✦ ❖ ✦

DAAT · LEVEL 1 — INTRODUCTION

Siman קמ״ה — Idols one may benefit from

The mountain, the spring, the tree, the house, the stone, the animal — what worship forbids, and what it does not reach

יורה דעה · סימן קמ״ה

אֵיזוֹ אֱלִילִים שֶׁל עוֹבְדֵי כּוֹכָבִים הַמֻּתָּרִים בַּהֲנָאָה

🌱 Introduction level · מתחילים

✦ ❖ ✦

A first approach to Siman 145: the 9 seifim of the Mehaber and the glosses of the Rama, Hebrew text with a flowing English rendering. The preceding simanim said what an idol forbids — itself, its accessories, its offerings, its price. This one asks the opposite question: what, having been worshipped, nonetheless remains permitted for benefit? The answer lies in three Hebrew words, תפיסת יד אדם — the grasp of the hand of man. What man has neither made nor shaped does not become an idol, even if people bowed to it: the mountain, the spring, the tree that grew by itself, the animal. And the whole siman consists in drawing, case by case, the exact line where the hand of man begins.

Subject: What was worshipped and remains permitted for benefit — הר, אבני הר, נהרות ומעיינות, אילן, ציפוי, בית, אבן, קרקע, בעלי חיים, חליפין
Source: שולחן ערוך יורה דעה סימן קמ״ה

Compiled by: הרב יוסף חיים סממה
DAAT · daattorah.com

📑 Plan of the study

1. The text of the Mehaber: the 9 seifim, with the glosses of the Rama

2. Background: the mishnah of Avodah Zarah 45a and the sugyot that follow it

3. Key concepts: תפיסת יד אדם, מחובר, ציפוי, משמשים, תקרובת, ביטול, חליפין

4. The summary tables: what stays permitted, what becomes forbidden — and the three houses, three stones, three trees

5. The Taz and the Shakh: seven key entries

6. The glosses of the Rama: four interventions, and the Pit’hei Teshuva

7. Contemporary practical cases: the hill, the spring, the sanctuary tree, the converted building, the stone, the animal, the exchange

8. Summary and comprehension questions

1. The text of the Mehaber — the 9 seifim

Siman 145 comes after three simanim that spoke only of prohibitions: siman 139 (the idol, its accessories, its offerings), siman 142 (the benefit one does not draw from it), siman 144 (its price). Here the Mehaber changes sides and asks what escapes the prohibition. Seif 1 lays down the rule and its four examples; seif 2 at once gives its limit — the plating; seifim 3 to 7 review the house, the stone, the tree and the ground, each time distinguishing what was made for worship from what merely received it; seifim 8 and 9 deal with the animal, and with what is given in exchange for an idol.

A single question runs through the nine seifim: did the hand of man touch it, and for what purpose? Where it did nothing — the mountain, the water, the tree that grew alone, the animal — prostration produces nothing. Where it built, hewed, planted, dug, slaughtered for worship, the thing is forbidden. And between the two, a fine zone: what was merely added to a permitted thing — a coat of plaster, a painting, a graft — where only the addition is forbidden.

Seif 1 — The rule: without the hand of man, nothing becomes forbidden

איזו אלילים של עובדי כוכבים המותרים בהנאה. ובו ט׳ סעיפים: כל שאין בו תפיסת יד אדם ולא עשהו אדם אע״פ שנעבד הרי זה מותר בהנאה לפיכך המשתחוה להר לא נאסר ואפילו אבני הר שנדלדלו ועדיין הם במקומם ועבדם שם אינן נאסרים וכן הנהרות והמעינות של רבים ואילנות שלא נטען לשם אלילים אינם נאסרים ומכ״מ אע״פ שלא נאסר גוף האילן כשמשתחוה לו כל השריגים והעלים והפירות שיוציא כל זמן שהוא נעבד אסורים בהנאה:

Title of the siman: which idols of non-Jews are permitted for benefit; and it contains nine seifim.

Whatever has no grasp of the hand of man in it, and that man did not make — even if it was worshipped, it remains permitted for benefit.

Therefore one who bows to a mountain does not make it forbidden; and even the stones of the mountain that broke loose — fallen by themselves, without a hand having moved them — as long as they are still in their place and were worshipped there, they are not forbidden. Likewise rivers and public springs; and trees that were not planted for idolatry are not forbidden.

Nevertheless, although the body of the tree is not forbidden when one bows to it, all the shoots, the leaves and the fruit it will produce, as long as it is worshipped, are forbidden for benefit.

Seif 1 gives the rule and its four witnesses. The rule: כל שאין בו תפיסת יד אדם. The witnesses: the mountain, the loosened stone still in place, the running water, the tree. They are chosen to cover the whole range of what man did not make — the ground, what separates from it, what flows in it, what grows in it. Then, in the same sentence, the first limit: the tree itself stays permitted, but what it produces after being worshipped is forbidden. It is no longer nature that grew it: it is a tree under worship, and its growth belongs to the worship.

