An idle thought. The Baal Haturim wrote his Arba Turim and his work on the Torah. His Arba Turim was yeish mei'ayin - its organizational system was invented by him alone. Just as the Rambam created his fourteen part Yad without precedent, the Tur created his four chalakim and their simanim.
Considering his sefer on the Torah, Rabbeinu Yaakov ben Harav Asher was a man for whom numerical values and systems meant a lot. When organizing the Tur, did he choose any numbers with a double meaning?
One way to remember how many simanim are in Orach Chaim is "לא תרצח." There are 697 simanim in Orach Chaim, תרצ"ז. I.e, lo sirtzach.
One humorous coincidence does not a summer make.
Here is another candidate. This was brought to my attention by Rav Yitzchak Aryeh Epstein in his האיחוד בחידוד for Parshas Achrei-Kedoshim, where he says that even though the Torah calls Kilayim a Chok, he found seven explanations for it. Here is his fifth (slightly edited)-
The רוקח says that through tzemer and pishtim, Hevel was killed by Kayin. In fact, Pirkei d'Rebbi Eliezer says רבי יהושע בן קרחה אומר אמר הקב"ה אל יתערבו מנחת קין והבל לעולם שמא חס ושלום יתערבו בארג בגד . Kayin's korban was flax & הבל brought a sheep which was wool! The ידות נדרים writes in his דרשה צמר ופשתים that the reason there are so many murders in the world is because of the prevalence of שעטנז & even the שלחן ערוך hints to this as he begins הלכות שעטנז in רצ"ח & ends in ש"ד which can stand for שפיכת דמים.
The "דרשה צמר ופשתים" he quotes is from Reb Yehuda Rosenberg, the fabulist who made up stories about the Maharal's Golem, and also wrote the ידות נדרים. I don't have the sefer, I don't know how much is R Epstein and how much is R Rosenberg, but I found this part quoted as follows:
כמבואר בספרי המקובלים שרציחת קין להבל, באה מן כח הטומאה של שעטנז, שזה הקריב צמר וזה הקריב פשתן. וגם השולחן ערוך מרמז על זה, כי הלכות שעטנז מתחילות בסימן רצ"ח ומסתיימות בסימן ש"ד (ראשי תיבות "שפיכות דמים")
Here is the Pirkei d'Rebbi Eliezer (21:5-6) :
הביא קין מותר מאכלו קליות זרע פשתן והביא הבל מבכורות צאנו ומחלביהן כבשים שלא נגזזו לצמר ונתעב מנחת קין ונרצית מנחת הבל שנ' וישע יי אל הבל ואל מנחתו.
רבי יהושע בן קרחה אומר אמר הקב"ה אל יתערבו מנחת קין והבל לעולם שמא חס ושלום (אפילו) [יתערבו] בארג בגד שנא' לא תלבש שעטנז וגו' אפילו היא מרוקבת לא יעלה עליך שנאמר ובגד כלאיים שעטנז לא יעלה עליך.
It's also in the Tanchuma Breishis 9:1.
וַיְהִי מִקֵּץ יָמִים וַיָּבֵא קַיִן וְגוֹ'. יֵשׁ מִקֵּץ שָׁנָה וְיֵשׁ מִקֵּץ שְׁנָתַיִם, וְיֵשׁ יָמִים, וְיֵשׁ אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה. אָמְרוּ חֲכָמֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה, בְּנֵי אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה הָיוּ קַיִן וָהֶבֶל. וַיָּבֵא קַיִן מִפְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה, מַהוּ? מִן מוֹתַר מַאֲכָלוֹ. וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי, זֶרַע פִּשְׁתָּן הָיָה, וְהֶבֶל הֵבִיא גַּם הוּא מִבְּכוֹרוֹת צֹאנוֹ וּמֵחֶלְבֵהֶן לְפִיכָךְ נֶאֱסַר צֶמֶר וּפִשְׁתִּים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: לֹא תִלְבַּשׁ שַׁעַטְנֵז וְגוֹ' (דברים כב, יא). וְאָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִּתְעָרֵב מִנְחַת הַחוֹטֵא עִם מִנְחַת הַזַּכַּאי לְפִיכָךְ נֶאֱסַר.
Don't ask me why bidgei kehuna were davka shatnez. That's not the point here. It's a Pirkei d'Rebbi Eliezer, and a Tanchuma, and a Rokeiach.
If it were anyone but the Baal Haturim, I would roll my eyes. And even the Baal Haturim, once I saw that he has הלכות ברכת הריח in Simanim רט"ז and רי"ז, I decided that he must have made a conscious decision to reject this kind of cleverness in his Arba Turim. Such a thing would not add to anyone's Chochma or Yira or Daas. But...... if anyone has any examples of Siman numbers having some clever connection with the subject matter, please let us know.
Tangential to your main point, but I think "His Arba Turim was yeish mei'ayin - its organizational system was invented by him alone. Just as the Rambam created his fourteen part Yad without precedent, the Tur created his four chalakim and their simanim."
ReplyDeleteThe four turim were not yeish mei'ayin. They come from the Bavli, which only covers the majority of four of the Sidrei Mishnah:
Mes' Berakhos + Zemanim → Orakh Chaim
Nashim → Even haAzer
Neziqim → Choshein Mishpat
Qodshim + Mes' Niddah + whatever didn't get its own mesechta → Yoreh Dei'ah
The only question is why YD was put second, unlike the order of the sedarim. (My best guess so far is that it's because EhE and CM have little a balebas would be handling on his own. So, YD is closer to OCh in usage.)
Thank you. That explains why YD, that is "issur v'Hetter," includes so many other things. Even NIddah, since it's not really taharos for us, isn't in EH.
DeleteWell, Niddah not being in EhE has a parallel with Ribbis not being in ChM. Disagreements about how much was borrowed and whether it was repaid are in one tur, but the ribbis is in another?
DeleteThat falls under איסור והיתר, but mezuzah/sefer torah/geirim/aveilus/shiluach hakan is definitely "everything's gotta be somewhere."
DeleteWell, it makes sense if YD were conceptually last, if not published that way, to have "misc." in YD. But I wondered about aveilus... The mesechta that covers it is in Mo'eid. Admittedly Mo'eid Qatan doesn't really target aveilus, which is I guess why it's not in OC, but I could see that decision going either way. (It could have been right after OC 156 "Masa uMatan".)
DeleteI vaguely remember seeing once somewhere - סימן רמ - איך יתנהג בתשמיש מטתו - as being the example of how one becomes "elevated" - רם.
ReplyDeletenice to see that you're still blogging :)
Thank you. I did a quick search and found someone who says it! I put it in the list.
DeleteAnd thanks for noting my return. I had been biting off more than I could chew lately, I would work on it for a month, and when/if I finally reached a maskana, it was a maaracha, not something to be posted. I know that Reb Moshe was disappointed that his Dibros on Shas were not popular, but we all know why that is. Even though he writes in a manner reminiscent of the Pnei Yehoshua, people want to be able to read it and not get up feeling dizzy.
The הלכות שופר begin in Siman 586, which is gematriya of שופר.
ReplyDeleteNow that is a hint that I'm not on a wild goose chase. Thanks.
DeleteThe Shofar allusion is actually in the Siddur Yaavetz Hilchos Shofar. What he says is relevant to your discussion:
Deleteדבר נפלא קרה בטור או״ח בסימניו שנזדמנו דיני שופר בסימן השוה עם גימטריא שלו ואע״פ שלא נתכוין המחבר לכך מ״מ נפל האמת באמת להראות כי מן השמים הסכימו ע״י לפי שעשה חיבורו לשם שמים וכל העוסקים במלאכת שמים לשמה מראים להם סימן טוב מה שלא עלה על דעתם
Thank you!
DeleteMy choson rebbe told me if you are particular to m’kayem r”m in orach chaim, your children will be the type to m’kayem r”m in yoreh deah (kibud av v’em)
DeleteThat is certainly a good siman, reminiscent of Kimchis. Thank you!
DeleteArukh haShulchan Yomi begins Hilkhos Taaruvos tomorrow. You need to know what nosein taam is in order to get very far in Hilkhos Basar beChalav. So it made me wonder why the Tur put Basar bVchalav (YD 87-97) ahead of Taaruvos (98-111)? Wouldn't it be easier to learn the general concepts and then apply them to felishigs vs milchigs?
ReplyDelete