Giving of the foreleg, cheeks and abomasum

The gift of the shoulder, cheeks and maw of an animal sacrifice to the priesthood in Ancient Israel was commanded in the Hebrew Bible

Hebrew Bible

The Hebrew Bible is a term used by biblical scholars outside of Judaism to refer to the Tanakh , a canonical collection of Jewish texts, and the common textual antecedent of the several canonical editions of the Christian Old Testament...

.

After the destruction of the Second Temple

Second Temple

The Jewish Second Temple was an important shrine which stood on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem between 516 BCE and 70 CE. It replaced the First Temple which was destroyed in 586 BCE, when the Jewish nation was exiled to Babylon...

at the Siege of Jerusalem (70)

Siege of Jerusalem (70)

The Siege of Jerusalem in the year 70 AD was the decisive event of the First Jewish-Roman War. The Roman army, led by the future Emperor Titus, with Tiberius Julius Alexander as his second-in-command, besieged and conquered the city of Jerusalem, which had been occupied by its Jewish defenders in...

animal sacrifices ceased. However in rabbinical interpretation a continuing application of the commandment was identified. Rashi

Rashi

Shlomo Yitzhaki , or in Latin Salomon Isaacides, and today generally known by the acronym Rashi , was a medieval French rabbi famed as the author of a comprehensive commentary on the Talmud, as well as a comprehensive commentary on the Tanakh...

, in his commentary on the Talmud (B.Bechoros 27a)
Yosef Karo

Yosef Karo

Joseph ben Ephraim Karo, also spelled Yosef Caro, or Qaro, was author of the last great codification of Jewish law, the Shulchan Aruch, which is still authoritative for all Jews pertaining to their respective communities...

(Venice, 1565) rule that after the slaughter of animal by a shochet, or kosher butcher, the cuts of shoulder, cheek and maw should be given to a kohen freely, without the kohen paying or performing any service.

Biblical source

Rabbinic interpretation

In rabbinical interpretation this is a positive commandment

Mitzvah

The primary meaning of the Hebrew word refers to precepts and commandments as commanded by God...

requiring the shochet

Shechita

Shechita is the ritual slaughter of mammals and birds according to Jewish dietary laws...

(ritual slaughterer) to give the aforementioned parts of a kosher-slaughtered animal to a priest

Priesthood (Ancient Israel)

The priesthood of Ancient Israel was the class of male individuals, whom, according to the Hebrew Bible, are patrilineal descendants from Aaron , who served in the Tabernacle, Solomon's Temple and Second Temple until the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. Their temple role included animal sacrifice...

. This giving is required to be free of both monetary and servicial compensation (B.Bechoroth 27a).

Contrary to popular belief these gifts are entirely mundane ("chullin") and are not associated with all or part of the sacrificial offerings

Korban

The term offering as found in the Hebrew Bible in relation to the worship of Ancient Israel is mainly represented by the Hebrew noun korban whether for an animal or other offering...

brought on the central altar in the Jerusalem temple

Temple in Jerusalem

The Temple in Jerusalem or Holy Temple , refers to one of a series of structures which were historically located on the Temple Mount in the Old City of Jerusalem, the current site of the Dome of the Rock. Historically, these successive temples stood at this location and functioned as the centre of...

(Mishna Chullin Ch. 10:1).
The early Rabbinical authorities felt the need to specify the specific animal parts to be given due to confusion in understanding which animal parts the Torah verse refers to (for example which foreleg), and whom is required to give them. The earliest extant Midrash

Midrash

The Hebrew term Midrash is a homiletic method of biblical exegesis. The term also refers to the whole compilation of homiletic teachings on the Bible....

on the above quoted text is found in the Sifri to Deuteronomy 18:3 which relays the following detail:

Foreleg: The right foreleg in its entirety (with the skin attached)
Cheeks: The lower jaw with attached cheek flesh, tongue included
Abomasum: The abomasum
Abomasum
The abomasum, also known as the maw, and the rennet-bag, and the read, is the fourth and final stomach compartment in ruminants. It secretes rennin - the artificial form of which is called rennet, and is used in cheese creation....

in its entirety

Mishnaic view

The Mishnah

Mishnah

The Mishnah or Mishna is the first major written redaction of the Jewish oral traditions called the "Oral Torah". It is also the first major work of Rabbinic Judaism. It was redacted c...

states that the application of this Mitzvah is not dependent on whether the temple in Jerusalem

Temple in Jerusalem

stands. Likewise, it is non dependent on whether the animal is slaughtered in or outside the land of Israel, as the gift are to be given nonetheless (Mishnah Hullin 10:1).

Talmudic and Gaonic view

The Talmudic view coincides with that of the Mishna requiring the giving even outside the land of Israel. The basis of this view is due to the Mitzvah not being a obligation of the land but an obligation of the body.

The Talmud delves further than the Mishna in terms of citing instances of penalties being levied against both individual transgressors and entire communities for failure to give these Gifts (Talmud Hullin p. 132b).

The view of Hai ben Sherira coincides with the Talmud regarding penalty, urging excommunication

Excommunication

Excommunication is a religious censure used to deprive, suspend or limit membership in a religious community. The word means putting [someone] out of communion. In some religions, excommunication includes spiritual condemnation of the member or group...

on those who do not carry out the commandment.

View of the Rishonim

Amongst the opinions expressed by the Rishonim

Rishonim

"Rishon" redirects here. For the preon model in particle physics, see Harari Rishon Model. For the Israeli town, see Rishon LeZion.Rishonim were the leading Rabbis and Poskim who lived approximately during the 11th to 15th centuries, in the era before the writing of the Shulkhan Arukh and...

(see below for a partial table of their respective opinions) most fall back to either the opinion of Maimonides

Maimonides

Moses ben-Maimon, called Maimonides and also known as Mūsā ibn Maymūn in Arabic, or Rambam , was a preeminent medieval Jewish philosopher and one of the greatest Torah scholars and physicians of the Middle Ages...

, Nachmanides and Meir of Rothenburg

Meir of Rothenburg

Meir of Rothenburg was a German Rabbi and poet, a major author of the tosafot on Rashi's commentary on the Talmud...

or Rashi

Rashi

's responsa.

Maimonides, Nachmanides and Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg

Maimonides, both in his commentary to the Mishna (Chullin Ch. 9 and 10) and in his Mishna Torah compilation was of the opinion that the giving of the gifts are completely mandatory outside of Israel. Nachmanides opined that any leniency applied to giving of the gifts outside the land would lead to forgetting entirely about the practice. He therefore stated that regardless of whether the obligation is direct from the Torah (min haTorah) or Rabbinical (midirabanan

D'Oraita and D'Rabbanan

The Aramaic terms de-'oraita and de-rabbanan are used extensively in discussion and text relating to Jewish law. The former refers to halachic requirements that are biblically mandated, while the latter refers to halachic requirements that are rabbinically mandated...

) the gifts are to be given outside the land.

Dealing with the issue of gift giving outside the Land, Meir of Rothenburg was by far the most lengthy and detailed of all opining Rabbis. By analyzing the issue at supreme depth, and implicitly differing form Rashi's opinion (see next paragraph), Meir reasoned that reliance on Rabbi Elai in the Mishnah for leniency or/and invoking a hekesh between reishith haGez and the gifts is invalid. (See next paragraph, and table below for paraphrase and source information).

Shlomo Yitzhaki, "Rashi"'s responsa

Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki

Rashi

, "Ra-Sh-I", in a responsa to Rabbi Yehuda the son of Rabbi Machir - in an attempt to explain the practice of the common folk withholding of the gift - cites reliance on a lone talmudic interpretation of the opinion of the Tanna Rabbi Elai;

Rabbi Elai invokes a comparison ("Hekesh") between the Mitzvah of Reishis HaGeiz (giving the first cut of wool from sheep shearing) and Trumah. Rashi then goes a step further by grouping the Giving the Foreleg Cheeks and Abomasum with the Mitzvha of Reishis HaGeiz. Being that Trumah is nonapplicable outside of Israel (according to the opinion of Rabbi Elai) likewish is the giving of Reishes HaGeiz and the giving of the Foreleg Cheeks and Abomasum.;
Rashi goes on to state that in many communities where Jews dwell there is a complete lack of Kohanim -thereby making the giving of the gifts technically impossible. Rashi concludes with praise of those who are scrupulous in making the effort and give the Gifts nonetheless.

Rashi's Talmudic expression

It has recently been established that the opinion cited in the Rashi commentary to Talmud Bavli (tractate Shabbos p. 10b) has been a later addition entered by persons other than Rashi himself. It has been suggested that Rashi's pupils keyed in the text based on the above noted responsa. Some scholars denounce the insertion as leaving out Rashi's advocacy for giving the gifts as recorded in his responsa.

The Halachic opinion of Rabbi Eliyahu of Vilna

The Gra's

Vilna Gaon

Elijah ben Shlomo Zalman Kramer, known as the Vilna Gaon or Elijah of Vilna and simply by his Hebrew acronym Gra or Elijah Ben Solomon, , was a Talmudist, halachist, kabbalist, and the foremost leader of non-hasidic Jewry of the past few centuries...

shorthand style commentary to Shulchan Aruch made it difficult -even for the advanced scholar- to decipher the authors opinion in terms of whether or not they are to be given outside of Israel. In 2006, Rabbi Shloma Leventhal of Jerusalem published his notes to the Gra's commentary, shedding much needed light on the Gra's Halachic stand.

Upon examining Rabbi Eliyahu of Vilna's cryptic text Rabbi Leventhal concluded with clarity that Rabbi Eliyahu sided with the opinion of Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg and differentiating between the gifts and Reshit HaGez. Hence making it not only a proper Jewish custom

Minhag

Minhag is an accepted tradition or group of traditions in Judaism. A related concept, Nusach , refers to the traditional order and form of the prayers...

to give the gifts -but halachically mandatory. It is also recorded by the Gra's pupils that he actively engaged in giving the gifts.

In Yemenite Jewry

Based on the responsa of the leading Yemenite Rabbi, Rabbi Yachya Tzalach

Yihhyah Salahh

Rabbi Yiḥyah Salaḥ, known as the Maharitz , was an 18th century Yemenite rabbi. He was the author of a prayer book in which he attempted to preserve as much as possible of the traditional Yemenite rite, while making some concessions to the needs of those who followed the Kabbalah as taught by...

it is apparent that the common practice of giving the Gifts was adhered to by common Yemenite Jewry, up and well into the Nineteenth century.

Slaughtering for personal consumption

As per the commandment a slaughtering by an individual or a group both require the giving of the gifts.

Commercial slaughtering

Based on Talmudic sources the giving of the gifts by any functioning kosher meat slaughter operation is required in all instances; including partnership (Jew and non Jew owned) or if owned by a Kohein.

Pro-leniency loopholes

In the diaspora, due to the value of the actual gifts, leniency was sought in order to alleviate the high consumer end-cost of Kosher beef.

The first recorded -and today still most popular- leniency produced involves a non-Jewish ownership or partnership of the animal at the time of slaughter as well as the Shochet commuting to the property of the non Jew. Thus, at the slaughter time the animal is exempt. Next, the Jew decides on those portions he would like to purchase. this retroactive acquisition is termed Breira
Breira
Breira or Bererah is a doctrine in Talmudic law, and its validity is the subject of dispute among Talmudic authorities. According to the doctrine of breira, subsequent decisions can under certain circumstances be retroactively applied to change or clarify the nature and Jewish-law consequences of...

h in Rabbinic terms. In this specific loophole the claim stated is ain breirah i.e. the acquisition is not applied retroactively hence rendering the animal non-Jew owned at slaughter time.

Claimants for leniency tout The Tur
Tur
Tur or TUR can stand for:* Arba'ah Turim, a work of Jewish law, also known as the Tur* Jacob ben Asher, its author, also known as the Tur or the Baal Haturim* Tur * Turkish language...

's concluding statement: "Rashi ruled that actual giving is not done in today's age and so wrote the Maharam of Rothenburg and this is what is acted on".

Claimants also point out the closing statement of the Shulchan Aruch
Shulchan Aruch
The Shulchan Aruch also known as the Code of Jewish Law, is the most authoritative legal code of Judaism. It was authored in Safed, Israel, by Yosef Karo in 1563 and published in Venice two years later...

which concludes that in action giving is not done outside the land.

The lineage of a Kohein being called into question since the issue is monetary the rule of "on he who seeks to withdraw lies the burden of proof"

Counter-leniency arguments

With leniency being common practice from time to time the basis of inaction of the Mitzvah are called into question with the following counterclaims:

The Mishna -when discussing partnering with a non Jew- uses the single person form ("המשתתף" as opposed to "המשתתפים") thereby alluding that the practice is not all that common. Also alluding that mass partnering with a non Jew with the intent of skirting the mitzvah is entirely not up for Mishnaic debate in terms of the clarity of liability. The Prisha
Joshua Falk
----Joshua ben Alexander HaCohen Falk was a Polish Halakhist and Talmudist, best known as the author of the Beit Yisrael commentary on the Arba'ah Turim as well as Sefer Me'irat Enayim on Shulkhan Arukh...

(Commentarian to Tur Shulchan Aruch) argues that partnering with a non-Jew with the intent to excuse the obligation of giving the gifts is "ערמה" ("trickery") which causes the Kohein to lose out on his rightful due.

The above claim is lent additional validity by the Ra"n's

Nissim of Gerona

Nissim ben Reuven of Girona, Catalonia was an influential talmudist and authority on Jewish law. He was one of the last of the great Spanish medieval talmudic scholars. He is also known as the RaN .-Biography:The Ran was born in Barcelona, Catalonia...

ruling that if one acquires the gifts from a non Jew the acquirer is obligated to give the gifts to the Kohein

Counter claimants further argue that the "Ain Breirah" explanation is inapplicable since in this instance one of two scenarios will play out for certain; either the animal will be deemed as glatt kosher or not. Being that most animals (70-90%) are indeed found to be Glatt Kosher the acquisition of the animal is likely (more than 50%). Thus, to state "Breirah" is more fitting for this scenario. Henceforth, the animal becomes retroactively Jew-owned at the time of slaughter.

In the instance where the cattle is Jew-owned and a Non-Jew commits to purchase those animals found not to be Glatt-Kosher, an exemption would be invalid, a detail easily and often overlooked with a permanent mindset of gift exemption in place.

Partnering with a Non-Jew may require instances where the partner -in case the animal will not be found as Kosher, demands the slaughterer make certain statements just prior to the Shechita
Shechita
Shechita is the ritual slaughter of mammals and birds according to Jewish dietary laws...

so the animal could be sold to adherents of other religions. causing the question of a "hefsek" in between the blessing the slaughterer is to make and the Shechita being performed, thereby making both Non-Jew partnering and ownership undesirable.

Proponents of giving the gifts point out that the Tur quoted only Rashi's Talmudic opinion while leaving Rashi's response out. Wherein Rashi directs Rabbinical figures not to instruct or reveal leniency to query posers, on the contrary Rashi heaped praise on practicing givers, while pointing out that lack of locating Kohanim to whom to give and the non-sanctic nature of the gifts are amongst the causes for inaction in the Diaspora.

As for Rabbi Meir of Rothenburgs stance proponents ascertain that the Tur was mistaken as to the Maharam's opinion. As the writing of three of the Rabbi Meir's prized pupils (i.e. the Mordechai, Rabbeinu Asher and the Tashbe"tz) document their mentor's opinion as being staunchly in favor of Diasporic gift giving. additionally, based on the Maharam's response on its own right it is clear that the author's opinion was contrary to that stated by the Tur and entirely in accordance with his pupils documentation.

Counterclaimants further argue that one of Rabbi Yosef Karo's
Yosef Karo
Joseph ben Ephraim Karo, also spelled Yosef Caro, or Qaro, was author of the last great codification of Jewish law, the Shulchan Aruch, which is still authoritative for all Jews pertaining to their respective communities...

(author of Shulchan Aruch) cardinal rules is that -contrary to the common "bottom-line" reasoning, the ruling which is stated first is the primary opinion whereas that which follows is not the Halachic first choice. Additionally Rabbi Karo was known to have adapted the majority of the big three (the Rambam Rif
Isaac Alfasi
for other Al-Fasi's see Al-Fasi disambiguationIsaac ben Jacob Alfasi ha-Cohen - also known as the Alfasi or by his Hebrew acronym Rif , was a Talmudist and posek...

and Rosh), whereas in this instance the former two are advocates of Diasporic giving while the latter is undecided.

A specific Kohein's lineage is immaterial since the Mitzvah is on the giver (and not for the Kohein to withdraw), hence the burden of locating a "lineage verifiable" Kohein rests on the giver. Notwithstanding that modern Kohanim carry a forceful claim to Kehuna titled "Chazakah
Chazakah
The Hebrew noun khazakah, is a Talmudic concept, derived from the Hebrew word חזקה, which can be translated as "strength".The conceptional terminology is "default status", "agreed properties" or Status quo of an object, land or person − usually when sufficient proof is missing or unavailable...

" which is deemed sufficient qualification for receipt of the Foreleg Cheeks and Abomasum.

"Kosher" status

In terms of "Kosher" (in this instance adopting the literal meaning as "in line" with the general and particular laws of the Torah) the Talmud and Rabbinic sages discuss various viewpoints as to whether the meat from an animal whose gifts have not been given may be eaten in part or if at all. The popular Rabbinic concern is that of "Gezel" (theft).

One underlying concern laid down by Rabbinic sources is a differentiation between the meat of the actual gifts and the meat from the rest of the animal;

The actual Cheek meat, Tongue, and Foreleg ("Marrow Bones")

Concerning the eating of the actual gifts, Rabbinic authorities adopted a stringent view by stating that they may not be eaten by anyone but a Kohein unless the Kohein permits otherwise.

Although a Kohein is authorized to permit the consumption of the gifts by a non-Kohein, Rabbinical responsa indicate that the gifts must first be placed in the hands of a Kohein before he is allowed to permit them to be eaten by a non-Kohein

Meat other than the actual gifts

Concerning the "Kashrut" of the remainder of the meat (if the gifts have not been given), there is a difference of opinion between leading Rabbinic sources.

The common Halachic stance is that this meat may be consumed, but nonetheless it is proper not to partake in this meat unless the giving of the gifts has been done.

The Yechezkel saga

Proponents of not eating meat from an animal of whom's gifts were not given cite the Talmudic comparison of such meat to "Piggul" based on the following Talmudic narrative;

Yechezkel, upon being commanded by the almighty to consume bread baked by using human excrement as coal pleaded for leniency by exclaming that he was always scrupulous in watching what he ate in terms of Kashruth and purity and that never had "Piggul" (i.e. repulsive) meat entered his mouth (and therefore should not be instructed to bake his bread in such a repulsive fashion). The Talmud, in examining the contextual meaning of "Piggul" quotes the view of Rabbi Nathan

Rabbi Nathan

Nathan the Babylonian , also known as Rabbi Nathan, was a tanna of the third generation , the son of a Babylonian exilarch. For unknown reasons he left Babylonia, and his bright prospects there, to settle in the land of Israel, where he was made chief of the school at Usha...

who maintains that Yechezkiel's claim was that he never consumed meat from an animal of whom's gifts were not given to a Kohein. The almighty then accepted Yechezkiel's plea as legitimate and instead instructed him to fire up his oven using animal dung.

Segulot

Of the various "segulot" of doing this mitzvah is noted meriting Ruach HaKodesh

Ruach HaKodesh

The Hebrew language phrase ruach ha-kodesh is a term used in the Hebrew Bible and Jewish writings to refer to the Spirit of YHVH. The Hebrew term ruakh kodeshka , without the definite article, also occurs...

. Likewise, divine intervention in assisting the Jewish nation with physical strength over their enemies is listed as well

Divine consequence

With the intent on relaying the divine consequence of neglecting the gift giving in the Diaspora, the Talmud tells the following story;

The "Marking" requirement

The Mishna stipulates that in the event the animal is owned by a non-Jew at Shechita time the buyer (if Jewish) is required to "mark", without detailing what type of mark or for what purpose this mark is to serve.

The Rambam in explaining the Mishna detailes that the actual gifts are to be marked to differentiate them from the other sections of meat so that they be given to the Kohein, this is in line with the Rambam's ruling in Mishna Torah that a non-Kohein is Halachically forbidden from consuming the actual gifts.

Rashi, by contrast, explains the marking requirement as an eye-catching technique visible to all viewers of the meat advertising that the slaughtered animal was non-Jew owned at Shechita time. The intention, explains Rashi, is to preempt the viewer from assuming that the non-Kohein owner of the animal is violating the requirement of giving the gifts.

In Israel

Per the investigation conducted by Rabbi Yaakov Epstien in 2005 many Jewish owned slaughterhouses enter a binding agreement with a group of pre-screened Kohanim, with whom monetary compensation is offered in place of the original gifts (albeit an agreement frowned upon by early Rabbinic authorities who insisted the actual gifts are to be given and not monetary compensation).

In the Diaspora

By and large in the Diaspora today most Jews -even Ultra-Orthodox, are unaware of the Mitzvah entirely. plausible explanation has been given by the famous Jerusalem Rabbi and Maimonides commentator Rabbi Yosef Corcous as follows;

Rabbinically, a Kohein is to refrain from requesting the gifts since they are to be given by will. Hence without a call for claimage it is assumed that the Kohanim implicitly forgive the gifts.
an Israelite married to a Kohein's daughter is exempt, as is a Levi causing neighbors of the non-giver's to assume that the gifts are not required to be given entirely.

The response often cited by today's Rabbi's when confronted by queries into the modern day inaction of this Mitzvah is simply that the animal is owned by a non Jew at the time of slaughter.

The pious viewpoint

From a somewhat pious prospective and disregarding the common practice of reliance on questioned Rabbinic loopholes, it has been the practice of select "Chassidim" to take the stricter approach in giving the gifts and to refrain from eating the meat of an animal from which the gifts were not given.

This view is quoted by popular Rabbis as recent as Rabbi Yonason Eibeshitz and the Chasam Sofer.

Modern dollar value of the gifts

The quantity of Glatt-Kosher cattle slaughtered daily in the US is approximated at 750. The figure multiplied by the dollar amount of the gifts carried by an adult cow is presented as follows:

.5 a pound of cheek meat $14.99 lb.
1.5 pounds of fresh tongue @ $9.99 lb.
10 pounds of marrow bones (and beef– stew quality cuts) in the foreleg @ $5.99 lb.
Abomasum -N/A

The dollar equivalent equals approximately $82.47 per Cow. multiplied by the number of days in a calender year equals $22,576,162.50 annually as the dollar value of the Mitzvah in the United States.

Table of Halachic opinions

Rabbinic Authority	Opinion on Diasporic gift giving
The Sifri	On the verse "if an Ox or if a Sheep" the Sifri exegesizes that the Gifts are required to be given outside of Israel as well
The Raavad	"The practice of being lenient does not go well (in my opinion)..one should not act on this unrully (lit. evil) custom of not giving the gifts. Behold, when dealing with gift giving Rabbis are authorized to levy penalties".
The Rambam	"If the Shochet did not give the Kohanic Gifts..he is liable for Excommunication,.. it is not permissible to purchase from him these Gifts in order that we not strengthen his action of Gezel (theft),.. the consumption of the actual Gifts are -in any case- considered Gezel and I do not see a possibility of being lenient on the consumption of the gifts".. The Rambam, in his Mishna Torah compilation also states that it is the practice to give the Foreleg Cheeks and Abomasum in the Diaspora.
The Ramban Ramban Ramban, RaMBaN can refer to:* Nahmanides , Rabbi Moshe ben Nahman, Catalan rabbi, philosopher, physician, Kabbalist and biblical commentator* Ramban Synagogue in East Jerusalem* Cave of the Ramban in East Jerusalem...	"The Rabbi's equalled the gift giving with that of Challah which is customary in all places, the reason being that all have challah but not all possess fields they were therefore concerned that the masses may come to forget entirely about the mitzvah of challah. So too with gift giving; ..The Rabbis where concerned that the Mitzvah of giving the gifts will be forgotten (in exile)..therefore it is customary to give the gifts in the diaspora, ..hence it is proper to give the Gifts"
Rabbi Meir of Rothernburg Meir of Rothenburg Meir of Rothenburg was a German Rabbi and poet, a major author of the tosafot on Rashi's commentary on the Talmud...	Every one should separate the gifts and be wary of Rabbi Chisda's curse who said "the Kohein who refuses to separate the gifts should be excommunicated from the almighty, the G-d of Israel" and even more so an Israelite (a non-Kohein who refuses to give the gifts). And all of the congregation of Israel shall do it (the gift giving)
The Mordechai	The Mordechai's view was that the gifts are to be given in the Diaspora, he argued against the logic of comparing ("Hekesh") the Gifts to the first-shearing of the Sheep ("Reishis Hagez").
Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi	It is permitted to give the Gifts (on Yom Tov)..and it is permitted to walk them over to the Kohein..even if it was available to give before Yom Tov.

External links

Maimonides Sefer HaMitzvot (Hebrew Fulltext)
Ceremonial video of Rabbi Ratzabi (of Bnei Brak) giving the Gifts וידיאו נתינת המתנות בשמחה

The source of this article is wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The text of this article is licensed under the GFDL.