Week One: Random Aruch HaShulchan - Orach Chaim 5 and Yoreh De’ah 6

Welcome, and Rules of the Game

Beki’ut, broad knowledge, has always been a challenge for me. I don’t read quickly, and when I try to, I don’t absorb. It’s led me to wonder about other ways to get at the essence of a work than read the whole thing. Also, when I read the writings of those who have read a whole corpus and then analyze, they experience those works from their own frameworks. I wonder what the work itself communicates, if we approach it on its own terms, without imposing ourselves on it.

For a few years now, I have been enamored of random sampling. What do works of Torah show about themselves if we dip into them randomly, sampling enough for the results to be meaningful. I want to try this with the Aruch HaShulchan.

Of whom I’m a longtime fan for many reasons, but especially because he attempted to codify all of halachah. I remember hearing my teacher, Prof. Twersky, a”h, note how Rambam was the only one, since the Mishnah, who had done so, and then being struck by Aruch HaShulchan’s attempt.

Except, of course, who can really read and remember all of Aruch HaShulchan (henceforth, AH)? Not me, that’s for sure. Instead, I accumulated a random sample of chapters [for those interested in technicalities: I found a website that tells you the sample size you need to have a 95% chance of being within 5% of the truth, found that number for each of the four sections of Shulchan Aruch (from now on, SA), took numbers from a random number generator], which we will study here. To avoid getting bogged down in any topic, I will also jump 10 chapters in the list from siman to siman.

Thanks for tolerating my throat clearing; I took the time because knowing what we are doing makes it more likely you’ll stay with me for the ride. I hope I am correct.

Our Berachot of Hashem Open the Door to Hashem Giving Us Berachot

Siman 5 came up first in Orach Chaim, where AH discusses how we formulate berachot, commonly translated as blessings. He starts the siman warning us not to think God needs our berachot, a misimpression fostered by the berachah itself’s starting in the second person, Baruch ata, blessed are you. [The word ”blessed” doesn’t help, it implies we are wishing good things for God.]

Not so. David HaMelech, II Shmuel 7;29, prays to have his household always be blessed from Hashem’s blessings (an idea AH seems to take to be David’s hope Hashem will send his, David’s, blessings of God back to David and his family). Tehillim 68;35 speaks of giving strength to Hashem, understood by AH to mean our berachot fortify, as it were, the Divine ability to shower bounty on us. [Mori ve-rabi R. Ezra Bick, spends the introduction to In His Mercy on this idea, how our speaking of Hashem enhances, somehow, the level of Divine Presence in this world.]

Berachot: De-Oraita or De-Rabbanan

That was all the first se’if, paragraph. We commonly say (not incorrectly) berachot are all de-rabbanan, enacted by Rabbinic law, other than birkat hamazon, Grace After Meals. Many also consider birchot ha-Torah, the berachot we recite before studying Torah, to be Biblical, too (AH says it is almost all reputable authorities).

Except many verses refer to berachot and their value, meaning the idea of berachot is clearly Scriptural. AH explains that the specific situations to recite specific words are rabbinic. Saying she-ha-kol before drinking water is rabbinic; thanking God for bounty in our lives with some blessing is there in Tanach.

Addressing Hashem, the Meaning of the Name

Paragraph two explains why we bless God directly, where Tehillim often speaks of rather than to Hashem. The verses spoke of Hashem to remind us we never fully know Hashem, we only spot His actions in this world and react to those. When Chazal set up berachot for us to say, those discuss Hashem’s actions, opening the door to the second person.

In paragraph three, he takes up our substituting the Ado… pronunciation for the four-letter Name, because the latter cannot currently be read as written. Instead, we think of God’s mastery of the world (the word adon, which we render my adon, has a plain meaning, master or my master). Elokim refers to God’s power, although AH doesn’t explain how that differs from rulership.

It leads him to explain that the first of the Names in a blessing should put us in mind of the Master who was, is, and will be (the implication of the four-letter Name itself), although the Vilna Gaon thought we should focus only on God’s being Master of all, how the Name is read, not written. AH closes that he is only sharing the plain meaning of the words, does not intend to discuss the kabbilistic ideas behind them.

The idea of how to read the four letter Name does come from Pesachim 50a, based on R. Avina’s reading of Shemot 3;15. Possibly, this is a literal halachic inference from a verse, and would have that status, or perhaps is part of the Oral Law taught at Sinai, either of which would restrict our ability to deviate from this rule. But that’s not made clear, and the meanings of the Names seems not to have been legally defined, leaving much room to adopt alternatives.

