b’yadan” doesn’t mean one doesn’t teach it in school or in halacha classes. Mecha’ah means a strong protest/enforcement — like “mecha’ah” in Hilchos Chezkas HaBatim. If one can say it calmly and they’ll listen — certainly. But one doesn’t make a formal protest, because that can lead to meizid.
6. The Specific Example with Yom Kippur: If one tells a woman that she already wasn’t allowed to eat (because tosefes Yom HaKippurim already began), she’ll think “okay, I already didn’t fast on Yom Kippur” — she won’t grasp the distinction that she only transgressed the tosefes, but not yet Yom Kippur itself. This can lead to her eating further on Yom Kippur itself.
—
The Principle of “Mutav Sheyihyu Shoggin V’al Yihyu Mezidin”
Explanation: The Rambam brings the principle that one should not protest when people will not listen anyway, so they should remain shoggin and not become mezidin.
Insights and Explanations:
1. The Problem of Protest That Makes Things Worse: In very many halachos people truly don’t believe that one may not do that. Even if one tells them, they won’t listen — not next year, not in three minutes. This is the reality of many halachos.
2. The Example of Shemiras Einayim: Poskim say, and people think, that shemiras einayim is a midas chasidus. The Rema indeed says it’s a midas chasidus (except for a woman who is forbidden to him). When one tells a person it’s a chumra or a hiddur, he won’t listen. But the harm of telling him is — now he becomes a meizid, because now he knows about it, and that makes him worse.
3. The Mechanism of “Mutav Sheyihyu Shoggin” — Not Just Saving from Punishment: The matter of mutav sheyihyu shoggin is not just a technical matter of saving from an obligation of sekilah or other punishments. It’s a character trait of the soul — a person must not become a meizid. A shogeg is a person who doesn’t know, never learned the halacha. But a meizid is a fundamentally different state of the soul.
4. The Example of Chinuch HaBanim: As long as the child doesn’t grasp that the father is not makpid on something, the father’s will remains in force, and the child will continue to act accordingly. But once it becomes open that he’s not makpid, one removes the will, and the child can do it “with a high hand.” So too with mutav sheyihyu shoggin — when one makes it open and the person doesn’t listen, it becomes something he does with a “high hand.”
5. “The Great Principle in All the Torah”: One must know when not to protest, so that shoggin should remain shoggin. This is a broad principle that extends to very many halachos.
—
Until here Chapter 1 of Hilchos Shvisas Asor.
📝 Full Transcript
Laws of Shevitat Asor — Chapter 1: The Commandments of Resting from Work and Eating
Introduction: Why Does the Rambam Call It “Shevitat Asor”?
Speaker 1:
Okay, we are learning Rambam, Sefer Zemanim. We’ve already finished Hilchot Shabbat basically, Shabbat and Eruvin, and we’re going to begin learning the laws of the holidays. And the first holiday, which is almost as severe as Shabbat, or as severe as Shabbat regarding most things, it even has an additional stringency that one may not even eat, this is a day that is called Asor. What is this Asor? “Ach be’asor” (but on the tenth). On the tenth day of some month. We don’t know. Ah, of the seventh month, obviously. But which one then? The month of holidays. Yes. So on the tenth day there is something that we call Yom Kippur.
And… why does the Rambam call it “Shevitat Asor”? Couldn’t he have written “Yom HaKippurim”? Okay, the answer is, because first of all, in Hilchot Yom Kippur he explains the part of the shevitah (resting) of Asor. He doesn’t explain, for example, the service of Yom Kippur. That he explains in Hilchot Avodah. And he also doesn’t explain what one prays on Yom Kippur. That he said in Hilchot Tefillah. And in general, also Yom Tov is called “Shevitat Yom Tov”, because he is connecting here Shabbat and all other shevitot. And not only that, but even the fast he calls shevitah. Besides shevitah from work there is shevitah from eating. He calls it shevitah. He is now dealing here with the topic of shevitah.
Speaker 2:
Right, so very good. There is indeed Hilchot Avodat Yom HaKippurim, which has to do with the atonement. Presumably it’s indeed in Sefer Avodah, I remember. Yes, because that is discussed in Sefer Avodah.
Avodah and kapparah are also not the same thing. There is avodah and there is teshuvah.
Speaker 1:
No, avodah in the Mishnah and in the Rambam always means avodat hamikdash (Temple service), not avodat Hashem that one cries out during prayer.
Speaker 2:
Right, right, right. But I’m saying, the kapparah of Yom Kippur, it could be that the kapparah happens through the sacrifices, but kapparah is a thing in itself, which has to do with teshuvah, and perhaps with the prayers of Yom Kippur where one asks for kapparah.
Speaker 1:
Okay, but all kapparot. I’m saying, there is indeed a law with the chapters “Yom HaKippurim”, with the Hilchot Avodat Yom HaKippurim. But you’re right that here he speaks of the shevitah, also because that is the thing… But why can’t it be called “Shevitat Yom HaKippurim”? It must be called “Shevitat Asor”? Where does such a language “Shevitat Asor” appear in the Torah?
Speaker 2:
It could be that the Rambam perhaps wants to say that the shevitah is not dependent on the kapparah. There is a Yom Tov, that the tenth day is a Yom Tov. The Yom Tov has commandments of shevitah. But there is a thing that the day is a Yom Kippur. I don’t know, I don’t know if the shevitah doesn’t stem from the kapparah. I don’t know, it’s a thing, a precision of a name.
Speaker 1:
Yes, no, it’s a funny name. No, I’m just asking, as we find in the Gemara, is there some language that it’s called Asor? I see the language of the Sefer HaMitzvot HaKatzar that I have copied here is “lishbot beyom hatzom” (to rest on the day of the fast), not “lishbot”. No, because he began with “lehitanot ba’asiri” (to fast on the tenth), so not what the day that I just said. No, he spoke of Chodesh HaShevi’i, the holidays of Chodesh HaShevi’i. He said, “lehitanot ba’asiri”. Now he can say, the day that is a Yom HaTzom, I just said it. He doesn’t call Yom HaTzom the designation for the day, but here. What is in the context? There’s no proof here. Yom Tzom Yom HaKippurim, that’s what one says. That he says already faster, let’s still leave over Yom HaKippurim. Is there an Asiri? To Yom HaKippurim. You have three names in the three names. Asiri bo? Okay, but Hilchot Shevitat Asor is difficult, because Asor of what? There must be some language that speaks of it? There must be some language that speaks of it? Lazar is not just the law forbidden in the seventh month. The chapter is Shevitat Asor, but indeed interesting. He held Shevitat Asor, Yom HaKippurim? He didn’t like long names? He didn’t like when the chapter has three four words?
Speaker 2:
I can be simply such a can, there is Shevitat HaShabbat, which is Shevitat HaShevi’i, and here is Shevitat Ha’asiri, Shevitat Ha’asiri. It’s something two numbers.
Speaker 1:
What do you mean not Hilchot Shevitat HaShabbat? It’s called plain Hilchot Shabbat. Hilchot Shabbat, right. Okay, because Hilchot Shabbat he explained everything that relates to Shabbat. Yes, true. Um… yes, true. Also you mean to say zachor and shamor, all these things. Oneg Shabbat, yes. The Rambam sometimes has long chapters? If he almost doesn’t have any long chapters here, did he prefer Shevitat Asor, which is two words, over Shevitat Yom HaKippurim, which is three words. Suddenly Shevitat Yom Tov? Yom Tov is usually a Y”T with a line. Okay, I’m going into the small pechim ketanim (small jars). No, it’s interesting, because there’s no other book that’s called like this. I think perhaps the Rambam says it’s taken? The Gemara calls it Kippur Yoma, the day. Shevitat HaYom, Yoma. The masechta is called that. The masechta is called DeYoma, Yoma, Yoma leYamim HaKippurim. Is it called that? I don’t know, the names of the masechtot are not… I don’t know, is it Rabbeinu Yonah HaKadosh who put in the headings of the masechtot? Well, I don’t know. No. I think there are places where it’s called Masechet Yom HaKippurim, no? Ah, there are those who call it Masechet Yom HaKippurim, yes. I don’t know. Okay. Yes. So we’re going to learn the laws of Shevitat Yom Kippur, as you say, not the matter of the prayer. But on Yom Kippur one does very many things, but now we learn mainly what one doesn’t do. Right. Right. We’re going to learn about being shabbat (resting). Being shabbat means stopping what one usually does, changing.
Speaker 2:
Going to disrupt. Disrupting the work, yes. Shabbat bayom, yes. Very good. And in our case one disrupts the work, and one disrupts the eating, one disrupts everything, one disrupts the regular life.
The Four Commandments of Shevitat Asor
Speaker 1:
The Rambam says like this, the chapter, the Rambam always brings the commandments that are in the topic, in the laws. He says, there are in this four commandments, two positive commandments and two negative commandments. Both are davar vehipucho (a thing and its opposite), right? The positive commandment is lishbot bo mimelachah (to rest from work), to stop, not to work. And the negative commandment is the same, shelo la’asot bo melachah (not to do work). And the same thing regarding shevitah from eating, there is the positive, the positive commandment is lehitanot bo (to fast). And the same thing is in the negative commandment, shelo le’echol velishto bo (not to eat and drink). The Rambam says clearly, le’echol velishto bo. We will see inside, the Rambam says that eating is de’oraita (biblical), and I think differently than perhaps other Rishonim, but not all five inuyim (afflictions) are de’oraita. He says here shelo le’echol velishto bo. It’s not the same level de’oraita, yes. Already. Yes. Okay. And the commandments we will learn in the three chapters. Yes. The Rambam says, very good.
