Law for Israel - Parashat Tzav, Tuesday

Torah

(11) 'Every male among the children of Aaron shall eat it. It shall be a statute forever in your generations from the offerings of Hashem. Whatever touches them shall become holy.' (P) Every male among the sons of Aaron may eat it. A statute forever in your generations from the offerings of Hashem. Everything that touches them becomes holy.
(12) Second Hashem spoke to Moses, saying:' And Hashem spoke to Moses, saying:
(13) 'This is the offering of Aaron and of his sons, which they shall offer to Hashem on the day when he is anointed: a tenth of an ephah of fine flour as a regular meal offering, half of it in the morning and half of it in the evening.' This is the offering of Aaron and of his sons, which they shall offer to Hashem on the day he is anointed: a tenth of an ephah of fine flour as a perpetual meal offering, half of it in the morning and half of it in the evening.
(14) 'On a griddle with oil it shall be made, when it is mixed bring it. A baked meal offering broken into pieces, you shall offer it as a sweet aroma to Hashem.' On a griddle with oil it shall be made, mixed, bring it; baked meal offering broken, offer it as a sweet aroma to Hashem.
(15) 'And the anointed priest that shall be in his place from among his sons shall offer it. It is a statute forever to Hashem; it shall be entirely burned.' And the priest who is anointed in his place from among his sons shall offer it. It is a statute forever to Hashem; it shall be completely burned:

Prophets - Jeremiah - Chapter 7

(31) 'They built the high places of Tophet, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and daughters in the fire, which I did not command, nor did it come into my heart.' (P) They built the high place of Tophet in the Valley of Ben Hinnom, to burn their sons and daughters in fire, which I did not command, nor did it come into my heart.
(32) 'Therefore, behold, the days are coming,' says Hashem, 'that it will no longer be called Tophet, or the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter, for they shall bury in Tophet, because there is no other place.' Thus, the days are coming, declares Hashem, when it will not be called Tophet or the Valley of Ben Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter, for they will bury in Tophet for lack of room.
(33) 'And the carcasses of this people will be food for the birds of the sky and for the animals of the earth, and no one will frighten them away.' And the carcasses of this people will be food for the birds of the heavens and for the beasts of the earth, and no one will scare them away.
(34) 'I will cause to cease from the cities of Judah and from the streets of Jerusalem the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, for the land shall be desolate.' I will put an end to the joy and gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, in the cities of Judah and the streets of Jerusalem, for the land will become a ruin.
8 (1) At that time, declares Hashem, 'They will bring out the bones of the kings of Judah and the bones of its officials, the bones of the priests and the prophets, and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem from their graves.' At that time, declares Hashem, they will remove the bones of the kings of Judah and its officials, the bones of the priests and the bones of the prophets and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem from their graves:

Writings - Proverbs Chapter 22

(20) 'Have I not written to you excellent things regarding counsel and knowledge,' Have I not written to you urging in counsel and understanding:
(21) 'To make you know the certainty of the words of truth, so you can bring back words of truth to those who sent you?' To let you know this truth, to reply with words of truth to those who send you:
(22) 'Do not rob the poor because he is poor, and do not oppress the afflicted in court,' Do not rob the poor because he is poor, and do not oppress the afflicted at the gate:
(23) 'For Hashem will plead their cause, and plunder the soul of those who robbed them.' For Hashem will plead their cause and rob their souls of those who rob them:
(24) 'Do not associate with an angry man, or go with a hot-tempered one, Do not associate with a hot-headed man, nor go with a quick-tempered fellow:

Mishnah Ketubot, Chapter 9

1. One who writes to his wife, 'I have no claim on your property,' still eats its produce during her lifetime, and if she dies, he inherits from her. If so, why write, 'I have no claim on your property?' It means if she sold or gave them away, it is valid. If he wrote to her, 'I have no claim on your property or its produce,' he does not eat its produce during her lifetime, but if she dies, he inherits from her. Rabbi Yehuda says, he always eats the fruit of the fruit until he writes, 'I have no claim on your property or their produce or the fruit of their produce forever.' If he writes, 'I have no claim on your property or its produce or the fruit of their produce in your lifetime or after your death,' he does not eat its produce in her lifetime, and if she dies, he does not inherit from her. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says if she dies, he inherits because he conditioned against what is written in the Torah. And anyone who conditions against what is written in the Torah, the condition is void:

Bartenura  (1) One who writes to his wife, 'I have no claim on your property...' He writes this when she is betrothed, that when you marry me, I will have no claim on your property. Even without a formal agreement, she can sell or give away, and it stands, for an inheritance coming to a person from another place can be conditioned not to be inherited. If there is a formal acquisition, even after marriage, her sale stands, but he eats the produce, and if she dies, he inherits, as this means 'No claim in your property, but have claim in the fruits.' As long as they are your possessions, that you are alive, I have no claim, but after death, I do. Rabbi Yehuda says he consumes even the secondary produce. The Gemara explains which are produce and which are secondary produce: if she brought him land that yielded produce, those are produce; if she sold that produce and bought land with them that yielded more, those are secondary produce. And if he said 'I have no claim on your property or its produce,' he is eating secondary produce, according to Rabbi Yehuda. The law follows Rabbi Yehuda: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says if she dies, he inherits because he conditioned against what is written in the Torah. It states, 'And he shall inherit her' (Numbers 27), from which we know the husband inherits his wife. But the final conclusion is, the husband's inheritance of his wife is not biblical, but rabbinic, and the verse is mere support. Nevertheless, the law follows RSG, not because he conditioned against what is written in the Torah, but because the sages made it strong like Torah:

2. If someone dies leaving a wife and creditors and heirs, and there is a deposit or loan in the hands of others, Rabbi Tarfon says it should be given to the weakest among them. Rabbi Akiva says there is no compassion in the law; it goes to the heirs because all require an oath, but the heirs do not require an oath:

Bartenura   (2) It should be given to the weakest among them. Some say, to the one with a later contract, as he cannot seize earlier claims; others say it is the wife's ketubah, as she is considered weak since it is not her way to pursue the deceased's assets actively as a man does. Even though movable property of the orphans is not bound to the creditor or to a ketubah, here they are not in their possession, and Rabbi Tarfon holds they are taken from the borrower or the one holding the deposit and given to the creditor and the ketubah: It is given to the heirs. And possession does not help: All must swear. Because whoever comes to claim from the estate of orphans does not do so without an oath, and as long as they haven't sworn, we do not know if they have anything due to them. Therefore, once the deceased died, the heirs have acquired: it's in their possession:

3. If he left detached produce, whoever seizes first zays seized, the estate. If she seized more than her ketubah or the creditor more than his debt, the excess, Rabbi Tarfon says it is given to the weakest among them. Rabbi Akiva says there is no compassion in the law; it is given to the heirs because everyone needs an oath, but the heirs don't need an oath:

Bartenura   (3) Whoever seizes first zays. If the heirs seized, it stands, and it is not taken from them, because movable property of the orphans is not bound to the creditor or ketubah. If either the wife or her creditor seized, he holds, seizure after death works: If a woman seized more than her ketubah. If she seized and an excess remains, or the creditor and an excess remains: The excess, Rabbi Tarfon... Goes to the one with the weaker claim, and if it comes into the hands of the orphans later, neither the woman nor the creditor takes from them. Today, all courts in Israel practice that movable property of the orphans is bound to the creditor, and if someone dies leaving movables and there is a creditor and a wife's contract, whoever seizes first wins, whether an earlier creditor or a later creditor, because there is no priority in movables. If neither seizes, the movables are divided among them, as we state later in the chapter of 'He who marries':

4. One who appoints his wife to be a storekeeper or makes her a steward, he may administer an oath whenever he wants. Rabbi Eliezer says even for her spindle and dough:

Bartenura   (4) Storekeeper. To sell and trade in the store: Steward. To manage his property and transact with it: He may administer an oath. An oath as directed by the Torah on a doubt, and he can extend the oath to her spindle and dough: Rabbi Eliezer says. Even initially, without extension, he can administer an oath regarding her spindle and dough. The law does not follow Rabbi Eliezer:

5. If he wrote to her, 'An oath and vow are not upon you,' he cannot administer an oath, but he can administer to her heirs and those in her place. If he wrote, 'An oath and vow are not upon you, your heirs, and those in your place,' he cannot administer an oath to her, her heirs, or those in her place, but his heirs can administer an oath to her, her heirs, and those in her place. If he wrote, 'An oath and vow are not upon me, my heirs, and those in my place to you, your heirs, and those in your place,' he cannot administer an oath to her, nor can his heirs or those in his place, to her or her heirs or those in her place:

Bartenura  (5) Administer an oath to her heirs. If he divorced her and she died and her heirs claim her ketubah from him, they swear the heir's oath that they were not charged or told beforehand nor found among her documents that her ketubah was paid: And those in her place. If she sold her ketubah to others and was divorced and died and the purchasers claim the ketubah, they too swear the heir's oath: But his heirs administer... If she became a widow and she or her heirs collect from the orphans, they require an oath, as he exempted them only from himself, if they collect during his lifetime: To those in my place. If I sell my property, and you collect from the purchasers:

6. If she left from her husband's grave to her father's house or returned to her husband's house and was not made an overseer, the heirs cannot administer an oath to her. If she was made an overseer, the heirs administer an oath regarding the future but not the past:

Bartenura  (6) She went from her husband's grave. She whom her husband exempted from an oath: To her father's house. Not taking further involvement in the property: The heirs cannot administer an oath. For what was handled between death and burial. Because the heirs can't administer an oath about it, since she needs witnesses for what she sold and bought for burial, the deceased would remain and spoil: Concerning the future. That she did not withhold anything from the business she became an overseer over after her husband's burial; her husband's exemption does not apply to this as it pertains to the orphans' property: Concerning the past. For transactions during her husband's lifetime:

7. If one admits part of her ketubah, she does not collect without an oath. If a single witness testifies that it was paid, she does not collect without an oath, from the estate of orphans, property with liens, or not in his presence, she does not collect without an oath:

Bartenura  (7) She does not collect without an oath. One collecting from another doesn't pay close attention to detail. Though she was partly paid, she might have been paid in full, so the sages placed an oath to ensure her honesty. With an oath that she had not collected: From property with liens. Because if she had collected from the borrower himself and he claimed 'Swear to me', she would swear. We extend this consideration to purchasers because maybe, had she collected from the borrower, he would have demanded she swear, so we require her to swear now too:

8. How is it with one admitting part of her ketubah? If her ketubah was a thousand zuz, and he told her 'You received your ketubah', and she says, 'I only received a hundred', she does not collect without an oath. How is it with one witness testifying her ketubah was paid? If her ketubah was a thousand zuz and he told her, 'You received your ketubah', and she said, 'I did not receive', and one witness testifies it was paid, she does not collect without an oath. How is it with property with liens? If he sold property to others and she collected from buyers, she does not collect without an oath. How about from the estate of orphans? If he died leaving property to the heirs, and she collected from them, she does not collect without an oath. How is it when not in his presence? If he traveled abroad, and she collected not in his presence, she does not collect without an oath. Rabbi Shimon says, if she claims her ketubah, the heirs administer an oath. If she does not claim her ketubah, the heirs do not administer an oath.