Seif 2 — The plating: the limit of seif 1

דבר שאין בו תפיסת ידי אדם שנעבד אע״פ שהנעבד עצמו מותר בהנאה ציפויו אסור בהנאה. (משמשי הר הוי כציפויו ואסור אבל תקרובת הר אינו נאסר) (תא״ו ני״ו):

A thing in which there is no grasp of the hands of man and which was worshipped — although the worshipped object itself is permitted for benefit, its plating is forbidden for benefit. Gloss of the Rama: (the accessories of a mountain are like its plating and are forbidden; but the offering made to a mountain is not forbidden) (Rabbenu Yeruham, netiv 17).

ציפוי — the plating. The gold and silver with which an object of worship is covered. The mountain is permitted, but the plating man laid on it is made by his hand and for worship: it is therefore forbidden, and the Taz cites the verse — לא תחמוד כסף וזהב עליהם. The Rama extends the plating to the משמשים, the implements of the mountain’s worship; but he excludes the תקרובת, the offering. The Shakh specifies, in the name of the Levush, that this offering is permitted for benefit — not for eating.

Seif 3 — The house: built for worship, plastered for worship, or merely occupied by the idol

בית שבנאו מתחילה שיהא הבית עצמו נעבד וכן המשתחוה לבית בנוי הרי זה אסור בהנאה היה בנוי וסיידו וכיידו לשם אלילי׳ עד שנתחדש נוטל מה שחידש והחידוש אסור בהנאה מפני שעשהו לעבדו ושאר הבית מותר הכניס אלילי׳ לתוך הבית כל זמן שהוא שם הבית אסור בהנאה הוציאה הותר הבית: הגה ודוקא שלא הוקצה הבית לכך אבל הוקצה לכך אינו מותר אלא א״כ הוציאה משם דרך בטול דהיינו שלא להכניס עוד שם (טור בשם רש״י) ובישראל לא מהני בטול כדלעיל סימן קל״ט:

A house built from the outset so that the house itself be worshipped, and likewise one who bows to an already built house — it is forbidden for benefit.

It was built, and he plastered and decorated it for idolatry to the point of renewing it: he removes what he renewed, and that renewal is forbidden for benefit, because he made it in order to worship it; and the rest of the house is permitted.

He brought an idol into the house: as long as it is there, the house is forbidden for benefit; he took it out, the house became permitted again. Gloss of the Rama: and this specifically when the house had not been set aside for that purpose; but if it had been set aside for it, it is permitted only if he took the idol out by way of nullification — that is, so as not to bring it in there again (Tur in the name of Rashi); and for a Jew, nullification is of no avail, as above in siman 139.

Three houses, three regimes — and it is the mishnah that counts them so. The first was made for worship, or worshipped as it stands: it is an idol, entirely. The second only received an addition — plaster, paintings — for worship: the addition is forbidden, the house is not. The third received nothing; the idol was merely placed in it: it is forbidden as long as the idol is there, and not a minute longer. The Rama adds the distinction that makes the third case workable: a house set aside to shelter the idol has become an accessory of worship, and the mere removal no longer suffices — a removal that amounts to nullification is required, and by a non-Jew.

Seif 4 — The hewn stone, and the stone merely decorated

אבן שחצבה לעבדה אסורה בהנאה היתה חצובה וציירה וכיידה שתיעבד אפי׳ צייר וכייד בגוף האבן נוטל מה שחידש והוא אסור בהנאה ושאר האבן מותר. ובעבודת כוכבים דמהני בטול אפילו לא נטל משם רק מה שצייר מותר אם עשאו דרך בטול (רבינו נסים):

A stone that was hewn in order to worship it is forbidden for benefit. It was already hewn, and he painted and decorated it so that it be worshipped — even if he painted and decorated in the very body of the stone: he removes what he renewed, that is forbidden for benefit, and the rest of the stone is permitted. Gloss of the Rama: and for the idol of a non-Jew, where nullification is effective, even if he only removed part of what he painted, it is permitted, if he did so by way of nullification (Rabbenu Nissim).

The stone of seif 4 is the sister of the house of seif 3, and the mishnah sets them side by side. Same logic: what was made for worship is forbidden in its entirety; what was merely decorated for worship is forbidden only in the decoration. The precision אפי׳ צייר וכייד בגוף האבן — even engraved into the stone itself — comes from Rabbi Ami in the gemara: one might have thought that an engraving into the mass turns the whole stone into a hewn idol; no, only the engraving is forbidden. And the Rama recalls the difference between a Jew and a non-Jew: the Jew must remove everything, the non-Jew nullifies by damaging a little.