Halacha 1: The Positive Commandment to Rest from Work
Speaker 1:
It’s Chapter 1. It is a positive commandment to rest from work, to rest and stop from the melachot, on the tenth of the seventh month, as it says, as it’s written in the verse about the commandment of Yom Kippur, “Shabbat Shabbaton hu lachem” (It is a Sabbath of complete rest for you). It’s a Shabbat Shabbaton, it’s a day of complete shevitah. By Shabbat it says Shabbat Shabbaton, and by Yom Kippur. It means that one must rest from everything. On Yom Tov it doesn’t say Shabbaton, it only says Shabbat, because one must rest from many things. Shabbat Shabbaton is a greater rest. Then one would have said there, one must check the languages of the verses, but on Yom Tov it says explicitly in Parshat Bo, that “ach bayom harishon tashbitu se’or mibateichem” (but on the first day you shall remove leaven from your houses). There specifically one knows. But I’m saying, when it says Shabbat Shabbaton it means a strong shevitah. And anyone who does work on it, nullifies a positive commandment, when someone does indeed do work he nullifies a positive commandment, and transgresses a negative commandment, as it says, it also says, besides the positive of “Shabbat Shabbaton” it also says, and at the end the verse concludes “kol melachah lo ta’asu” (you shall not do any work), a negative commandment.
Punishments: Karet, Chatat, Sekilah
Speaker 1:
And what are the punishments? He says, the punishments are like this, if he did it willingly with intent, we understood earlier, willingly with intent means, with intent means he knows what he’s doing, and willingly means he wants to do it. Ratzon to exclude shogeg (unintentional), zadon to exclude ones (compulsion). The opposite, ratzon to exclude ones, that is when a non-Jew forces you, you know what you’re doing, it’s not that you forgot that it’s Shabbat, but there’s no ratzon. And with intent, that you know that you’re doing it with intent. Willingly and with intent. Ratzon to exclude ones, and zadon to exclude shogeg. Right. And if he did it unintentionally, he is liable for a fixed sin offering, one must bring a korban chatat. Chatat kevuah (fixed sin offering) means that there’s no difference between rich or poor. There are certain commandments where the sacrifice is oleh veyored (sliding scale) according to the money one has, but chatat, this is chatat kevuah.
Halacha 2: Which Melachot Are Forbidden
Speaker 1:
Further, the Rambam says, which melachot may one not do? The Rambam says, every melachah for which one is liable on Shabbat with stoning for doing it intentionally, ah, he’s now going to say which melachot. He says, we’ve already learned in Hilchot Shabbat 39 melachot with toladot. All these melachot for which on Shabbat one is liable for stoning, these melachot are forbidden on Yom Kippur, and one is liable for intentionally doing them with the punishment of karet. And the punishment, as he already said that the punishment is karet, for what thing is karet? For all these melachot for which on Shabbat one is liable for stoning.
And also the same thing is with the unintentional, and everything for which one is liable for a sin offering on Shabbat, that is all these same melachot that if one did them unintentionally one brings a sin offering on Shabbat, one is liable for a sin offering on Yom Kippur. Yes, that’s redundant. One could have said that all melachot are the same. The point is, as it says in the Mishnah in Makkot, there is no difference between Shabbat and Yom Kippur except that this one’s intentional violation is with karet and this one’s intentional violation is by human hands. In other words, Shabbat, when we remember what it says with the same formula, “and one is liable for doing this melachah”, we learned three things: if one does it with witnesses and warning, obviously willingly and with intent, he gets stoning. And if he does it without witnesses and warning, he gets karet. And unintentionally is the same chatat. So the only thing that Yom Kippur is different from Shabbat is the same melachot, but there isn’t the way that one can get stoning. That is, there’s no beit din, beit din shel matah (earthly court), doesn’t punish a willful violator of Yom Kippur, or the Torah law of Yom Kippur. The Almighty already gives karet, that’s already between a person and the Almighty. Unlike Shabbat which has both, there is both karet and stoning. So everything that on Shabbat would be stoning, and the truth is that it would also be karet, also on Yom Kippur is karet without stoning. That’s the language. I mean, stoning is as if he takes over the karet, yes, it can’t be both. But that’s already another topic.
Rabbinic Prohibitions Are Also Forbidden on Yom Kippur
Speaker 1:
Now, not only the Torah law, but everything that is forbidden to do on Shabbat, because in Hilchot Shabbat we learned that there are very many rabbinic laws. All these things that one may not do rabbinically on Shabbat, even though there is no melachah in them, it is also forbidden to do them on Yom Kippur.
Halacha 1 (Continued) — Everything Forbidden on Shabbat Is Forbidden on Yom Kippur: Rabbinic Laws
The Term “Melachah” Always Means Biblical Melachah
Speaker 1: Melachah, remember is always the term, for example in Hilchot Eruvin they had the whole time, if one placed something in a tower and it’s forbidden because of melachah. Melachah always means biblical melachah, the term melachah means 39 melachot, not shevut which is similar to melachah or may lead to melachah. Biblical melachot, 39 melachot.
So we learned in chapter 20 something in Hilchot Shabbat, right? That the Sages also forbade things that are not melachah, but they are similar to melachah or lead to melachah, whatever the reason is, and about this he now speaks.
Rabbinic Prohibitions on Yom Kippur
A thing that is forbidden on Shabbat even if it’s not melachah, in other words, yes, exempt but forbidden, right? The Sages forbade it, it’s also forbidden on Yom Kippur. “And if he did”, if he transgressed and indeed did it, it’s also the same thing as Shabbat, that “one gives him lashes of rebellion”. One gives him lashes of rebellion as every rabbinic prohibition gets lashes of rebellion. If one did one of the rabbinic prohibitions on Yom Kippur, one gets lashes of rebellion as one gets on Shabbat, “just as one gives him on Shabbat”.
Three Types of Rabbinic Laws: Shevut, Muktzeh, Prohibitions of Saying/Doing Initially
So it says that for example, here we’ve only had so far the rabbinic laws that are not melachah, that are similar to melachah, but we haven’t yet had for example muktzeh or the things of shevut or of… ah, good. Ah, here he’s going to say muktzeh.
“Everything that one doesn’t move on Shabbat”, that’s a thing in itself. Similar to melachah, but it’s a prohibition of moving, it’s also forbidden to move on Yom Kippur.
The Rambam lists all three types of rabbinic laws that exist on Shabbat, extend to Yom Kippur. Because it seems that it’s not the same. If he had only said one, one would have thought, okay, I understand that, because it leads to melachah. But what comes in moving? No, moving is also there on Yom Kippur.
And a fourth thing, and everything that is forbidden to say, also all these things that one may not do as, as we explained, that your speech on Shabbat should not be, the things that have to do with honoring Shabbat, or to do initially on Shabbat.
Discussion: What Does “To Do Initially on Shabbat” Mean?
Speaker 1: About what did he say certain things that one shouldn’t begin to do on Shabbat? I would have said to do initially means like the thing that we also learned, because of finding your needs, like to begin, to make preparation for after Shabbat. That would be called to do initially. That is, to begin the work for after Shabbat, to begin with melachah, as initially means the beginning. I would have thought so, why not? It’s generally one of the shevutim.
I saw, he translates here, someone translates here, initially, initially, there are things that there’s no punishment. That is, it seems that for… the Rambam doesn’t say about moving, for example, there are lashes of rebellion. What is noted? Lashes of rebellion, whoever does a thing because of shevut, one gives him lashes of rebellion. But he doesn’t say here for example that someone who moves a thing that one doesn’t move rabbinically… right, or someone does one of the things that we learned later in Hilchot Shabbat, because of finding your needs, or all these things, can this be called going out sending beginning. Meaning to say, as you said, it could be that it means to begin, or it could also be that one may not send beginning to do, but after the fact there’s no punishment for it.
Back to Hilchot Shabbat Chapter 1 — What Are Lashes of Rebellion?
Speaker 1: Because in Hilchot Shabbat we have, it seems, the Rambam said very clearly. He told us at the beginning that everything that one may not do on Shabbat rabbinically is lashes of rebellion. Well, what’s not clear?
Speaker 2: I mean to say what I innovated that for muktzeh there isn’t any…
Speaker 1: Yes. I don’t know if it’s… no, it did indeed say. What did one look at what was written? “And everywhere it says that one who does this thing is exempt but forbidden, this is forbidden by rabbinic law.” He says very clearly, about things where it says exempt. “And so everywhere it says one doesn’t do such and such.” No, that’s… or one doesn’t say such and such on Shabbat, he also means it’s a general language, like moving apparently, no?
But he speaks more about the things that are essentially like exempt but forbidden. But the other things… but the language isn’t so implied. I don’t know if the law…
Speaker 2: No, the language that the Rambam speaks about in… in chapter 1 of Hilchot Shabbat, he gives the rules of that there is forbidden, permitted, liable, forbidden, permitted. And he says that there are other languages that also mean exempt but forbidden, not just the language exempt, but also the language one doesn’t do and the like, that’s the language you bring. It doesn’t mean to say that.
Speaker 1: And they learned, that one in those is also because similar to melachah means. He still goes up on all these chapters. He only says a rule that sometimes it says in those, but you see clearly that from chapter 24 that we come here, that there are things that are forbidden even if they’re not similar or lead to melachah, they don’t stick that one gets lashes of rebellion for violating Shabbat.
