Siman 604

We learn in Yoma (81b): Hiyya bar Rav of Difta taught: It is written, "And you shall afflict your souls on the ninth of the month in the evening." Do we then fast on the ninth? Behold, we fast on the tenth! Rather, it is to tell you: Anyone who eats and drinks on the ninth, the verse considers it for him as if he fasted on the ninth and the tenth. And it appears to me that this is its explanation: for the entire verse is redundant, as at the beginning of the section it is written, "But on the tenth of this seventh month is the Day of Atonement, it shall be a holy convocation for you, and you shall afflict your souls." Furthermore: where do we find regarding all Sabbaths and Festivals that it says to observe the Sabbath or Festival on the preceding day in the evening? For regarding the Sabbath it is written, "Remember the Sabbath day," and the day includes also the night before it, as the night follows the day after it. And so too with all the Festivals. And also regarding Yom Kippur itself, it is written here and in Parashat Pinchas, "And on the tenth of the seventh month," and it follows that this is the night and the day. Why then did the Torah change here to write concerning the preceding day, that on the evening of that day the fast begins? Furthermore: according to the plain meaning of this verse itself, it is not correct, for at night the affliction is not yet noticeable, as he ate close to evening. And the essence of the affliction is during the day.

And it is not similar to what is written in Parashat Bo: "In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat matzot," for there it is written "you shall eat" at the end, which implies in the evening you shall eat matzot. But here it is written "and you shall afflict" before "at evening," which implies "and you shall afflict" – immediately on the ninth day (Tosafot Berakhot 8b). Furthermore: there it was necessary to write thus, for the obligation of matzah is only on the first night, and not during the day. And it teaches us that the obligation is only on the fourteenth at evening. But here the night and the day are equal, and on the contrary: the essence of the affliction is during the day, as I have written. And that which is written there, "until the twenty-first day of the month at evening" – it was also necessary to write thus, for if not so, I would have said "until but not including." But here, the entire verse is completely redundant. And also according to the language it is not correct, as I have written.

Therefore, our sages, of blessed memory, expounded that it is as if it were written (Leviticus 23:32), "and you shall afflict your souls on the ninth of the month" and also in the evening, from evening until evening of the next day on the tenth day. And in practice, it is impossible to say this, for this "in the evening" is not a matter unto itself, and perforce its meaning is on the ninth in the evening. Rather, it is the opposite: and you shall afflict on the ninth in the evening, and not on the ninth. And it is a negative commandment derived from a positive one: that on the ninth you shall not afflict yourselves, but I will consider it for you as if you fasted also on the ninth, and "and you shall afflict" will be fulfilled also regarding the ninth, meaning: that for Me it will be considered as a fast of the ninth and tenth. And the explanation of the verse is thus: "and you shall afflict your souls on the ninth of the month in the evening," meaning: prepare yourselves so that you will be able to fast in the evening, from evening until evening, and that is that you should eat much on the ninth, and you will have the strength to fast on the tenth. And for Me it will be considered as a fast of two days (see Rashi).

And it is from the love of the Holy One, Blessed be He, for Israel that He decreed upon them to fast, and commanded them that beforehand they should eat and drink, so that they should have strength to fast (Bach). And regarding the fast, it is like two days of fasting. As it is brought in the Mishnah at the beginning of the fourth chapter of Taanit, that the men of the Ma'amad would not fast on the first day of the week, so that they should not go from rest and delight to exertion and fasting, see there. Behold, a fast that follows delight is harder for a person. And since on Erev Yom Kippur it is a mitzvah to eat and drink and delight—consequently the pain of the fast is harder. Therefore, it is as if they fasted the ninth and the tenth. However, the strengths are stronger to endure the fast when one has eaten beforehand, but his pain is greater from the sudden reversal.

Therefore, it is a mitzvah to eat and drink on Erev Yom Kippur, and to rejoice on it. Our hearts should be confident that Yom Kippur will result in good and blessing for us, and that the Holy One, Blessed be He, will forgive our sins and seal us for a good and blessed year. And one eats fish and meat as on a Yom Tov. It appears that the mitzvah is only on the day of Erev Yom Kippur, and not on the night preceding it; since the reason is so that one will be strong to fast on Yom Kippur—this is only on the day, and not at night. This is also clearly implied in Rashi, Ketubot (5a, in the heading starting with "Yidcheh," see there). One should diminish his study on Erev Yom Kippur in order to eat and drink (Magen Avraham).

And know that in the Rambam, in all the laws of Shevitat Asor – this law of "anyone who eats and drinks on the ninth etc." is not found. And seemingly his reason is simple: for behold, in Yoma there, the Tannaim disagreed regarding this verse. For one Tanna learns from this the addition to Yom Kippur, and thus it is stated there: "And you shall afflict" etc. "on the ninth of the month" – could it be he should begin and fast on the ninth? The verse teaches: "in the evening." If in the evening – could it be from when it gets dark? The verse teaches: "on the ninth." How so? He begins and fasts while it is still day; from here we learn that one adds from the profane to the sacred etc. And it asks: that Tanna who expounds the addition from another verse, what does he do with this verse? And it answers: for anyone who eats and drinks on the ninth, it is as if he fasted etc. And the Rambam in the first chapter of Shevitat Asor, halacha 6, wrote, and this is his wording: And one must add from the profane to the sacred etc., as it is said: "And you shall afflict your souls on the ninth of the month in the evening," meaning: begin to fast and afflict yourself from the evening of the ninth adjacent to it etc. Thus far his words. And since he expounds this verse for the addition, it follows that he does not hold the exposition of "anyone who eats and drinks etc.," and therefore he omitted it.