Seif 5 — The stone serving as a base

אבן שהעמיד עליה אלילים של עובד כוכבים הרי זו אסורה כל זמן שהיא עליה סילקה האבן מותרת:

A stone on which the idol of a non-Jew was set up is forbidden as long as the idol is on it; he removed it, the stone is permitted.

This is the third stone of the mishnah, and the exact parallel of the third house: nothing was done to the stone, something was merely placed on it. The Shakh, in the name of Rashi, adds the same reservation as in seif 3 — this holds only if it was placed there for a while, without the stone being set aside for that use.

Seif 6 — The tree: planted for worship, pruned for worship, or sheltering the idol

אילן שנטעו מתחילה שיהא נעבד אסו׳ בהנאה היה אילן נטוע וגדעו ופסלו לשם אלילים אפי׳ הבריך והרכיב בגופו של אילן והוציא שריגים כורת את השריגים והם אסורים בהנאה ושאר האילן מותר. אילן שמעמידין תחתיו אלילים כל זמן שהיא תחתיו אסור בהנאה נטלה מתחתיו הרי זה מותר מפני שאין האילן עצמו הוא הנעבד:

A tree planted from the outset to be worshipped is forbidden for benefit. The tree was planted, and he lopped and pruned it for idolatry — even if he layered and grafted into the body of the tree and it produced shoots: he cuts the shoots, they are forbidden for benefit, and the rest of the tree is permitted.

A tree under which idols are set up: as long as it is underneath, it is forbidden for benefit; it was taken from underneath, it is permitted, because it is not the tree itself that is worshipped.

Three trees, like three houses and three stones. The tree planted for worship is the אשרה of the Torah — and the Shakh specifies that it is forbidden from the planting, without anyone bowing to it, provided a non-Jew planted it. The existing tree that was pruned for worship is forbidden only in what it has produced since — even if the graft penetrated its body, teaches the school of Rabbi Yannai. The tree sheltering an idol is forbidden as long as it is there; the Shakh, in the name of the Ran, restricts this case to a tree planted in order to shelter the idol, failing which it is attached to the ground and cannot be more severe than the idol itself.

Seif 7 — The ground: dug for worship

אע״פ שקרקע עולם אינו נאסר אם עשה בו מעשה כגון שחפר בו בורות שיחין ומערות לאלילים נאסר:

Although the ground of the world does not become forbidden, if he performed an act in it — for instance if he dug pits, ditches and caves in it for idolatry — it is forbidden.

Seif 7 is the counter-example that confirms the rule of seif 1. The ground, like the mountain, does not become forbidden through prostration; but a pit is not the ground — it is the work of man in the ground, and that is what is forbidden. One question remains, which the Shakh notes in the name of the Beit Yosef: is a prostration required in addition to the digging? The Tur requires it; the Rambam seems to do without it.

Seif 8 — The animal: prostration does not forbid it, slaughter does — and who can forbid what

בעלי חיים אינן נאסרים שאפילו השתחוה לבהמה שלו לא נאסרה עשה בה מעשה ששחטה לאלילים אפי׳ סימן אחד נאסרה ואפילו אינה שלו ודוקא עובד כוכבים אוסר דבר שאינו שלו אבל ישראל אינו אוסר של חבירו שודאי אינו מכוין אלא לצערו ויש אומרים שאפילו אם יש לו חלק בה אינו אוסר ואם ישראל מומר הוא או שהתרו בו וקבל התראה הרי זה אוסר. (וע״ל סימן ד׳) . (תקרובת ב״ח ומשמשיהם נאסרים) (תא״ו ני״ז):

Animals do not become forbidden: even if he bowed to his own animal, it is not forbidden. If he performed an act on it — if he slaughtered it for idolatry, even a single organ — the windpipe or the gullet — it is forbidden, and even if it is not his.

But only a non-Jew forbids what is not his; a Jew does not forbid what belongs to his fellow, for he surely intends only to cause him distress — and not to perform an act of worship. And some say that even if he has a share in the animal, he does not forbid it. But if he is an apostate Jew, or if he was warned and accepted the warning, he does forbid. Gloss of the Rama: (and see above siman 4.) (Offerings made to animals and their accessories are forbidden) (Rabbenu Yeruham, netiv 17).

Two ideas cross in this seif, and they must be kept apart. The first: the animal is like the mountain — alive, not made by human hand, it does not become forbidden through prostration; but an act on its body forbids it, and the minimal act suffices — one organ, and the Shakh even specifies half an organ. The second idea is that of ownership: אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו, no one forbids what does not belong to him. The non-Jew nonetheless achieves it through his act; the Jew does not, because he is presumed to have wished only to harm his fellow — except the apostate, or the one who was warned and persisted, who have placed themselves outside that presumption.