Look, everything has a measure. And this is interesting, the Rambam didn’t say very clearly in Hilchot Shabbat, but here it looks like this, and here he says it.
Another Explanation of “Initially” — Time of Pressing Need
Speaker 1: But simply, and the things I would have said are called things that one doesn’t do initially. That’s what I would have thought. It could be in the topic initially he means versus all those that in a time of pressing need the Rabbis were lenient. All these things that are all rabbinic, if there is a time of pressing need one is lenient. He says, every rabbinic thing is something that only initially one may not do on Shabbat. Everything in the world is permitted in a time of pressing need. One is not the Rabbis.
Speaker 2: No, Shavuos is not just a sha’as hadechak (time of pressing need), it has to be a makom mitzvah (place of mitzvah), it has to be stronger. For example, with eruv we didn’t even have a lesser one for sha’as hadechak.
Klalo shel davar — Four Categories of Derabbanan
Speaker 1: In short, the point is clear that Yom Kippur has all the clarifications. But we see here very clearly that the Rambam held very strongly to the four categories that exist in Hilchos Shabbos. There is melachah, there is something we don’t know if it’s melachah, there is tiltul (moving objects), there is the prohibition of amira (telling) or asiyah (doing) lechatchilah. These are four different categories, it’s not the same. Each one is written separately.
The Rama says, “klalo shel davar” (the general principle), this is the language of the Mishnah that you said, “ein mah Shabbos l’Yom HaKippurim b’inyanim elu” (there is no difference between Shabbos and Yom Kippur in these matters). There is no difference between Shabbos and Yom Kippur in these matters. It means in the matters of melachah, melachah d’Oraisa, melachah d’Rabbanan, “ela she’zeh b’misah v’zeh b’kares” (except that this one is with death penalty and this one is with kares).
But there is indeed a difference. There are things that were permitted on Yom Kippur. We’re going to discover that there is indeed some difference, which is somewhat of a surprising midrash in my opinion.
Halachah 2 — It is Permitted to Prepare Vegetables on Yom Kippur from Minchah and Onward
Introduction — A Difficult Halachah
Speaker 1: Okay, the next halachah is a bit of a difficult halachah. So I think I’m going to learn it one way, or you can say your letters. I’m going to learn it one way, which is not according to all opinions that this is the correct interpretation in this Rambam, but this is how I think it fits somewhat.
The Rambam is going to enumerate things that on Shabbos one may not do, but it’s a bit difficult to say it that way, because we haven’t seen that it should be forbidden in Hilchos Shabbos. But things that on Shabbos one may not do, because it resembles one of the melachos of preparing food, or it resembles grinding, or similar. But on Yom Kippur it was indeed permitted, on Yom Kippur afternoon, when one is already very hungry, we permitted it, because Yom Kippur is different from Shabbos, in that one fasts and is very hungry. Therefore the Chachamim were indeed lenient, just as they were lenient with certain derabbanans, they were lenient with this rabbinic prohibition because of agmas nefesh (distress). That’s how I think is the simple interpretation.
The Language of the Rambam — Preparing Vegetables
Speaker 1: The Rambam says as follows: “mutar l’kanev es hayarak” (it is permitted to prepare the vegetables). The Rambam is going to say what “l’kanev es hayarak” means — preparing vegetables for breaking the fast on motzaei Yom Kippur. May one do this b’Yom HaKippurim min haminchah ul’ma’alah (on Yom Kippur from minchah and onward), from afternoon and onward one may prepare the vegetables.
The Rambam says, “mah hi hakinuvah?” (what is this preparation?) What does preparing vegetables mean? And his question is like this, what has he now encountered? Why haven’t we heard about this yet? I haven’t yet heard in Hilchos Shabbos about all kinds of melachos. What is kinuvah?
He explains. He says, “mah hi hakinuvah? She’yasir es he’alin hameyuvashin” (what is kinuvah? That one removes the dried leaves) — from the vegetables one removes the leaves that are not good, “v’yikatzetz hashe’ar” (and cuts the rest) — and the remainder one cuts, “v’yisaken oso la’achilah” (and prepares it for eating).
So from the language it implies that there would have been some prohibition, or from the “yasir es he’alin hameyuvashin” some matter of borer (selecting), something similar to borer, and the “yikatzetz hashe’ar” could be some matter of grinding. And “v’yisaken oso la’achilah” is perhaps the general prohibition of being metaken (fixing) on Shabbos. Although being metaken food is indeed permitted.
Other Things — Nuts and Pomegranates
Speaker 1: “V’chen” (and likewise), other things that one may do this way: “mefatze’in b’egozim” (cracking nuts) — breaking nuts. “U’mefarerin rimonim” (and breaking open pomegranates). Grinding.
Speaker 2: Grinding literally.
Speaker 1: Grinding?
Speaker 2: Perurim, perurim (crumbs, crumbs).
Speaker 1: Yes, but it means literally opening…
Speaker 2: Yes, to make the seeds.
Speaker 1: Or one must break the seeds.
Speaker 2: The same thing over, one must open.
Speaker 1: No, one doesn’t have to open. It simply means to take the kernels, to separate. To remove the kernels from the pomegranate. To remove the kernels. To open a pomegranate.
Speaker 2: Not even opening a nut or opening a pomegranate.
Speaker 1: But not opening a pomegranate. Removing the… just removing the kernels from where they lie. So that the kernels should be separate, so one can eat them. Preparing the pomegranates.
It also appears that this is also something that… would have been some prohibition on Shabbos. But one may do it min haminchah ul’ma’alah (from minchah and onward). Why? Mipnei agmas nefesh (because of distress). Because… why may one do it? The Rambam says, mipnei agmas nefesh. Because on Yom Tov, on Yom Kippur one has agmas nefesh, especially when it’s already min haminchah ul’ma’alah one is already very hungry, this was permitted that one may already begin preparing the food for motzaei Yom Tov.
Apparently it implies agmas nefesh means, because always when you’re going to have to start preparing the breaking of the fast after Yom Tov, it will take another ten minutes until you can eat, and you’ll have to fast motzaei Yom Tov too, poor thing.
Speaker 2: Yes, very good.
Yom Kippur That Falls on a Weekday and Yom Kippur That Falls on Shabbos
Speaker 1: The Rambam says, but this is Yom Kippur that falls on a weekday, but Yom Kippur…
Continuation of Halachah 1 – The Custom in Shinar and the West Regarding Preparing Vegetables on Yom Kippur
And another thing, kvar nahagu ha’am (the people have already adopted the custom), says the Rambam, in practice, the custom of Israel is, kvar nahagu ha’am, the people conduct themselves b’Shinar u’v’ma’arav (in Shinar and in the West), Shinar is Babylonia, and ma’arav, what is ma’arav? It was thought, does it mean Morocco or west of Babylonia? She’lo ya’asu echad mikol eleh b’yom hatzom (that they should not do any of these things on the day of the fast), that one should not do the preparing of vegetables, nuts, pomegranates on the day of the fast, ela harei hu k’Shabbos lakol (rather it should be like Shabbos for everything), one should observe like Shabbos the prohibition with this type of thing.
In other words, let’s say, this goes back to what was said. Yom Kippur is like Shabbos for everything, except for one thing, the Rambam didn’t say clearly at the beginning that it’s an exception, but this is from the end. Except, here there is something about preparing vegetables, which when Yom Kippur is Shabbos you see, this is one line in the Gemara that the Rambam ruled that one may not do it, because Shabbos is a problem. Yom Kippur, since because of agmas nefesh the Chachamim permitted it, therefore even Yom Kippur that is Shabbos they didn’t permit it because it remains Shabbos, which one may not.
And the custom is however that one goes back, no, Yom Kippur is like Shabbos, and apparently this is also the explanation of this custom. That is, one tells people that Yom Kippur is like Shabbos, but this one may do, people get confused, so it was made that one should conduct oneself entirely like Shabbos, and not get confused about things that are permitted on Yom Kippur and forbidden on Shabbos.
Do you agree?
Speaker 2: Very good, yes.
A Note on the Rambam’s Approach in Hilchos Shabbos
I just want to say one note on these days of preparing, because this is an important thing. They learned in Hilchos Shabbos. Usually, the Rambam doesn’t say what things are, almost never. He brings a language from the Gemara, and he says the meaning, because in Perush HaMishnayos he does it all the time. But in halachos, and usually in Hilchos Shabbos in particular, in most halachos, the Rambam brings the language. Someone doesn’t know that the Hebrew language of the Gemara is another problem, the Rambam doesn’t help with that problem. It’s a question why not, but that’s the reality.
Here is… here is… I wrote a book. I hear, from me. The Rambam doesn’t say that one should learn Perush HaMishnayos before one learns Rambam with the introduction, right? He says that one should learn from the Chumash and Rambam. So according to this one still needs to learn Perush HaMishnayos, it requires investigation.
Here he brings the language, that is, the second thing that the Rambam does often, this is one thing that the Rambam does often. The second thing that the Rambam does often, is he already rewrites the language in a language that is more understandable. He brings a language, instead of saying, I don’t remember an example automatically, but often he brings a language that is simpler, instead of some difficult language from the Gemara, he already says what it means.
Here he doesn’t do so. He brings the language of the Gemara, not a Mishnah, “mutar l’kanev yarak” (it is permitted to prepare vegetables), and he still needs to add an explanation of what preparing is, so one should understand what one may do. He could have been patient, “mutar l’hasir he’alim hameyuvashos etc. v’yisaken ochel” (it is permitted to remove the dried leaves etc. and prepare food), that’s how he could have done it.