Bartenura  (8) Rabbi Shimon. Based on earlier sages' opinion that said if one set up his wife as a shopkeeper or a steward, he administers an oath whenever he wants. And if he wrote 'No oath or vow is on you', the heirs do not administer an oath to her; Rabbi Shimon disagrees, saying as long as she's claiming her ketubah, the heirs administer an oath even if he wrote, 'No oath or vow is on me or my heirs upon you.' If she's not claiming, the heirs do not impose an oath on her for managing during his life, even if he didn't exempt her. Because he upholds Rabbi Eliezer and his argument that says earlier in the Mishnah, he can administer an oath whenever he wants. The law doesn't follow Rabbi Shimon:

9. If she produces a get without a ketubah, she collects her ketubah. If a ketubah without a get, she says 'My get was lost', and he says, 'My receipt was lost', and similarly a creditor without a prosbul, they cannot collect. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says from times of danger onwards, a woman collects her ketubah without a get, and a creditor without a prosbul. Two gets and two ketubot, she collects two ketubot. Two ketubot and one get, or one ketubah and two gets, or a ketubah, a get, and death, she only collects one ketubah because one who divorces and remarries his wife does so on the basis of the first ketubah. A minor whose father married him off, her ketubah stands because it was on that basis they remained married. A convert who converted with his wife, her ketubah stands because it was on this basis she remained:

Bartenura  (9) If she produces a get without a ketubah. In a place where ketubot are not written, relying on the terms of the court: She collects her ketubah. For the condition of the ketubah is like a decree of the court, and any act of the court stands as if one holds a document. But one only collects the base amount, not the additional part, unless a ketubah is produced: Prosbul. Hillel enacted a prosbul to prevent the sabbatical year from canceling debts by transferring one's claims to the court, so the court may collect when demanded; this avoids violating 'Do not make demands', as the court demands, not the individual: They cannot collect. We suspect she might have been paid her ketubah and he his loan by the sabbatical year: From the time of danger. When decrees prohibited keeping records of Jewish law, and women burned their gets after receiving them. So too with prosbuls:

Gemara Ketubot, Page 86a

Amemar said in the name of Rav Hama: If a man has a wife’s ketubah and a creditor’s debt, and he has land and money, we settle the creditor with money and the wife with land, each according to what is theirs. If there is only one piece of land that is enough for just one, we give it to the creditor, not to the wife. Why? Because a man is more anxious to marry than to be married. Rav Pappa said to Rav Hama: Is it true you said this in Rava’s name? Indeed, we burden the debtor to sell the land and bring money for the creditor. If someone owes money and offers land instead, we tell him to sell it himself and pay. If not, tell me the details of the case! He said the person was tying up his money with gentiles, thus he conducted himself inappropriately, and thus they acted the same.
Rav Kahana said to Rav Pappa: According to you who said paying one’s creditor is a mitzvah, if he says, 'I don’t wish to perform the mitzvah', what then? He said we have learned: 'What is taught about commandments of 'Do not do', but with positive commandments like building a sukkah or taking a lulav and does not do, we beat him until he performs it':

Rashi  This is according to his law. This is for the debtor who loaned money, and she relies on the mortgage of the land, and she did not give anything, and if for her upgraded dowry that is assessed in the ketubah? He has acquired them immediately, and she jointed them with the ketubah on the mortgage of the land: Not enough except for one. There's only enough for one of them: To the creditor, we give. So as not to close the door: More than a man wants. And we don't worry about the notion of favor. Only the deeds have the same date, but if the ketubah precedes, she collects: Indeed, you said.  In questioning form, is it true you said something perplexing that the debtor is burdened to sell it and pay, for the lender's primary reliance is on the land: Tying money with a foreigner. Claiming the money to repay is for a foreigner: Paying a debt is a mitzvah. A mitzvah to repay one's debt, to uphold truthfulness as it is written, 'You must have fair measures':