Seif 9 — The exchange, and the exchange of the exchange

אף על פי שבעלי חיים אינם נאסרים אם החליף בעלי חיים באלילים נאסרו אבל חליפי חליפין כגון שהחליף בעלי חיים בחליפי אלילים מותרי׳ ויש אוסרים גם בזה:

Although animals do not become forbidden, if he exchanged animals for idols, they are forbidden. But exchanges of exchanges — for instance if he exchanged animals for what he had received in exchange for idols — are permitted; and some forbid even this.

חליפין and חליפי חליפין. A man owns an idol and exchanges it for animals: the animals are the price of the idol, and they are forbidden like it — this is the first half of seif 9, and Rashi, cited by the Shakh, fixes the case. Then he exchanges those animals for other animals: these are the exchange of the exchange. The Tur permits them, deriving it from the word הוא — it, and not the exchange of its exchange; the Rambam and the Ran forbid them. The Mehaber first gives the view of the Tur, then signals the others with ויש אוסרים.

2. Background — the mishnah of Avodah Zarah 45a and the sugyot that follow it

The siman copies, almost in order, the chapter כל הצלמים of Avodah Zarah: the mishnah of the mountains, the discussion of the tree, the loosened stones, the spring, then the three twin mishnayot — three houses, three stones, three trees. Two passages come from elsewhere: the dug ground and the exchange, from the chapter רבי ישמעאל; the slaughtered animal, from Chullin.

The mishnah of the mountains lays down the rule and the verse:

« הַגּוֹיִם הָעוֹבְדִים אֶת הֶהָרִים וְאֶת הַגְּבָעוֹת — הֵן מוּתָּרִין, וּמָה שֶׁעֲלֵיהֶן אֲסוּרִין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לֹא תַחְמֹד כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב עֲלֵיהֶם״ » (עבודה זרה מ״ה ע״א)

Rabbi Yose HaGelili gives the source of the permission, and the mishnah the reason for the prohibition of the asherah:

« רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר: ״אֱלֹהֵיהֶם עַל הֶהָרִים״ — וְלֹא הֶהָרִים אֱלֹהֵיהֶם, ״אֱלֹהֵיהֶם עַל הַגְּבָעוֹת״ — וְלֹא הַגְּבָעוֹת אֱלֹהֵיהֶם » (עבודה זרה מ״ה ע״א)

« וּמִפְּנֵי מָה אֲשֵׁירָה אֲסוּרָה? מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ תְּפִיסַת יְדֵי אָדָם, וְכֹל שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ תְּפִיסַת יְדֵי אָדָם — אָסוּר » (עבודה זרה מ״ה ע״א)

The tree planted then worshipped — this is where the gemara locates the dispute between the first tanna and Rabbi Yose HaGelili, and the halakhah follows the first tanna:

« תַּנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר: אִילָן שֶׁנְּטָעוֹ וּלְבַסּוֹף עֲבָדוֹ — מוּתָּר, וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי סָבַר: אִילָן שֶׁנְּטָעוֹ וּלְבַסּוֹף עֲבָדוֹ — אָסוּר » (עבודה זרה מ״ה ע״ב)

The loosened stones are the object of a dispute of amoraim left without conclusion in the Bavli — this is where the Shakh’s discussion in ס״ק א comes from:

« אִיתְּמַר: אַבְנֵי הַר שֶׁנִּדַּלְדְּלוּ — בְּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, חַד אָמַר: אֲסוּרוֹת, וְחַד אָמַר: מוּתָּרוֹת » (עבודה זרה מ״ו ע״א)

« כְּהַר — מָה הַר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ תְּפִיסַת יְדֵי אָדָם וּמוּתָּר, אַף הָנֵי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן תְּפִיסַת יְדֵי אָדָם וּמוּתָּרִין » (עבודה זרה מ״ו ע״א)

The spring — Rabba asks whether the water of a worshipped spring is fit for libations, and the gemara recalls the teaching on which seif 1 rests:

« וּמִי מִיתַּסְרִי? וְהָא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוֹצָדָק: מַיִם שֶׁל רַבִּים אֵין נֶאֱסָרִין! לָא צְרִיכָא, דְּקָא נָבְעִי מֵאַרְעָא » (עבודה זרה מ״ז ע״א)

The three houses, with the teaching of Rav that explains them:

« שְׁלֹשָׁה בָּתִּים הֵן — בַּיִת שֶׁבְּנָאוֹ מִתְּחִלָּה לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, הֲרֵי זֶה אָסוּר. סִיְּידוֹ וְכִיְּידוֹ לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְחִידֵּשׁ — נוֹטֵל מַה שֶּׁחִידֵּשׁ. הִכְנִיס לְתוֹכָהּ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְהוֹצִיאָהּ — הֲרֵי זֶה מוּתָּר » (עבודה זרה מ״ז ע״ב)