The Difficulty with Preparing Vegetables
So, don’t know why? The reason is because here there is perhaps a difficulty, and the commentators already before the Rambam about this, others struggled with this problem. How can it be, if it’s a Torah prohibition, it can’t be that it’s permitted on Yom Kippur. If it’s a rabbinic prohibition, perhaps this should be permitted on Shabbos also, through being close to eating time.
Have you ever heard that on Shabbos one may not crack a nut? It’s a question of borer, and likewise, one may not, in the usual way one may not on Shabbos, but it’s permitted for eating.
Speaker 2: I had it clear that one may crack a nut.
By the prohibition of tiltul it said that one may crack a nut with the shells. But the answer is, one may only do it for the purpose of eating. One may not do it for the laws of borer, one may not do it to set aside.
Discussion: The Matter of “Lo Nicha” on Yom Kippur
I would have thought such a simple thing, that Yom Kippur afternoon…
Speaker 2: No, it’s not.
That’s the point. If it’s early in the day it’s for the night. If it’s afternoon, it means already close to eating time. That’s why one may.
Speaker 2: Say so, say Shabbos, then one doesn’t need as if… it’s always, one can eat it all the time.
Not lo nicha (not pleasant) literally, making a big preparation to wake up, is a problem. But simply one may crack. But Yom Kippur one may only when it’s already close, because that’s how it’s called like lo nicha.
Speaker 2: Okay, that’s how you would have thought. But it doesn’t fit according to that because if Yom Kippur is for all, Shabbos should be forbidden.
Okay, it could be that Shabbos remained with its regular prohibition. It was permitted on Yom Kippur, and Shabbos remained with its prohibition.
Speaker 2: But I have with a Shabbos also.
With a Shabbos, I just have here a matter of how one says here lo nicha. But what would I have said? Usually one may not on motzaei Shabbos, even if it’s designated, even if it’s close enough, because one doesn’t prepare from Shabbos for motzaei Shabbos.
Speaker 2: What is the topic of preparation like this?
Yom Kippur, because of agmas nefesh they permitted this. If it’s Shabbos, one still doesn’t want… it’s not so clear.
In short, because of this, and… I should now, because of this, there were other commentators who understood that preparing vegetables spoke of something that is forbidden, perhaps actually forbidden. What the Rambam adds to mark over to say clearly, whatever exactly the details of what he means are, but we’re not talking about any grinding. Actually, not about any actual borer, something to prepare the vegetables, and he should understand that this is… he never says on Shabbos that it’s forbidden, I don’t know how they can know that one may not on Shabbos, but perhaps because like I say, on Shabbos, if it’s for eating one may, but if not it wasn’t. If Yom Kippur they specifically permitted that not something is Shabbos.
I only say this to explain why the Rambam needs to say this, in order to say that we’re not talking here about a Torah prohibition, or even perhaps not about any actual rabbinic prohibition, it could be it’s even less than that. But it’s a bit difficult to understand, because if so, why did the people already conduct themselves to even forbid this, it’s already a bit exaggerated.
Speaker 2: Yes, the sugya is a bit more complicated, because in the Gemara it appears like part of the thing one worries about is when one will come to eat. The difference between min haminchah l’ma’alah and after is about when one will come to eat. So it becomes somewhat difficult, and also because of agmas nefesh there is some opinion that one should do it because of agmas nefesh so one should feel the afflictions more.
Yes, one of the Rishonim. So it’s a Gemara where there are different opinions of Rishonim to learn.
Speaker 2: Yes, this is a small Gemara. Like the Gemara says one should let grow the Gra is because of agmas nefesh. So that one should… it’s difficult, yes. But that’s what one says?
Yes, I mean, I mean, I mean. Simple interpretation. I say that Gemara has different ways how to learn it, but we learned it so that one can learn it the smooth way of the Rambam. I just want to say what the Rambam says, but also the reason why the Rambam isn’t properly explaining, because it’s anyway the custom is not to do it, and so it also says in Shulchan Aruch that the custom is not to do it, so it’s not relevant, because one doesn’t do it anyway, so it’s still not relevant.
Discussion: Practical Questions About Preparing Vegetables
Speaker 2: Also for example for children or people who may eat, there also won’t be the problem so strongly with lo nicha. One sets here all the time with the… who says that one said at all that Yom Kippur one must always be more concerned because it’s always more lo nicha?
I don’t know, he has children at home.
Speaker 2: For children?
We’re not talking now about that, we’re talking now for the fathers.
Speaker 2: No, it appears like it was entirely forbidden because Yom Kippur is more lo nicha.
No, no, it’s not because that’s the matter. I say, well, simply, a practical thing. We’re talking about what they make for motzaei, for the breaking of the fast.
I remember that the Belzer Rebbe would always ask the gabbai before Ne’ilah he should take out the milk from the fridge, because he wanted it shouldn’t be too cold when he drinks his coffee on motzaei Yom Tov. And he said that with this he fulfills the matter of preparing for Yom Tov.
Speaker 2: It’s not any prohibition perhaps, doesn’t he also have a bit of preparation?
No, on prohibitions or concerns of actual prohibitions. Here, on simply on taking out, in all shuls they already prepare the breaking of the fast. Although it’s a question of preparation, it appears it goes on the leniency, on something that is only a topic of preparation, Yom Kippur one may. That’s how it would appear.
Very good.
—
Halachah 4 – The Positive Commandment of Affliction on Yom Kippur
Okay, the Rambam says further, now we’re going to talk about the thing that is unique to Yom Kippur. Until now we learned about resting how Yom Kippur is similar to Shabbos. Now we’re going to learn how Yom Kippur is unique.
“Mitzvas aseh acheres yesh b’Yom HaKippurim” (there is another positive commandment on Yom Kippur), there is another positive commandment, but the Rambam also gives the title shevitah (resting), to rest. To rest from what? To refrain from eating and drinking.
From this it’s interesting that the Rambam gives this name, because the Torah says “ta’anu” (you shall afflict), but the Rambam still, he loves the language of shevitah. Just as the Rambam says “shovas me’aveirah” (resting from sin), the Rambam didn’t use shevitah only on how we call it Shabbos, we rest from melachos.
Yes, it appears that the Rambam interpreted the verse in Parshas Emor that he brings here, not the verse in Acharei that he brings, but the verse in Parshas Emor where it says “Shabbos Shabbason hu lachem v’inisem es nafshoseichem” (it is a Sabbath of complete rest for you and you shall afflict your souls). The Rambam interpreted, he brings the language from Sefer HaMitzvos, the Rambam interpreted that the Shabbason also goes on the “v’inisem”, that they should rest from everything, from melachos and from eating.
But here he doesn’t bring that verse at all, he brings the verse from Acharei. But it’s actually interesting, “v’Shabbos Shabbason” and “v’inisem”.
Ah, here it says a fast. This is another verse, and from where do we know that “ta’anu es nafshoseichem” (you shall afflict your souls) means not to eat? It could be other ways of afflicting oneself.
“Mipi Hashemu’ah Lamedu” – The Source of Inui HaNefesh
“Mipi hashemu’ah lamedu” (they learned from the oral tradition), the Chachamim learned halachah l’Moshe miSinai, “she’inui she’hu lanefesh zeh hatzom” (that the affliction that is for the soul, this is the fast) specifically. This is their hint so to speak, that which type of affliction? An affliction that is for the soul. Nefesh means eating, that’s how they understood. I don’t know how they understood the play, a matter that involves loss of life, he brings the languages. In short, nefesh, the vitality of the soul, is a matter about that.
Although it doesn’t say that, it doesn’t say inui shel nefesh (affliction of the soul), it says “v’inisem es nafshoseichem” (you shall afflict your souls), you should afflict yourselves, you should afflict your soul. But they added from the oral tradition that it’s like an interpretation or a hint of such a spiritual affliction, and this they understood that this is not to eat.
Therefore, v’chol hatzam bo (and whoever fasts on it), yes? Perhaps there were others, a Karaite can argue, he can say that “v’inisem es nafshoseichem” means standing on one foot, I don’t know, he means slapping oneself like others do, whatever, one can think of other interpretations.
But, the Rambam says further, v’chol hatzam bo (and whoever fasts on it), one who fasts on this day, kiyem mitzvas aseh (fulfilled a positive commandment), just as he said afflicting the soul is a positive language. V’chol ha’ochel v’shoseh bo (and whoever eats and drinks on it), bitel mitzvas aseh (nullified a positive commandment), if someone eats or drinks on Yom Kippur, he has nullified the positive commandment of fasting, v’avar al lo sa’aseh (and transgressed a negative commandment), he also transgresses a negative commandment, she’ne’emar “ki chol hanefesh asher lo se’uneh v’nichresah” (as it says “for any soul that shall not be afflicted shall be cut off”).
Kares and the Negative Commandment on Eating and Drinking
Translation
One should afflict oneself just as others do. Whatever, one can think of other interpretations. But, this is what the Rambam says further:
“And anyone who fasts on it fulfills a positive commandment (mitzvas aseh)” — one who fasts on this day, “fulfills a positive commandment”, as it says “te’anu es nafshoseichem” is a language of aseh (positive commandment).