But if so, why did the Rambam mention this in the Laws of Vows, chapter three, law 9? This is his wording: One who vows to fast on a Sunday or a Monday etc., and it happens to be a Yom Tov or Erev Yom Kippur—he is obligated to fast etc. If Hanukkah or Purim happens upon him—his vow is set aside etc., since the prohibition regarding them is from the words of the scribes—they require reinforcement. Thus far his words. And it implies explicitly that on Erev Yom Kippur it is forbidden to fast by the Torah, as on a Yom Tov, and it does not require reinforcement. And thus the commentators of his words understood. (And the Kesef Mishneh wondered, saying that it is a complete derivation, and in his opinion it was only a mere asmachta. But the Lechem Mishneh wrote that it is a complete derivation, and so it implies from the sugya in Rosh Hashanah 9a and in Yoma there. And so it implies from the Maggid Mishneh in Shevitat Asor there, see there.)

And I am very much astonished by this. For if it entered your mind that the Rambam holds that it is forbidden to fast on Erev Yom Kippur by Torah law, or even by rabbinic law, and that he is obligated to eat and drink on it—how could he not mention it in its place in the Laws of Resting on the Tenth, and instead rely on what he mentions incidentally in the Laws of Vows, and the opposite, that he is obligated to fast? Therefore, it seems clear in my humble opinion as I have written, that the Rambam rejected this from the halacha, for the reason I have written. And that which he wrote in the Laws of Vows that he is obligated to fast—the reason is not as it is on a Yom Tov, because it is a Torah law or a support for a Torah law. And it does not require strengthening, but rather the opposite, because there is no mitzvah at all to eat, neither by Torah law nor by rabbinic law. And therefore, the vow automatically takes effect. And as for the fact that he needed to mention this at all—it is because it is the custom of the world to increase the meal on Erev Yom Kippur. And as is explained in the Midrash, in the story of that tailor who paid much money for a fish on Erev Yom Kippur, and it was brought in the Tur. And at the end of the fifth chapter of Chullin (83a) we also find that in the Galilee they would increase the meals on Erev Yom Kippur. And so as not to err that there is in this at least a rabbinic mitzvah, and the vow would not take effect as on Chanukah and Purim—he teaches us that there is no complete rabbinic mitzvah in it, and the vow takes effect. And the Rambam is not alone in this, for also in the Rif and the Semag I did not find this law, that it is a mitzvah to eat on Erev Yom Kippur. And their reason is also because they brought this verse for an addition, see there.

But the Rosh and the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch ruled like Chiyya, that it is a mitzvah to eat on Erev Yom Kippur. And it is possible that they hold it is from the Torah, and for the addition they would derive from another verse, from "etzem" "etzem," as they said there in Yoma. Or they hold like Rabbi Akiva in Rosh Hashanah (9a), that we learn it from Shevi'it, see there. Or it is possible to say they hold that the primary verse is for the addition, and this of Chiyya is a mere asmakhta (as the Kesef Mishneh wrote in Nedarim there). And from the end of the fifth chapter of Chullin there is a proof for the Rif and the Rambam and the Semag, which says there that in the Galil they would increase the meals on Erev Yom Kippur. This implies that in other places they did not hold it to be a mitzvah. However, the Tosafot wrote there that in every place they would increase the meals, but they would eat poultry, see there. And so it implies in Ketubot (5a) that in every place they increase the meal on Erev Yom Kippur, and as is the custom among us.

Our teacher, the Rema, wrote that it is forbidden to fast on it, even a dream fast. And if one vowed to fast on it – see siman 570. Thus far his words. And one should not wonder: is it possible that it would be more stringent than Shabbat and Yom Tov, on which one may fast a dream fast? For on Erev Yom Kippur – there is another reason for it, since his eating is like a fast, as if he fasted on the ninth and the tenth, as we have written. And if so, he is indeed fasting (Turei Zahav subsection 2; and with this the difficulty of the Magen Avraham subsection 1 is well-settled). Nevertheless, until the seudah hamafseket, if he wishes he may fast, and afterwards he shall eat the Erev Yom Kippur meal. For there is no fixed measure for the mitzvah of eating (Magen Avraham ibid.), and he will also improve the dream.

If one vowed not to eat meat except on Shabbat and Yom Tov—he is permitted to eat on Erev Yom Kippur, as it is called Yom Tov in the language of people. And specifically during the day and not at night, for there is no mitzvah at night, as I have written. And there is one who wrote that those who are accustomed to not eating meat except on days when Tachanun is not recited—may eat meat even at night (ibid. in the name of the Shelah). And even though Tachanun is recited during the preceding Mincha (ibid.), nevertheless, it is certain that this night is significant at the very least like the days when Tachanun is not recited.

And we do not perform nefilat apayim on the eve of Yom Kippur. We also do not say "Lamnatzeach ya'ancha" and "Mizmor Letoda," for they did not bring it on the eve of Yom Kippur because the time for eating it is short. We also do not say many selichot before the break of dawn. There are places that are accustomed to say many selichot. We do not practice this way, but rather we begin from "Lecha Hashem hatzedaka" until "Shome'a tefilla," and afterwards we say two selichot, and the pizmon "Yirtzeh tzum amcha" etc., "Shema koleinu," the viduy one time until "Harachamim vehaselichot" and no more. Everything is according to the custom. Regarding the saying of "Avinu Malkeinu" – there are different opinions, and our custom is not to say it unless Yom Kippur falls on Shabbat, for then we do not say "Avinu Malkeinu," so then we say it on the eve of Yom Kippur during Shacharit but not during Mincha, as on the eve of Shabbat.