« אָמַר רַב: הַמִּשְׁתַּחֲוֶה לְבַיִת — אֲסָרוֹ. אַלְמָא קָסָבַר תָּלוּשׁ וּלְבַסּוֹף חִבְּרוֹ כְּתָלוּשׁ דָּמֵי, וְהָאֲנַן ״בְּנָאוֹ״ תְּנַן! » (עבודה זרה מ״ז ע״ב)

« בְּנָאוֹ — אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא הִשְׁתַּחֲוָה לוֹ, הִשְׁתַּחֲוָה — אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא בְּנָאוֹ » (עבודה זרה מ״ז ע״ב)

The three stones, and the precision of Rabbi Ami that seif 4 copies:

« שָׁלֹשׁ אֲבָנִים הֵן — אֶבֶן שֶׁחֲצָבָהּ מִתְּחִלָּה לְבִימוֹס — הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. סִיְּידָהּ וְכִיְּידָהּ לְשֵׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה — נוֹטֵל מַה שֶׁסִּיֵּיד וְכִיֵּיד, וּמוּתֶּרֶת. הֶעֱמִיד עָלֶיהָ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְסִילְּקָהּ — הֲרֵי זוֹ מוּתֶּרֶת » (עבודה זרה מ״ז ע״ב)

« אֶלָּא כִּי אִתְּמַר דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי — לְעִנְיַן בִּיטּוּל אִתְּמַר, וְאַף עַל גַּב דְּסִיֵּיד וְכִיֵּיד בְּגוּפָהּ שֶׁל אֶבֶן, כִּי נָטַל מַה שֶּׁחִידֵּשׁ — שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי » (עבודה זרה מ״ז ע״ב)

The three trees, and the school of Rabbi Yannai on the graft:

« שָׁלֹשׁ אֲשֵׁרוֹת הֵן — אִילָן שֶׁנְּטָעוֹ מִתְּחִלָּה לְשֵׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. גִּידְּעוֹ וּפִיסְּלוֹ לְשֵׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְהֶחְלִיף — נוֹטֵל מַה שֶׁהֶחְלִיף. הֶעֱמִיד תַּחְתֶּיהָ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וּנְטָלָהּ — הֲרֵי זוֹ מוּתֶּרֶת » (עבודה זרה מ״ח ע״א)

« אָמְרִי דְּבֵי רַבִּי יַנַּאי: וְהוּא שֶׁהִבְרִיךְ וְהִרְכִּיב בְּגוּפוֹ שֶׁל אִילָן » (עבודה זרה מ״ח ע״א)

The dug ground and the exchange both come from Rabbi Yohanan, in the chapter רבי ישמעאל:

« אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ הַמִּשְׁתַּחֲוֶה לְקַרְקַע עוֹלָם לֹא אֲסָרָהּ, חָפַר בָּהּ בּוֹרוֹת שִׁיחִין וּמְעָרוֹת — אֲסָרָהּ » (עבודה זרה נ״ד ע״ב)

« אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ הַמִּשְׁתַּחֲוֶה לְבַעֲלֵי חַיִּים לֹא אֲסָרָן, עֲשָׂאָן חֲלִיפִין לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה — אֲסָרָן » (עבודה זרה נ״ד ע״ב)

« כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין אָמַר: פְּלִיגוּ בַּהּ רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בַּר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבָּנַן, חַד אָמַר: חֲלִיפִין אֲסוּרִין, חֲלִיפֵי חֲלִיפִין מוּתָּרִין, וְחַד אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ חֲלִיפֵי חֲלִיפִין נָמֵי אֲסוּרִין » (עבודה זרה נ״ד ע״ב)

The slaughtered animal, finally, comes from Rav Huna in Chullin — and there the whole end of seif 8 is decided:

« אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: הָיְתָה בֶּהֱמַת חֲבֵירוֹ רְבוּצָה לִפְנֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, כֵּיוָן שֶׁשָּׁחַט בָּהּ סִימָן אֶחָד – אֲסָרָהּ » (חולין מ׳ ע״א)

« רַב נַחְמָן, וְרַב עַמְרָם, וְרַב יִצְחָק אָמְרִי: אֵין אָדָם אוֹסֵר דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין שֶׁלּוֹ » (חולין מ׳ ע״ב)

The Rambam gathered all this in chapter 8 of the laws of idolatry, and the Mehaber copies him almost word for word:

« כָּל שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ תְּפִיסַת יַד אָדָם וְלֹא עֲשָׂהוּ אָדָם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנֶּעֱבַד הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר בַּהֲנָאָה » (רמב״ם הלכות עבודה זרה וחוקות הגויים פרק ח׳ הלכה א׳)

3. Key concepts

The siman is read with seven notions. The first three decide whether a thing can become forbidden; the other four decide what is done with it afterwards.