“And anyone who eats or drinks on it has nullified the positive commandment” — if one eats or drinks on Yom Kippur, he has been mevatel (nullified) the mitzvas aseh of fasting, “and transgressed a negative commandment (lo sa’aseh)”, because there is also a lo sa’aseh, “as it says ‘kol hanefesh asher lo se’uneh venichretsah’”.
It doesn’t say the language “lo sochlu” and then “venichretsah”, rather it just says “venichretsah”. But the Rambam says, that once there is stated an issur kares (prohibition with kares), automatically it is a lav (negative commandment). “Since the Scripture punished with kares one who does not fast” — because the Torah states explicitly the punishment of kares, “we learn that we are warned about eating and drinking”, that we are warned about this, that there is on this a lo sa’aseh.
He says, it doesn’t need to state the words “lo sa’aseh such and such” in order to be a lo sa’aseh. If it states about something that it is kares, automatically there is a lo sa’aseh. It doesn’t need to explicitly state the lo sa’aseh to be a lo sa’aseh. It’s interesting.
Discussion: Is the Rambam Consistent with This Principle?
Speaker 1:
So there are regarding this chekiros (analytical questions). It’s true, it’s not clear in the learning in the Gemara that every time there is stated a punishment it’s already enough and one doesn’t need to also seek a lav. Many times one needs to seek. And here also, it could be that the Gemara is mashma (implies) that it’s more complicated. There is a gezeirah shavah (textual analogy), that just as on eating there is a lav and an issur, so too on melachah (work) there is a lav with a punishment. So brings the Lechem Mishneh from the Gemara, and he says that the Rambam means this.
But in short, it’s not a kashya (difficulty), because the Rambam generally doesn’t necessarily go with the rules of drashos (exegetical interpretations). The Rambam brings a pasuk (verse), according to logic it makes sense to go, that if there is a kares, certainly there is a lav. He does it not necessarily in the Gemara’s calculations.
Speaker 2:
Is the Rambam consistent with this that when there is a kares, he doesn’t seek another lav?
Speaker 1:
The Rambam is certainly consistent with what when he brings pesukim, he brings many times an interpretation close to the plain meaning, not necessarily exactly what the Gemara learns it out. I mean just now I remember that there were other places where the Rambam does this, he brings regarding the punishment for the lav, but I don’t remember at the moment.
Shogeg — Korban Chatas (Sin Offering)
The Rambam says further: “And anyone who eats or drinks on it inadvertently (b’shogeg)”, we’ve already said the kares, and if one does it b’shogeg, eats or drinks on Yom Kippur b’shogeg, “is obligated in a fixed sin offering (korban chatas kevuah)”.
He says, this is eating and drinking. But we remember that there are five types of afflictions (inuyim). Eating and drinking we’ve counted two. What about the other three?
The Other Four Afflictions — Washing, Anointing, Wearing Shoes, Marital Relations
The Rambam says thus: “And so they learned from the oral tradition (mipei hashemu’ah)”, also the Sages learned… He says, “and so”. He just said that mipei hashemu’ah they said that inuy means fasting. “And so they learned mipei hashemu’ah, that it is forbidden to wash on it” — one may not do other bodily pleasures, one may not do thus, to wash, “or to anoint”, to smear oneself, “or to wear shoes”, to put on shoes, “or to have relations with one’s wife”, to cohabit. These other four things.
The Rambam says, “and it is a mitzvah to abstain from all these just as one abstains from eating and drinking”. One must refrain from doing these things, one must be shoves (abstain) from all these pleasures that he counted, just as one is shoves from eating and drinking, “as it says ‘Shabbas Shabboson’”. Shabbas regarding melachah. Here he says very clearly, “Shabbas regarding melachah and Shabboson”, to be shoves, besides from melachah one should be shoves “regarding these matters”.
The Rambam learns that, so it is mashma here from the language, that eating and drinking we learn from “te’anu es nafshoseichem”, and the four other afflictions we learn from “Shabboson”. So, not that everything is Shabboson, although the law of shevitas aseh (positive commandment of cessation) he says that eating and drinking is also a shevitah, but here he brought on eating and drinking a pasuk “te’anu”, and on the other four afflictions he says “Shabboson” regarding the four things.
Discussion: Biblical or Rabbinic?
Speaker 1:
It’s interesting, because these things are rabbinic, clearly, because he says so about the punishment.
Speaker 2:
No, it’s not clear. It’s very not clear. “Lamdu mipei hashemu’ah” always means halachah l’Moshe miSinai (law given to Moses at Sinai), but he says that one only receives makos mardus (lashes of rebellion).
Speaker 1:
So it goes. Let’s see when I said, but he says when it’s rabbinic. Let’s speak in the next piece, and let’s try to understand.
“And one is not obligated in kares or korban”, what he said that one is obligated in kares or korban, “this is only for eating and drinking. But” but for the other afflictions, “if one washed, anointed, wore shoes or had relations”. There is no kares or korban, only “one receives makos mardus”. He receives makos mardus.
Speaker 2:
So it’s interesting, because by both it said “lamdu mipei hashemu’ah”. On this that “ve’inisem” means eating and drinking, he said “lamdu mipei hashemu’ah” earlier.
Speaker 1:
Right, “lamdu mipei hashemu’ah” always means that the Sages explain that the pasuk means this. So, the mipei hashemu’ah can make something biblical, or can it make something rabbinic?
Speaker 2:
No, there isn’t in the entire Rambam a mipei hashemu’ah that makes something rabbinic, that I know. Mipei hashemu’ah is always biblical. I don’t know why he brings a pasuk, he brings a pasuk “as it says ‘Shabboson’”, how can it be? A pasuk always, almost always, is biblical. And it says that there is a mitzvas aseh, shevitah.
We learned that there are two mitzvos in the topic of affliction on Yom Kippur. There is a mitzvah of shevitah, in this mitzvah all the afflictions are included. Then there is a lo sa’aseh, and on this lo sa’aseh one receives kares. I remember, on nullifying a mitzvas aseh one doesn’t receive kares, only on doing a lo sa’aseh. That means, the lo sa’aseh isn’t stated, but from what it says “venichretsah”, on that it says “kol hanefesh asher lo se’uneh”. That is stated only on the inuy nefesh, which means eating and drinking. Mipei hashemu’ah it says, it doesn’t say in the pasuk that it means eating and drinking, but the Sages say that it means eating and drinking. Therefore on the inuy nefesh one receives kares.
Is there a mitzvas aseh? On a mitzvas aseh one doesn’t receive kares, but what is said is that one receives makos mardus. Perhaps every bitul mitzvas aseh (nullification of a positive commandment) receives makos mardus? I don’t know. The makos mardus usually is on rabbinic laws, but somewhere the Rambam decided that on this one receives makos mardus. I don’t know why.
Speaker 1:
This is simply the plain meaning of the Rambam, you could say it a bit clearer, as you’re saying it, and say that there is a lav, and the lav is clearly eating and drinking, and the aseh is the other thing. He says this clearly, “to abstain from eating and drinking, as it says ‘ve’inisem’”. He begins with the mitzvas aseh, and he says, “and anyone who eats transgresses the positive commandment”. This is the same mitzvas aseh, what does this mean? This isn’t the same mitzvas aseh. The mitzvas aseh says “ve’inisem”. There’s another third pasuk, I hear.
It’s in any case very difficult to learn in the Rambam that he means to say that it’s rabbinic. There are those who learn that there are other Rishonim who learn clearly that it’s rabbinic, but in the Rambam it’s a doubt. But it’s correct that he says “makos mardus”, which is usually on rabbinic laws. So, we don’t know. Also later we’ll see, it looks like one is a bit more lenient with washing than with the other things. There is, because it’s an aseh. It’s difficult to say about this.
Parallel to Shevusos Shabbos (Sabbath Cessations)
Speaker 2:
Perhaps it’s also more like an aseh of shevus (cessation) of Shabbos. It looks very similar to Shabbos. Remember, I’m saying that it’s strange that the Rambam says a pasuk and makos mardus. I said that there isn’t a single time that there is a pasuk in rabbinic law, but yes, here, right? Shevus of Shabbos is also a strange thing. The Rambam at the beginning of Hilchos Shabbos chapter, I don’t remember where, Hilchos Shabbos chapter 21, it says “it is stated in the Torah ’tishbos’ even from things that are not melachah”, and this is certainly rabbinic, because he’s speaking about shevusos that are rabbinic that one receives makos mardus for them. It’s a very similar structure to here, that there is “Shabboson”, and perhaps it’s rabbinic if one is medayek (precise) in makos mardus, and one understands, one understands it.
Question: Why Is There a Distinction Between Inuy Nefesh and the Other Afflictions?
Speaker 1:
I’m thinking of another reason why it’s difficult to say that the other afflictions are also biblical, because he says earlier thus: “ve’inisem es nafshoseichem”, the Sages say that it means affliction of the soul which is eating. But once we see by the mitzvas aseh that mipei hashemu’ah it is all pleasures of the body, why should there still be a distinction? Why should there be… what’s the problem? Again, “Shabbas Shabboson”, and we know to abstain from these things. It has nothing to do with the words “ve’inisem es nafshoseichem”? “Ve’inisem es nafshoseichem” means only eating and drinking, and “Shabbas Shabboson” to abstain from what? To abstain from what? It has nothing to do with affliction of the body? Difficult to say so. What is it only things that are a pleasure for the body or an affliction for the body? These are the things that the Sages counted mipei hashemu’ah. If it’s rabbinic one can hear, but if it’s biblical it’s very interesting, because biblically there is a pasuk “ve’inisem es nafshoseichem”, and then there are things that one may only not do as a mitzvas aseh, and they are very close cousins, they are all about being or not being pleasurable to the body. But why isn’t this stronger, meaning only eating and drinking? It’s very difficult to understand. But so the Rambam says clearly.
Speaker 2:
No, it’s not rabbinic, it’s not a problem. No, it’s certainly biblical. That is, certainly, mipei hashemu’ah one says already on things that are rabbinic, it doesn’t make sense.
Possibility: Aseh Without Punishment of Kares
Speaker 1:
And there are other things like this, they found, for example chametz (leavened bread), they had the same confusion. But there are things in the world that are issur aseh, like chametz, the Rambam says clearly that there is an issur aseh, but there doesn’t come on this any punishment, right? Biblically, perhaps rabbinically they gave malkos (lashes), makos mardus. But there is such a thing in the Torah that two details in one mitzvah, as generally, where one is issur kares, one does it, and one is only like a chiyuv aseh (obligation of a positive commandment). There is such a thing, it’s not… actually with all of these things, in general with actually also the people became confused from the language of the Rambam, but I see that it’s a consistent thing, perhaps by the Rambam it was normal that there is such a thing, this is aseh, and this is… what does it mean?
Rambam’s Perush HaMishnayos on Yoma
The Rambam, he brings the language of Perush HaMishnayos in Yoma, that he says that because it says forbidden, he learns that one receives makos mardus, but the whole thing is in kabbalah (tradition). Kabbalah means the same thing as mipei hashemu’ah, that the Gemara speaks indeed of hints that inuy means this, inuy means that. The Rambam says that these are all only hints. The Gemara hints at what makes it, but it’s kabbalah. Kabbalah, all these things are forbidden, and also a kabbalah that inuy nefesh means specifically eating and drinking. This is all the same language as here essentially.
Speaker 2:
But one doesn’t say mipei hashemu’ah. Kabbalah. It’s kabbalah. And the essence of prohibitions is kabbalah means from the words of kabbalah, like rabbinic.
Speaker 1:
No, rabbinic. Like divrei Torah (words of Torah) and divrei kabbalah lo yisbarech (do not mix).
Speaker 2:
No, divrei kabbalah, the essence of prohibitions is kabbalah.
Speaker 1:
No, kabbalah means that it’s not biblical.
Speaker 2:
No, kabbalah doesn’t mean that it’s not biblical, kabbalah means that it is biblical. Kabbalah means that one received from Moshe Rabbeinu that when it says shevitah and inuy, it means shevitah. So it says in the Rambam here, and the Perush HaMishnayos doesn’t make the distinction of shevitah and inuy. But right after that, there on the makos mardus. Makos mardus the Rambam learned. “And this is the meaning of its saying asur”, this was his proof. It says in the Mishnah in Yom Kippur asur, he interpreted asur.
Continuation: Status of the Afflictions – Biblical or Rabbinic?
Kabbalah Means Biblical, Not Rabbinic
Speaker 1: No, biblical.
Like divrei Torah and divrei kabbalah don’t mix? No, divrei kabbalah is kabbalah. No, kabbalah means that it’s not biblical. No, kabbalah doesn’t mean that it’s not biblical. Kabbalah means that it is biblical. Kabbalah means that one received from Moshe Rabbeinu that when it says “shevitah” and “inuy”, it means shevitah.
The Rambam in Perush HaMishnayos – “Asur” Means Makos Mardus
So it says in the Rambam here, and in Perush HaMishnayos he doesn’t make the distinction of shevitah and inuy. But he says right after that there on the makos mardus. The makos mardus the Rambam learned “and this is the meaning of their saying asur” – this was their very… It says in the Mishnah in Yoma Kippur “asur”, he interpreted, asur rabbinically? Not asur rabbinically. Asur, that is, if it would have said simply “no” or something like that, he wouldn’t have said that one receives makos mardus. I don’t know on every rabbinic law, every… Fine, it’s an issur aseh, not every issur aseh has makos mardus. But here, since it says “asur”, he decided that it means that one receives makos mardus. Perhaps it’s so mashma in the Gemara that one is lokeh (receives lashes), but the Rambam learns that it means makos mardus.
The Rambam Has No Problem with Two Levels of Afflictions
In any case, it appears that the Rambam didn’t have a problem that there should be an issur aseh on one part, and on another… or let’s say much more simply. What we know as a tradition, kabbalah, at least to us, is that there are two types of afflictions. There are afflictions that are very severe, eating and drinking, on which one receives kares. Let’s say the punishment, I don’t know, he receives a punishment. And there are afflictions that are less severe, he doesn’t receive kares on them. Perhaps rabbinically one receives a punishment, but this is the kabbalah.
How Does It Fit with the Pesukim? Hints and Tradition
Now, how does it fit with the pesukim? The Rambam says that in the Gemara there are indeed hints, but they’re only hints. And here it appears the Rambam wants to indeed supportively place in the pesukim this distinction, but he says clearly that it’s mipei hashemu’ah, it’s not dependent on the pasuk. It’s a tradition that so there is a rule. One can grade it, in the pesukim one cannot.
Why Is There Only an Aseh on the Less Severe Afflictions?
It’s interesting, because if there would be stated a clear lav, one could perhaps ask why on this thing there is a lav and on that only an aseh. But since the lav is from the implication of kares, one can understand a bit. Which lav? The lav of “ve’inisem” isn’t a real lav, it’s a lav that one understands because there is kares. So one can understand that the Torah didn’t go so strictly until kares. Automatically it’s also a lav, because the lav is included in the kares.
Innovation: Even “Inuy Nefesh” May Not Be Explicit in the Torah
But I’m saying that it could be that it’s biblical but without the punishment. You can even say more, it doesn’t even say in the Torah that “inuy nefesh” means eating and drinking. The whole distinction is a kabbalah. It doesn’t say what it means, it’s not explicit.
—
Halachah 6: Times of Cessation of Affliction – Day and Night
The Rambam’s Language
Speaker 1: Okay, until here is the main obligation, the main prohibition of fasting and the other afflictions. Now one goes to learn another law in this chapter, about when the afflictions are practiced, yes? The Rambam says, “Just as one abstains from work on it both day and night”, as it says in the pasuk “from evening to evening” it says in Parshas Pesach, Yom Kippur. On cessation from work, how does one know? Because it’s like Shabbos, which is day and night.
Digression: How Do We Know That Shabbos Is Day and Night?
How does one know that Shabbos is day and night? Yes, yes, yom always means the whole day, only “the seventh day is Shabbos”. By the way, in the pasuk? No.
Everyone knows, I don’t know, how does it say in the pasuk that always it’s day and night? Perhaps normally when it says yom it means, I don’t know. Everyone knows that Shabbos begins from night. How does one know? “From all you shall do”. Go to shul you’ll see. From the pasuk it never says. It’s very interesting, because there are pesukim by Yom Kippur it says explicitly “from evening to evening”, or also Pesach “in the evening you shall eat matzos”. You see clearly that it begins from evening. Is it mashma from this that normally when it says in the Torah “on the day” it doesn’t begin in the evening. Or you can say the opposite, only if it says “on the very day” then it means specifically during the day, but simply so yom also means night. It’s not a clear thing. Do you know what is the plain meaning of Scripture? Not clear to me.
Digression: The Six Days of Creation – When Does the Day Begin?
Translation
“Six days you shall do work” and He stopped at the end of the sixth day. This depends on how one learns the six days of Creation, it’s really not so simple, because it says “and there was evening and there was morning.” The plain meaning, the simple plain meaning, is that the Almighty only worked during the day, at night it became night and He went to sleep. Okay, I know, the Almighty doesn’t sleep, but we’re talking whatever the verse, the parable, yes? “And God said… and there was evening.” What does “and there was evening” mean? When was “and there was evening”? Was there already a night before? You understand that there’s a difficult six days of Creation, something very basic. The Torah commentators say “there was already evening” before, it’s not so simple. From this there’s the Rashbam with the Ibn Ezra and the whole dispute, because it’s not simple. The simple plain meaning would have said that in the Torah one works during the day, just as the parable speaks of the Almighty like a person who works, at night he doesn’t work. So, there wasn’t yet any cessation.
Speaker 2: Yes, according to my…
Speaker 1: No, I’m saying very well, if at night there’s no time of work anyway, then automatically the Almighty… But if now begins 24 hours of cessation, it already begins on the eve of Yom Kippur, the sixth day, and on the seventh day He didn’t create anything. Usually the night is a preparation for the next day’s work, and the night is already part of the long cessation.
Speaker 2: Could be, but I’m saying, it’s not like…
Speaker 1: It means to say as everyone knows, but from what we know, everyone isn’t entirely clear. But to say like, just as everyone understands that regarding halacha there’s no difference, because everyone knows that Yom Kippur and Shabbat means 24 hours.
The Innovation: Affliction is Also at Night, Even Though It’s Not Noticeable
Regarding work everyone understands, regarding affliction a person would have thought that you’re anyway sleeping, the affliction isn’t noticeable. When a person wakes up in the morning and doesn’t eat, he’s hungry all day. The person just finished eating in the evening with seudah hamafseket, so? The question is when one must finish, there’s hafsakat. Perhaps one can finish when it’s already becoming night. That’s the innovation. The fact that affliction is both day and night means that one must finish… I’m saying, it’s anyway not “ve’initem,” there’s anyway no affliction. So there’s no difference.
Speaker 2: This can also be said regarding eating. I’m saying, before that one must… Here it states a law that to fast one must before the shkiah. For example, tomorrow we fast on the seventeenth of Tammuz, you don’t actually fast from night, right? There’s such a thing by a fast…
Speaker 1: Yes, yes. Right, but you see that it makes sense that there’s such a thing as a fast where one eats and drinks all night, one may eat until dawn, right?
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 1: So, from the beginning… That still makes sense, because the affliction of the soul isn’t noticeable. But it’s not noticeable, one was allowed to eat at night.
Speaker 2: No, I’m saying, a person would have thought that when the Torah says “ve’initem” it means from daytime, from when one then sees something of an affliction of the body, something of not eating.
Speaker 1: The fact that there’s affliction, in practice the law is that just like work, from when Shabbat begins, and from when Yom Kippur begins one may not do work, so also from when Yom Kippur begins one may not do any eating, all five afflictions, all these things of pleasure.
—
Law 6 (Continued): Adding from the Weekday to the Holy – Tosefet Yom Kippur
The Rambam’s Language
Speaker 1: And not only that, the Rambam says a law like this: It is necessary, there’s an obligation, another matter, an obligation, apparently a rabbinic obligation. Let’s see, not adding from weekday to holy, that one should add from the weekday, meaning from Erev Yom Kippur, one should add a bit of time to the holy, to Yom Kippur, both at its entrance, meaning one should begin Yom Kippur a bit earlier, and at its exit, and one should end Yom Kippur a bit later. As it states, because it says in the verse “ve’initem et nafshoteichem betish’ah lachodesh ba’erev”, and it says further, “me’erev ad erev tishbetu shabbatchem”.
How Do We Learn This Verse?
That is, but the first exposition interpreted, as if it says “ba’erev, ba’erev,” what is “erev”? Still from evening, before the night, not from… But that at its exit is simply from the next word. Very well that one reads it both ways. That is, you should begin and fast a bit from the evening of the ninth close to the tenth. The evening of the ninth, not on the ninth, the ninth itself. The evening of the ninth, Erev Yom Kippur, a bit close to the tenth. And so at its exit, that means “ba’erev” which is after the ninth, right? It’s not “ba’erev.” I don’t understand how one reads this verse, because “ba’erev” means that at night it’s already the night of the tenth. Erev Shabbat means when it’s still a bit earlier. But by Shabbat we call it Shabbat, and here we call it the ninth.
Speaker 2: No, Erev Shabbat. What does Erev Shabbat mean? Erev Shabbat is Friday, and here before Shabbat. Here we’re talking about the end of the ninth, yes? It’s before “betish’ah lachodesh ba’erev,” that means the night after the ninth of the month, before the night after the ninth, in short.
Speaker 1: And so at its exit, when the day ends, one should add a bit from the night of the eleventh close to the tenth, as it states “me’erev ad erev tishbetu shabbatchem”. How do we learn this? “Me’erev ad erev,” one should begin early, “ad erev,” one should end late, into the night.
Speaker 2: Yes, but he says it only regarding fasting, he doesn’t say it regarding work.
Speaker 1: But I want to first understand the learning, because it’s terribly difficult. As if “me’erev ad erev” means “ad ve’ad bichlal.” That is, normally, let me understand, normally if I were to simply interpret the verse, it would have said like this, in the verse it states explicitly that Yom Kippur is also at night. Normally a fast, as we see from rabbinic fasts that we have, there can be a fast that’s only during the day. But the Torah, no, you must begin at night, therefore the Torah explains. I want to ask you a question, how can the Torah write in the language of the Torah that the fast begins at night? Before it says “batish’i,” yes, everyone knows later another exposition, “can it be that on the ninth one fasts?” It means to say from the night before, which means still from after the ninth. “Batish’i” doesn’t mean the ninth in the evening, doesn’t mean the eve of Erev Yom Kippur, right? It means the night after the ninth, which is after the ninth day, “ad erev” until the eleventh night. But he includes it all, it just comes out to say that it goes a full twenty-four hours. That’s how I would have said the simple interpretation.
The Nature of the Addition – Torah Law or Rabbinic?
Therefore, for no reason, the Sages said, or I don’t know if this is Torah law or rabbinic, it doesn’t state clearly in the Rambam, that one must actually add a bit. He doesn’t say a measure or anything. Perhaps the addition is simply so that it should be clear that when it comes, ah, one shouldn’t stumble with bein hashemashot, one should give it a bit of space. Not clear.
Speaker 2: What do you mean? By Shabbat we saw that one is lenient, it only needs to begin when it’s really Shabbat. And here we’ll be a bit more stringent. That bein hashemashot we look at as only a rabbinic Shabbat, Yom Kippur, yes, only with the rabbinic. And here one should be stringent with the doubts, one should already begin a bit earlier. Bein hashemashot is a doubt, it’s a Torah doubt, but one must be stringent. On cessation the Torah didn’t decree regarding the Sabbaths, that’s what we learn in Shabbat.
Speaker 1: But I don’t know, it doesn’t say here bein hashemashot, it says “me’erev,” on the contrary, if one makes the addition only at bein hashemashot one doesn’t fulfill it, because if it’s an obligation, it’s a verse, Torah law, it must be when it’s still certainly day. One should add still before a bit, one should add. He doesn’t say the measure of adding. He also doesn’t say what the meaning of this is.
The “Ve’initem” Verse Applies to Both Laws
But it’s interesting, you learn that the “ve’initem” applies to both laws, to this is also what he began that one begins the night before. I mean, that one begins the night before, only the Rambam says, he doesn’t need sources for this. He only says that regarding cessation. I’m trying to make some sense of this, and I’m trying to think that the addition has something to do with the fact that one begins at night.
A New Approach: The Ninth of the Month Already Obligates
Let’s learn this verse: “Ve’initem et nafshoteichem betish’ah lachodesh”. But it’s not the ninth, it’s “ba’asor,” yes? But he means to say “ba’erev.” Very interesting. That’s what you’re trying to say, yes? Unlike what the Gemara says “ve’initem et nafshoteichem” – that one should eat, “anyone who eats and drinks on the ninth.” But here it’s a difficult verse, yes? Why does it say “betish’ah lachodesh”? It should say “ba’asor lachodesh.” He says, that he calls it “tish’ah lachodesh,” just like that, but he means to say the night when the ninth of the month ends, “ad erev,” until the next night when the tenth of the month ends.
So we see here as if that one should already begin, that the obligation already begins with the departure of the ninth. The end of the ninth already obligates. So one can understand that tosefet Yom Kippur is just like an addition to the point. It’s an innovation. By Shabbat no one will think that the sixth day is already obligated with Shabbat. On the contrary, as long as there’s still something of the sixth day it’s still exempt. Here we see something that the ninth of the month already brings with it the mitzvah of “ve’initem.” So you’ll say that at the end of the ninth one must already begin fasting. Yes? I think so. It’s interesting. I think so, and it makes sense. Before that one must add a bit from… Yes, “ba’erev” means already the eve of the tenth. One sees that also the eve of the tenth still has in it something of a prohibition, something of an obligation.
Yom Kippur = The Tenth + A Drop of the Ninth + A Drop of the Eleventh
Speaker 2:
So Yom Kippur is all of the tenth, plus a drop of the ninth and a drop of the eleventh, right? You can say it like that?
Speaker 1:
Right. Because… In other words, if there were a time that it only begins in the morning or only in the middle of the night, it wouldn’t make sense. Since it must be a whole day, let it be a whole day. In short, one must understand this better. The poskim say that there’s an obligation of addition. Why? For when? What does it mean? No, here it also looks quite clear that this is something a law in the fast, it’s not any law in work. Therefore Shabbat is a different world unto itself. But the Rishonim who learn that the verse “ve’initem et nafshoteichem” tosefet Yom Kippur is on all cessations, cessation from work and craft, they have a problem. What about every Shabbat? Why shouldn’t there be every Shabbat? But according to the Rambam, it’s only an obligation on the fast, that one should fast a bit more, one should fast a bit before, and a bit after.
Dispute of Rishonim: Rambam vs. Ran
Very well, the Maggid Mishneh brings that it’s implied in the Gemara that there’s a dispute about this. The Rambam rules apparently clearly that there’s only addition only on Yom Kippur and only on eating and drinking. Other commentators…
Speaker 2:
Not on the other afflictions either?
Speaker 1:
It means only on the “ve’initem et nafshoteichem,” which is the main Torah affliction. In any case, not something new, in any case only on the affliction, certainly not on cessation from work. That’s the main point. And the other commentators, the Ran, I mean others, others have said that there’s an addition even on the cessation, therefore there’s also addition also on the… Shabbat, because Shabbat is also the cessation.
Speaker 2:
Hey, it doesn’t say Shabbat?
Speaker 1:
There’s a verse they compare, it says “shabbatchem.” “Shabbatchem” is a hint to Shabbat. Also on Shabbat there’s a concept of addition. One must know, I want to know how one knows that Shabbat is from evening.
Speaker 2:
Perhaps Shabbat is only during the day?
Speaker 1:
We see that “kavod yom adif,” also Shabbat the main thing is the day, right? No?
Speaker 2:
The mitzvah of Kiddush is what comes in on Shabbat.
Speaker 1:
No, it comes in on Shabbat. True. Kiddush rabbah.
Speaker 2:
Yes, it’s actually less.
Speaker 1:
Okay.
Addition vs. Bein Hashemashot – Stringency by Yom Kippur
It’s interesting, because I would have been able perhaps to learn such an approach, that bein hashemashot by Shabbat one is lenient with the rabbis. You want to tell us here that one shouldn’t think that Yom Kippur one can be lenient with the… with the bein hashemashot on afflictions, afflictions is a serious thing, as we see that the Sages are easily lenient with a place of distress, they say that every affliction is a place of distress, especially the five afflictions which isn’t clear that it’s Torah law. He says, no, that with affliction one must be stringent plus, even more than the bein hashemashot. Difficult, it seems that the law is Torah law. And also, the Rambam only says clearly, to fulfill the fast, he also doesn’t say clearly.
Speaker 2:
He means all five matters.
Speaker 1:
Okay, that can be inferred. It’s certain that it has something to do. We see, let’s say like this, all the laws with the learnings of bein hashemashot, of doubt, these are already learnings of definition. It’s certain that every time one says that something begins a day, if it begins in the morning there’s also a question of dawn, sunrise. But in short, the transition from day to night, there’s something a time in between, or a bit before and a bit after, and one must know what the law is for each one of them. It’s not such a normal thing that one should talk about this. All these details have something to do. And the next section will also show that as if there’s a test in this, that there’s in this a test in this.
Law 7: Women Who Eat and Drink Until Dark
The Words of the Rambam
The Rambam says, “Women who eat and drink until dark”, women who don’t follow the law that one should add a bit of tosefet Yom Kippur, “and they don’t know that it’s a mitzvah to add from weekday to holy”, a person will think that one should protest. Just as Erev Shabbat there’s actually a mitzvah that a person must announce in the house.
Comparison with Erev Shabbat
Very interesting, that Erev Shabbat where bein hashemashot isn’t only rabbinic, one must announce in the house, one must act as if one is angry, the whole business.
Speaker 2:
What are you talking about? Well, the… calmly, but… not in anger.
Speaker 1:
No. It states in the Gemara, we learned in tractate Shabbat, you’re more than the people of the house, but not Erev Shabbat, that it states explicitly calmly. Yes, in short, one is busy with this. Yom Kippur is a mitzvah, but the Rambam says, “one doesn’t protest against them”, one doesn’t need to protest against the women.
Speaker 2:
But it’s simple, because Shabbat we’re talking that it should prepare for the house, the candle lighting, other people, that she does on her own her own matter, it has nothing to do with a second person.
Speaker 1:
We also see that the shofar blowing to stop doing work, everything is only about the house, that the house should be Shabbat-like.
Speaker 2:
Again, the shofar blowing is for the whole world.
Speaker 1:
But what you bring that “within his house he must say,” that’s not that one should protest that your wife shouldn’t transgress a prohibition. You must be for Shabbat, it should be certain.
Speaker 2:
I understand, it’s different.
Why One Doesn’t Protest
Speaker 1:
Okay, further. But here the Rambam says that one doesn’t protest. Why? He says like this, “lest they come to do it intentionally”, so that the women shouldn’t do it intentionally. Now they do it because “they don’t know.” If you will protest, they don’t know the whole matter, they don’t know that there’s such a thing that one must eat earlier, they’ll eat until the last minute, they’ll eat intentionally. The Rambam says, hey, who says they should do it intentionally? I’ll stand at home, I’ll be a strict father. The Rambam says, it’s impossible that there should be a guard in every single house to warn to return. One can’t obligate that everyone should be a guard, to warn, that every person should be in his house a guard, to warn that the court shouldn’t send a court.
Discussion: Who is the “Guard”? – The Court or the Husband?
Speaker 2:
The Rambam says, because the husband, “and one doesn’t protest against them,” it seems that he’s not talking about the husband, he’s talking about the court. The court doesn’t send around guards, why can’t the person prevent? Because he can’t! A person won’t take away his wife’s…
Speaker 1:
No normal person…
Speaker 2:
The shoter doesn’t speak… You’ve learned a translation that shoter means that the man shouldn’t be a shoter. It’s certain that this doesn’t mean that. Shoter means that one can’t, the beit din doesn’t have enough police. The Rambam says, the beit din sends police to the na’arah there, the na’arah they can send to. One can’t send to everyone’s home. So therefore, ah, should the man himself grab his food? That won’t happen! One doesn’t grab the food from the wife. He should do the business. It doesn’t exist.
The Faith in Honest Jewish Women
Speaker 1:
“Ve’ein lecha lahem sheyad’u veyishmeru et atzman”, it’s still all their hall, because he goes here further with the assumption that they won’t stop. Why won’t they stop? Honest Jewish women, Yom Kippur night, they all want to do the mitzvah. It’s an interesting faith. And it has something to do with the matter that… It looks somewhat connected with the matter of being mosif mei’chol al hakodesh. But wait again. This is the obligation. They don’t know, on Yom Kippur itself one isn’t concerned, one knows that they will stop when it becomes bein hashemashot, for example. They don’t know the mitzvah of being mosif mei’chol al hakodesh. And “ein mocheh”. On what does he think that they won’t follow when one goes to tell them? This I don’t understand.
Discussion: Why Won’t People Follow?
Speaker 2:
People don’t follow. I don’t know if you speak with people sometimes, but people don’t follow. One can force them, they can’t follow. People don’t follow.
Speaker 1:
One isn’t speaking of this. If people don’t follow, he wouldn’t have started writing the sefer. People follow. Here there is something extra why people don’t follow.
Speaker 2:
No, no, no, something in between. “Ve’ein momchin bidam” means one doesn’t disturb them, one doesn’t teach them. If one goes to school and teaches halachot, one teaches the school.
Speaker 1:
Also. But this doesn’t mean that one doesn’t teach it. Once one has decided, one doesn’t stop. Like a mecha’ah from hilchot chazakat habatim. A mecha’ah doesn’t mean the same thing as saying. If one can now say it and they will follow, certainly, but one doesn’t disturb. And I mean precisely that there is here a giant… what it says here like this. First of all, I’ll tell you, there is here a giant, because the other, the Rashba came and said, what does it mean, on every matter should one say this? Who says first of all, the Rambam doesn’t say all these distinctions.
The Rashba’s Distinction: Davar Shegagim
But the Rambam argued that the Rashba argued that there is a distinction that this doesn’t stand in the Torah, it’s only something a learning that the Chachamim understood. They go, if you go to say it, they won’t take it seriously. The reality is, whoever speaks with normal people, not with the bnei Torah. Bnei Torah is, perhaps one must indeed be mocheh, shegagat Talmud and the like, but people aren’t bnei Torah. Simply, in the normal world, you’ll say, you know that on Shabbat one may not open bottles. I want to tell you, he won’t believe you, it doesn’t help. One must be a talmid chacham to understand. Davar hashaveh nishma, yes, this is the same similar thing, davar shegagim, davar shegagim, davar shegagim.
But I just want to answer your question that you ask, he will follow you. He won’t, because there are things that he will follow. Drive on Shabbat? If he doesn’t know, I don’t know, one will tell him one may not drive on Shabbat. Things that are something like why must one be mosif? What wasn’t enough to fast on Yom Kippur? He knows that one fasts on Yom Kippur, she is a pious woman, she fasts on Yom Kippur, certainly, it becomes night, she stops eating. Before that also? What should the Rabbanan have said? They won’t trust this. I mean that there is such a thing, I mean that they
The Practical Application of “Mutav Sheyiheyu Shogegim”
I mean that very many halachot are like this: People don’t truly believe that one may not do this. Next year he won’t do it again, or in three minutes, I don’t know, it doesn’t help. There are very many things where one is mocheh and no one follows.
And the poskim say, people think that shemirat einayim is a midat chasidut. It’s actually precisely a midat chasidut. Yes, except if it’s a woman who is assur alav, but it says in the Rema that it’s a midat chasidut. People are right. Many times you tell him, I hear, it’s a chumra, a nice hidur, he won’t follow it. The problem is, now he will become a meizid, because now he knows about it, and it makes him worse.
The mutav sheyiheyu shogegim is a very important thing, because many times when one tells people things they become worse, because afterwards he says, okay, I’m already not from this person.
The Example of Yom Kippur
And here one can say it very clearly, if you will tell a woman, you already weren’t allowed to eat now, she will think, okay, I already didn’t fast this Yom Kippur. She won’t grasp the distinction that you were only transgressing on the tosefet, you weren’t yet transgressing on the Yom Kippur itself.
The Essence of “Mutav Sheyiheyu Shogegim” — A Character Trait
I mean that the meizidim, the elevation of meizidim, isn’t that one saves him from some obligation of sekilah, it’s something, as you say, a techunot hanefesh. A person may not be a meizid. He is a shogeg, okay, a shogeg is… he doesn’t know. He never learned the halacha, he doesn’t know such a thing. I don’t know.
The Example of Chinuch Habanim
It’s a din in chinuch, it’s a true thing. That as long as you don’t catch your child, he will continue to act as if he is makpid on this, he falls through. Once it becomes open that he isn’t makpid on the thing, you’ve taken away your will. To maintain if he is sometimes nichshal. It becomes such a thing that he can do beyad ramah. I mean that it has to do with this.
Okay, wonderful.
Conclusion of Chapter 1
The Rambam says, vechein kol hadomeh lazeh. Here stands the great principle in all the Torah, that one must know when not to be mocheh, so that the shogegim should spread and they shouldn’t know. This is very much.
Okay, in short, one can think a lot.
Until here chapter 1 of hilchot shevitat asor. Yes.