Zohar Tzav, Page 31b

On the seventh day of the festival is the completion of the world’s judgment, and decrees are issued from the king’s palace, strength awakens and concludes on this day. Willows of the brook uphold them and we need to awaken these strengths to water and circle seven times around the altar to fill Isaac’s well with water, to fill the well of Isaac, and when it is filled, the world is blessed with water. On this day strengths need water and conclude later because the judgment concludes on this day. Therefore, we strike the willows of the land to finish them, for no judgment remains; this day is both the awakening and completion of judgment. Therefore, this awakening and completion are made with the willows of the brook. Rabbi Chiya said this is definitely so and fitting. The willows of the brook stem from a stream, strength awakens on this day and concludes judgments on this day. It is written 'Isaac dug wells' (Genesis 26). Wells are written without a Waw. What is 'Isaac dug'? It is the first day of the month, the awakening of judgment in the world, Isaac sits on a throne judging the world on this day, Isaac digs to awaken and conclude judgments, to extend strength to Israel to awaken water because water descends with might into the world. As these strengths only descend with cloud and a cloudy day, the spirits of the world’s inhabitants rest only because the world needs this. Why? Because the world was created with judgment and everything needs this. Therefore, it all depends on action. Therefore, the priest in his actions awakens above and below to rectify them, and they are rectified by him.
Rabbi Yose said we have learned that the willow is like lips, why take it on this day? Rabbi Chiya said though it comes for expounding, so it is truly, because on this day things depend on lips. The king decrees the issuing of decrees, and tongues of evil are silenced. On the first day of the month is the beginning of judgment, and conclusion on this day, as said. Come and see, on this day non-Jews conclude their blessings and remain in judgment. Israel on this day concludes their judgments and remain in blessing, for on the next day they delight in the king, take blessings for the year, in that joy only found with the king, with Israel alone. One who dwells with the king takes for himself whatever he wishes. Therefore, Israel begins, and non-Jews conclude. Israeli writes, 'I have loved you,' says Hashem, and etc. He told him, 'Surely we see Esau at ease in the kingdom in high places and rules over the world, and you say 'I laid waste his mountains'.' He said, 'Everywhere it is so, for the King decreed, writes his decrees on documents.' And therefore, it is written, 'I laid waste his mountains, as established in my document, and all the good G-d decreed for Israel is written 'I, Hashem, spoke and accomplished':'

Clear Halacha
Rambam Laws of Offering Actions, Chapter 2

1. The wine and fine flour brought with the offering are called libations, and the fine flour alone is called a meal offering of libations. This meal offering of libations requires no waving, bringing near, or frankincense, but it needs salt and is entirely burned on the outer altar, and the wine is poured on the altar. The wine is not put on the fire, only poured into the foundation and goes down to the shittin. 2. Only the animal burnt offering and peace offerings require libations, whether public or individual sacrifices, or a lamb of a woman who has given birth. But those of the High Priest, since they are burnt offerings, require libations, yet the bird, guilt offering, and sin offerings don't bring libations with them, except the leper's sin offering and guilt offering, whose libations are specified in the Torah. 3. From where do we know libations are not brought with a sin offering and guilt offering? As it says in the verse (Numbers 15), 'To utter a vow or in freewill offering, a thing that comes in vow or freewill.' Excluding sin offering, guilt offering, firstborn, tithe, and Passover, for they do not come in vow or freewill, do not require libations; and from where to bring peace offerings of holiday and burnt offering of appearance to libations as it says (ibid), 'or on your appointed feasts':

Ethics
From Gates of Holiness, Part 2, Gate 6

Forbidden foods are known to even contaminate the soul, as it says (Leviticus 20) 'Do not contaminate your souls'. Moreover, someone who abstains from them is called holy, as it says, 'Do not contaminate your souls', etc., and it ends, 'And you shall sanctify yourselves [...] for I am Hashem, sanctifying you', and you know that holiness brings to the spirit of holiness. Oaths, if false or vain, our sages of blessed memory said, when Hashem said, 'Do not take', the entire world quaked etc., and it is said (Job 9) 'He makes the earth quake from its place [...] the pillars tremble', and the depths seek to rise to flood the entire world, etc. Our sages of blessed memory said all sins are avenged from him and his family and the entire world, even if true; our sages of blessed memory said 600,000 cities were in Yannai on the mountain of the king; all were destroyed through oaths, even though they kept it. Our sages of blessed memory said about Rabbi Joshua ben Levi, when Hashem said, 'See if he ever took an oath and nullified it through a sage', he was removed from the Garden of Eden, but if not, let him stay there, and he always managed never to be released from an oath and never annulled it, nor ever swore in his life: