Shevitat Asor - Chapter 2

If, however, the foods are not fit for human consumption, different. rules apply. (See Halachah 5.)

Although most prohibitions against forbidden foods involve a smaller measure—a k’zayit (the size of an olive)—an exception is made in this instance, because a person’s appetite will not be sated if he eats an amount of food smaller than the size of a date. In contrast to the measure for drinking, this is a standard measure, regardless of a person’s size (Yoma 80a).

According to Shiurei Torah an egg is 57.6 cubic centimeters; according to Chazon Ish (when the smaller measure is more stringent), it is 41 cubic centimeters. Thus, the size of a date would be a slightly smaller figure. The laws regarding eating less than this amount are mentioned in Halachah 3.

The commentaries interpret this to mean slightly less than a revi’it. Note, however, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 271:13), which states that this measure is slightly more than half a revi’it with regard to the laws of kiddush. (Note the comments of the Be’ur Halachah 271.)

For this will sate neither one’s appetite nor one’s thirst (Yoma 81a).

For even forbidden food will sate one’s hunger (Rabbenu Manoach).

A sacrifice that was offered with the intent that it—or any of its sacred elements—be offered on the altar or eaten at a time when it is forbidden to be eaten; e.g., a peace offering the blood of which one thought to have poured on the altar at nightfall, or to have its flesh consumed on the third day after its sacrifice (Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 13:1).

Sacrificial meat that was left over past the time during which it is allowed to be eaten—e.g., a sin offering on the morning of the following day or a peace offering on the morning of the third day (Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 18:10).

Produce from which the agricultural requirements of terumah and the tithes were not separated (Hilchot Ma’achalot Asurot 10:19).

An animal that will not live longer than twelve months, because of a wound or blemish (Hilchot Ma'achalot Asurot 4:6-8; Hilchot Shechitah 5:1).

By eating from this prohibited food on Yom Kippur, one violates two prohibitions: the consumption of the prohibited food and eating on Yom Kippur (Merkevet HaMishneh). See Hilchot Shegagot 6:4 and the conclusion of Chapter 14 of Hilchot Ma’achalot Assurot.

Since the substance that he is eating is forbidden, it is merely lacking in quantity (Rabbi Yochanan’s view, Yoma 74a).

Whenever the Torah mentions a prohibition—and similarly, a mitzvah—that involves eating, the intent is that the person partake of a minimum measure within a specific time. The standard time for all prohibitions (and mitzvot) is כְּדֵי אֲכִילַת פְּרָס, which the Rambam defines as the time it takes to eat the above amount. [There are opinions that state an amount of bread equivalent to four eggs (Maggid Mishneh). This opinion is mentioned in the notes on Halachah 8.]
In time, כְּדֵי אֲכִילַת פְּרָס is defined as six minutes by the Tzemach Tzedek in one place and seven minutes in another (Sha’ar HaMiluim, sec. 9). Other opinions mention nine minutes, 8, 7 1/2, 6, 5, 4 1/2, 4. (See Ketzot HaShulchan 3:15.)

And it is considered as if the person ate less than the minimum measure. For this reason, as mentioned in the notes on Halachah 8, when a person must eat on Yom Kippur, there are times when at first he is given less than the minimal amount, his eating is interrupted, and then he is given less than the minimal amount again, so as to minimize the extent of his transgression.

I.e., the amount of time it takes to drink a revi’it leisurely (Radbaz, Vol. V, Responsum 1554). This is, nevertheless, a much smaller measure than the amount of time it takes to eat three eggs.

Our translation is taken from Rav Kapach’s translation of an Arabic term in his edition ofthe Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah (Yoma 8:2, Nedarim 6:4). In the latter source, the Rambam also states that the brine is sometimes made from fish. The Mishnah Berurah 612:28 renders the Hebrew term as referring to fat that exudes from a fish.

When describing the fast, Leviticus 23:29 uses the expression, “Every soul that will not afflict itself shall be cut off.” Eating food that is not fit for human consumption is also a form of affliction. Hence, one is not liable for punishment (Rabbenu Manoach).

From the fact that the text mentions only fresh ginger, and not fresh peppers, the Maggid Mishneh states that one might infer that one is not liable for eating fresh peppers. He differs with this conclusion and suggests amending the text based on the Rambam’s statements in Hilchot Berachot 8:7. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 612:8) also makes a distinction between fresh and dried peppers.

The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:7) quotes the version of Yoma 81b that we have, which states, “the leaves of reeds.” The Rambam’s wording is based on the version quoted by Rabbenu Chanan’el.

I.e., the leaves just as they emerge from the stem of the vine.

I.e., when calculating whether or not a person ate a quantity of food equivalent to the size of a date.

Although the brine is a liquid, and liquids and foods are not ordinarily combined (Halachah 1), since the brine is used to flavor the vegetable, it is considered to be a food (Yoma 80b).

The Rambam's wording requires some clarification. He is referring to a person who had overeaten before the commencement of Yom Kippur, and then despite being disgusted by food, continued to eat on Yom Kippur itself (Maggid Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 612:6). If a person began eating in the midst of the fast and then overate, he would be liable, because of the first morsels of food that he ate.

If, however, the person is not jaded with the taste of the food, e.g., because the food is prepared in a very flavorful manner, he is liable even though he overate.

Compare to Hilchot Shabbat 2:5, which explains that the classification “dangerously ill” means that “he has a wound in his body cavity, from his lips inward.” Such a person does not need the assessment of a physician to determine whether or not the Sabbath should be violated on his behalf. In situations where the seriousness of the person’s ailment is not as obvious, the Sabbath may be violated on his behalf based on a physician’s pronouncement. Also, in this category is a women within three days after childbirth.
Significantly, when stating this law, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 618:1) mentions only “a sick person who must eat,” without stating that he must be dangerously ill. The Be’ur Halachah emphasizes that in many instances, even mildly serious conditions can become life-threatening if the person fasts.

See Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 5:6, which states that with the exception of the prohibitions against idol worship, murder, and incestuous or adulterous relations, any of the Torah’s prohibitions may be violated to save a person’s life. As mentioned in Hilchot Shabbat 2:1, even if there is a doubt regarding the matter, the Sabbath should be violated, and moreover, it should be the leaders of the people and the wise who violate the Sabbath on the sick person’s behalf, so that the people at large will appreciate that this is the course of action that should be taken.

Significantly, the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:7) mentions that when a sick person is fed on Yom Kippur, he should first be fed less than the size of a date within the amount of time it takes to eat four eggs (the more stringent view regarding the time of סרפ תליכא.)ידכ If, however, that is not sufficient, the more lenient opinions concerning the measure of סרפ תליכא ידכ can be relied upon. If even that is not sufficient, the person should be fed in the normal manner.

The sick man’s own opinion should followed, because “the heart knows the bitterness of his soul.” Nevertheless, the person should be reminded that it is Yom Kippur. If he persists in his desire to eat, we assume that he does not desire to transgress, but cannot bear the fast (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 618:1; Mishnah Berurah 618:5).

This is speaking about a person who genuinely does not think that it is necessary for him to eat. It must be emphasized that the Rabbis frowned on the supposed “piety” of a sick person who knows that he should eat, but refrains from doing so because of the fast, and applied the verse (Genesis 9:5): “I will demand an account of the blood of your own lives” (Mishnah Berurah, loc. cit.). He should be forced to eat, even against his will.

The Mishnah Berurah 618:1 quotes opinions that state that a Jew need not be an expert physician to render such an opinion. Since he is aware of a threat to life and knows the seriousness of Yom Kippur, his view is accepted. A gentile, however, must be an expert physician for his view to be considered.

The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 618:4) differs and states that if two physicians say that the sick person should eat, their opinion should be followed. Since two physicians have made such a statement, no further risks should be taken with a person’s life.

Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi gave this suggestion when asked regarding such a problem (Yoma 83a).

This refers to a sense of infirmity that overcomes a person because of lack of nourishment; he becomes, dizzy, faint, and unable to focus his eyes.

If all that is immediately available is non-kosher food, he should be fed food that involves a prohibition that is least severe first. [See Hilchot Ma’achalot Asurot 14:17, the Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah (Yoma 8:4), and the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 618:9). See the Noda BiY’hudah, Vol. I, Orach Chayim, Responsum 36, which focuses on this issue.]

The intent is non-kosher species. Even if their flesh is tasty, they are considered loathsome by Jewish law.

The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 616:2) explains that when a child’s constitution is strong, his training to fast should begin at age nine. If he is weak, the training can be postponed a year.

The Ra’avad differs and maintains that since males and females reach maturity at different ages, that factor should be taken into account in this law. According to his view, a male child is not obligated to complete the fast until he is twelve, and a female must complete the fast at age eleven.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim, loc. cit.) quotes the Rambam’s view. The Ramah mentions a third opinion, which does not require children to complete a fast at all. He states that when a child’s constitution is weak, this view should be followed.

Even a fraction of a day is considered to be a day. Therefore, if a girl’s birthday is on Yom Kippur, she is obligated to fast from her twelfth birthday onward.

In this instance, however, even a child with a weak constitution should make every effort to complete the fast. For it is possible that the child had pubic hairs, which would cause him or her to be considered to be an adult, but they fell off (Ramah, Orach Chayim 616:2).

Even if a child desires to fast, he should be prevented from doing so (Ramah, Orach Chayim, loc. cit.).