One siman, studied, showing a clear interest in berachot in Judaism, but their specifics more amorphously developed, perhaps therefore amenable to adjustment. But that’s not enough for today, is it? Let’s start another siman.

Yoreh De’ah 6—The Knife of Shechitah

Moving to Yoreh De’ah (Shulchan Aruch comes in four parts, Orach Chayim, Yoreh De’ah, Even HaEzer, and Choshen Mishpat), our number generator puts us in siman 6, the first paragraph of which explains why the tool used for shechitah, the proper way of killing an animal for food, need not be a keli, a formal instrument.

For sacrifices, Zevachim 97a inferred a need for a keli from Bereshit 22;10 saying Avraham took a ma’achelet, a knife, to kill Yitzchak during the Akedah. Tosafot explains that the verse could have written mechatech, something that cuts; its emphasis on ma’achelet therefore indicated a tool.

Chullin 16a does apply one lesson from the Akedah to ordinary meat, the need for the cutting tool to be talush, unattached, since the verse speaks of Avraham taking the knife. [Aruch HaShulchan does not discuss how the Gemara knew which aspects of Avraham’s actions are specific to sacrifices and which apply to all slaughter. Especially since these are de-oraita rules, the question seems important to understand, but we will not find the answer here.]

Materials of Cutting Tools

Paragraphs two and three define further what materials we can use for this cutting. Paragraph two records Chullin 15b, it can be a rock, glass, or reed, as long as it is sharp, with no irregularities, and—Rema adds—does not shed when used.

In paragraph three, Aruch HaShulchan takes the availability of finely honed steel knives to preclude other materials, to account for earlier authorities’ various worries and to honor the mitzvah properly. [So today, when there are ceramic and obsidian blades that may be sharper than steel…?]

Another example of proper honor for the mitzvah is to use such a knife only for shechitah, the reason it is muktzeh on Shabbat, a Rabbinic rule. Aruch HaShulchan also reports the custom among slaughterers to have separate knives for large animals, small animals, and birds, the size better matching the creature.

Avoiding Drasah

Paragraph six takes us to one of the main ways a shochet can mess up the process, drasah, where he presses the knife through the neck, rather than slicing. It comes up with a knife reattached to a ground or wall. As long as the person wasn’t mevatel it, didn’t plan for it to be there permanently, the knife is not considered attached and could be used. Except it runs a greater risk of drasah, since it is less easily maneuvered.

Tur restricted shechitah with an attached blade to where the neck was below the knife, and the shochet moved it back and forth upwards to slice it. If the neck were on top, Tur held that the worry of drasah negated the shechitah even after the fact, even if the shochet is positive he sliced rather than pressed. For birds, AH qualifies, it should be acceptable bedi’avad, after the fact, because they are lighter, and it is plausible the neck will not weigh down on the blade.

All this is only for an attached blade, because the shochet can be more sure he slices upward with a handheld blade. Still, says AH, Shach infers from the Gemara we shouldn’t do it that way anyway.

Attached to Living Creatures

Because verses compare people to the earth [AH sends us to Rashi, Kiddushin 7a], anything attached to a person or live animal is the same as the ground, and the shechitah is Biblically invalid. Should an animal with a sharp tooth or talon die, and the shochet wants to use the jaw or hoof as a kind of handle, that is allowed, as long as it is not two teeth, because the space between them counts as a pegimah, a flaw that tears at the neck rather than slices, another type of invalidation, ikkur.

Knives with Flaws

The rest of the chapter discusses knives with blemishes in various places. Should one edge be full of such jags or ridges, Tevu’ot Shor said not to use the smooth side, for fear the shochet will forget, even if he placed a reminder on the knife.

AH treats it like a gezerah, a protective rabbinic rule, and permits the meat after the fact, if the shochet in fact used the right side, because a Mishnah and Gemara in Chullin 15b discuss a similar case. [If the rules in this section are protective gezerot, Rambam seems to think they are immutable, where Tosafot and others see more room for a court to adjust them.]

If the knife blemish is in only one spot, and the shochet knew about it, he can only cover that spot and slaughter using the rest of the knife if there is some time pressure such that he cannot sand down that spot to smooth it out. If he didn’t know about it, we reject the shechitah completely, unable to trust his current claims he did not use that part of the knife, because we have no confidence he was paying attention to that issue, since he did not know it was an issue.

A knife with a sharp point at its head raises another problem, chaladah, that the shochet will puncture the animal’s esophagus or windpipe, kill it that way, another way it would be a terefah, rather than kosher.

And our time is up. Next week, God willing, we will start the first siman of Even HaEzer, quite a long one. Thanks for reading, and feedback welcome!

Adapted from articles previously published on Torah Musings