What can become forbidden

תפיסת יד אדם — The grasp of the hand of man. This is the single criterion of seif 1: what man has neither made nor shaped is never an idol, even when worshipped. The mishnah derives from it the reason for the prohibition of the asherah — מפני שיש בה תפיסת ידי אדם —, and Rabbi Yose HaGelili the source of the permission of the mountain — אלהיהם על ההרים ולא ההרים אלהיהם. The Rambam makes it the first line of his chapter, and the Taz the first line of his commentary.

מחובר and תלוש ולבסוף חברו — Attached to the ground, and detached then reattached. The mountain, the spring, the tree that grew by itself are attached to the ground and do not become forbidden. But a house is made of detached stones that were reattached — and Rav teaches that this counts as detached: the worshipped house is forbidden. The planted tree escapes this reasoning because its roots truly reattach it to the ground, says the Ran; Rashi distinguishes the seed, which is not yet a tree, from the cutting, which already is one.

מעשה — The act. Where prostration is not enough, the act is enough: digging in the ground, slaughtering one organ of the animal, setting up a brick to bow to it. The act marks the grasp of the hand of man on the thing — and Rashi, cited by the Shakh, teaches that the minimal act suffices, half an organ.

What is done with it afterwards

ציפוי · משמשים · תקרובת — The plating, the accessories, the offering. Three things that gravitate around the worshipped object. On a mountain, itself permitted, the plating is forbidden by the verse לא תחמוד כסף וזהב עליהם; the accessories are too, by אבד תאבדון את כל המקומות; the offering is not, because the prohibition of the offering is learned from Peor, which was detached. Seif 2 and its gloss say exactly that.

נוטל מה שחידש — He removes what he renewed. The formula of seifim 3, 4 and 6: when a permitted thing has only received an addition for worship, the addition is forbidden and the rest is not. Removing the addition suffices — and for a non-Jew, the Taz and the Shakh recall in the name of the Ran that he need not even remove everything: a little, by way of nullification.

ביטול — and why the Jew is excluded from it — Nullification. A non-Jew’s idol is nullified when a non-Jew damages or renounces it; a Jew’s idol is never nullified. This siman recalls it three times — in seif 3, in seif 4 and in the Shakh’s ס״ק — because every case of addition splits in two: a non-Jew nullifies by removing a little; a Jew must remove everything, and what he removed remains forbidden forever.

אין אדם אוסר דבר שאינו שלו — No one forbids what is not his. The rule that governs seif 8. The non-Jew is an exception to it through his act: he forbids another’s animal by slaughtering it. The Jew is no exception, because he is presumed to have wished to harm, not to worship — until the apostate, or the one who was warned and persisted.

4. The summary tables

Table A — what stays permitted, and what becomes forbidden

The object	Through prostration alone	What, around or within it, becomes forbidden	Seif
The mountain, the hill	Permitted	Its plating, its accessories; not its offering	א, ב
The stones that broke loose from it, left in place	Permitted (Mehaber, Rambam)	The Ran, the Ramah, the Raavad forbid them out of doubt	א
Rivers and springs	Permitted	Water detached by one’s hand is forbidden	א
The tree not planted for worship	Permitted	What it produces while it is worshipped	א
The tree planted for worship	Forbidden from the planting, if it belongs to a non-Jew	Entirely — it is the asherah	ו
The house built to be worshipped, or worshipped as it stands	Forbidden	Entirely	ג
The stone hewn to be worshipped	Forbidden	Entirely	ד
The ground	Permitted	The pits, ditches and caves dug in it for worship	ז
The animal	Permitted, even one’s own	Slaughtered for worship, even a single organ; its offerings and accessories	ח
Animals received in exchange for an idol	Forbidden	The exchange of the exchange: permitted according to the Tur, forbidden according to the Rambam	ט

Table B — three houses, three stones, three trees

	Made for worship	Receives an addition for worship	Shelters the idol without having been set aside for it
The house (seif 3)	Forbidden in its entirety	Plaster and decorations: he removes the addition, only the addition is forbidden	Forbidden while the idol is in it; taken out, permitted — even by a Jew, even if he means to bring it back
The stone (seifim 4 and 5)	Forbidden in its entirety	Painting and engraving, even into the mass: he removes the addition	Occasional base: removed, permitted
The tree (seif 6)	Forbidden in its entirety — the asherah	Pruned, grafted: he cuts the shoots, only the new growth is forbidden	Idol underneath: removed, permitted — if the tree was not planted for that

The two tables say the same thing from two angles. Table A follows the order of the Mehaber; Table B follows the order of the mishnah, which counts three houses, three stones, three trees — and the number three is the same each time because the question is the same: did the hand of man make the thing, did it merely decorate it, or did it do nothing at all?

5. The Taz and the Shakh — seven key entries

Taz ס״ק א — the source of the whole siman

The Taz opens with the verse from which Rabbi Yose HaGelili derives the permission of the mountain:

« דכתיב אלהיהם על ההרים ולא ההרים אלהיהם » (ט״ז יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק א)

Their gods upon the mountains — and not the mountains, their gods. The whole of seif 1 flows from this reading: what the Torah orders to destroy is what is placed on the mountain, not the mountain.

Shakh ס״ק א — the loosened stones, and the proof from the Yerushalmi

The Mehaber permits the stones that broke loose from the mountain. The Shakh begins by recalling that this is not everyone’s view:

« זהו דעת הרמב״ם (והטור) והר״ן תמה עליו כיון דאיכא פלוגתא ה״ל ספיקא דאורייתא ולחומרא וכ׳ שכן פסק הרמ״ה ומביאו ב״י » (ש״ך יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק א)

Then he rules in favour of the Rambam, by an argument no one had put forward before him — the Jerusalem Talmud says expressly who permits and who forbids:

« וא״כ לא שבקינן מאי דפשיטא לירושל׳ משום מאי דמספקא לש״ס דידן ועוד דהרי ר׳ יוחנן גופיה חיבר הירושלמי וא״כ ע״כ ר״י עצמו אומר שהוא אוסר וא״כ הדבר ברור דקי״ל כחזקיה דשרי » (ש״ך יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק א)

The Bavli did not know which of the two amoraim permitted; the Yerushalmi says so — and its author is Rabbi Yohanan himself, who was not mistaken about his own position. The halakhah therefore follows Hizkiya, who permits.

Taz ס״ק ב — what does “broke loose” mean?

The Kesef Mishneh reads: not entirely uprooted. The Taz refuses, and goes to the chapter רבי ישמעאל for the comparison with water that a wave detached:

« פי׳ ולא נעקרו לגמרי שהרי לא הגביהן אדם כ״כ הכסף משנה ולענ״ד נראה שנעקרו לגמרי אלא שלא נעשה ע״י אדם דהא בפ׳ ר״י דנ״ט מדמה לזה מים שנתלשו ממקורן ע״י גל » (ט״ז יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק ב)

What decides is not whether the stone still holds, but whether a hand moved it. The Baer Hetev retains the Taz’s reading.

Shakh ס״ק ב — public waters, and the waters of an individual

The Mehaber writes “public springs”. The Shakh, with the Levush, shows that this is a formula of the gemara taken over by habit, and that an individual’s spring is just as permitted — since the reason is that it is attached to the ground:

« כתב העט״ז דל״ד אלא אשגרת לישנא דש״ס (דף מ״ו ע״א) נקיט וה״ה נהר ומעיין של יחיד כיון דטעמא הוא דמחובר אינו נאסר אלא דלענין נסכים יש חילוק בין רבים ליחיד ודבריו נכונים ע״פ הש״ס שם » (ש״ך יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק ב)

But he rejects the second half of the Levush: detached water, even public, is forbidden.

« מיהו מ״ש העט״ז דבתלושים יש חילוק בין רבים לשל יחיד אינו נ״ל דבש״ס מוכח דתלושין אפילו של רבים נאסרים מטעמא דלמא קא סגיד » (ש״ך יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק ב)

Shakh ס״ק ד — the asherah of the Torah, and the difference between a Jew and a non-Jew

« אבל נטען לשם אלילים אסורים וזהו אשרה האמורה בתורה ש״ס ופוסקים ובנטיעה לחוד לשם אליל נאסר אפילו לא השתחוה לו אח״כ ודוקא נטעו עובד כוכבים אבל נטעו ישראל אינו נאסר עד שיעבד כדלקמן » (ש״ך יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק ד)

The tree planted for worship is forbidden from the planting, without prostration — but only if a non-Jew planted it; a Jew’s idol is forbidden only once worshipped, as in siman 139. This is the key that then serves for the house and the stone.

Taz ס״ק ו — the Jew’s house, the non-Jew’s house, and the apostate

The Tur writes that if the house belongs “to a Jew”, it has no nullification. The Taz, with the Beit Yosef, explains which Jew is meant — and he forcefully rejects those who see an apostate in it:

« ומ״ש בטור כאן אם הוא של ישראל וכו׳ ר״ל שעל כל פנים עובד כוכבים עשאו אלא שמכרו אחר כך לישראל אבל אם ישראל עשאו לא נאסר עד שיעבד כ״כ ב״י » (ט״ז יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק ו)

« וראיתי מאן דמוקי לה כאן בישראל מומר דהוי כעובד כוכבים בזה והבל יפצה פיהו דדינו כישראל בזה ולכל עונשי׳ שבתורה כמ״ש ר״ס קל״ט » (ט״ז יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק ו)

The Shakh, in ס״ק ח, nonetheless reports the contrary view of the Hagahat Derishah — the apostate is like a non-Jew —, and the Baer Hetev notes that the Nekudot HaKesef, in siman 139, side with the Derishah. The divergence is real, and level 4 draws its consequences.

Shakh ס״ק כ״א and ס״ק כ״ב — the minor act and the major act

« כלומר אפילו מעשה כל דהו וה״ה חצי סימן כדאיתא בש״ס ורש״י ותוס׳ בחולין (דף מ׳) וכן הוא בתה״א ד׳ י׳ ע״ב » (ש״ך יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק כ״א)

« אפילו במעשה רבה דהיינו ששחט בה ב׳ סימנים. רש״י והר״ן והרא״ש וכ״נ דעת הט״ו » (ש״ך יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק כ״ב)

The two ס״ק answer each other. For the non-Jew, the smallest act suffices — half an organ. For the Jew who slaughters another’s animal, even the greatest act — both organs, a complete slaughter — does not forbid it: Rashi, the Ran, the Rosh, the Tur and the Shulchan Arukh agree against Rabbenu Tam, who distinguished the minor act from the major act.

6. The glosses of the Rama, and the Pit’hei Teshuva

The Rama intervenes four times, and each time to draw a limit the Mehaber had left implicit.

First gloss, in seif 2 — the accessories and the offering of a mountain:

« משמשי הר הוי כציפויו ואסור אבל תקרובת הר אינו נאסר » (רמ״א יו״ד קמ״ה:ב)

The Taz gives the two sources: the accessories are learned from the verse אבד תאבדון את כל המקומות, which cannot refer to the mountain itself and therefore refers to what was placed on it; the offering is learned from Peor, which was detached — hence the permission for the mountain. The Shakh, in the name of the Levush, bounds that permission: for benefit, not for eating.

Second gloss, in seif 3 — the house set aside for the idol:

« ודוקא שלא הוקצה הבית לכך אבל הוקצה לכך אינו מותר אלא א״כ הוציאה משם דרך בטול דהיינו שלא להכניס עוד שם » (רמ״א יו״ד קמ״ה:ג)

The mishnah says that taking the idol out makes the house permitted. Rashi, cited by the Tur, specifies: because it had been put there only for a while. A house set aside to shelter it has become an accessory, and then a removal that amounts to nullification is required — and the Shakh, in ס״ק ט״ו, adds with the Beit Yosef: by a non-Jew.

Third gloss, in seif 4 — partial nullification:

« ובעבודת כוכבים דמהני בטול אפילו לא נטל משם רק מה שצייר מותר אם עשאו דרך בטול » (רמ״א יו״ד קמ״ה:ד)

The Shakh reads רק מעט ממה שצייר — only a little, by damaging. It is the general rule of nullification applied to the addition.

Fourth gloss, in seif 8 — offerings to animals:

« תקרובת ב״ח ומשמשיהם נאסרים » (רמ״א יו״ד קמ״ה:ח)

A deliberate contrast with the mountain of seif 2: the offering to a mountain is permitted, the offering to an animal is not. The reason, in Rabbenu Yeruham cited by the Beit Yosef: for the mountain there is a verse that permits; for the animal there is none.

The Pit’hei Teshuva — three references

The Pit’hei Teshuva writes only three entries on this siman, and two are mere cross-references: on public waters, to the She’ilat Yaavetz; on the house built for worship, to the Urim ve-Tumim. The third matters more — it concerns “a single organ”, and notes that the Taz, in siman 2, is not of that opinion:

« עבה״ט והוא מדברי הש״ך ועט״ז לעיל סי׳ ב׳ ס״ק י״ד שאין דעתו כן וסובר דשוחט לעבודת כוכבים לא מיתסר אלא בשוחט משהו מושט או רוב הקנה וכבר השיג בנה״כ שם עליו והסכים לתירוץ הב״ח דהא בסימן ב׳ לא איירי במין האדוק » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קמ״ה ס״ק ג)

And he reports the reconciliation of the Bekhor Shor: the minimal act forbids when one said that one acts for worship; a silent intention forbids only through a complete slaughter.

7. Contemporary practical cases

Case 1 — The hill, the rock, the spring of a pilgrimage site

A natural site that was, or still is, the object of a cult: a sacred hill, a rock, a spring. Seif 1 is made exactly for this — כל שאין בו תפיסת יד אדם —, and the answer is clear: the hill, the rock in place, the flowing water do not become forbidden, whatever cult was rendered to them. What was added by the hand of man — a facing, a rim built for worship, implements — falls under seif 2. And a stone that was picked up there to be venerated elsewhere is no longer a stone in place.