|
|
|
|
Have a question? Send it in! Questions are answered by Rabbi Bartfeld.
|
|
|
|
|
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
|
|
|
|
|
# 1245 Make No Mistake
|
|
|
Q. 4) See prior question 1242.What happens if when reciting the sheva brochos, Shehakol was said instead of Hagefen? Mesameach Chassan Vekala instead of Chassan Im Hakala?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that being under the chupa is not different from any other situation where we rule that when mistakenly reciting shehakol on wine, after the fact one complies.
Similarly, if one would have to perform in need a chupa at a location where kosher wine is not available, he may use beer or any other liquor that is considered chamar medina and recite shehakol instead.
Regarding Mesameach Chassan Vekala instead of Chassan Im Hakala in the last brocho, Kuntres Paamei Yaakov (5768: n. 2) carries a number of articles with different opinions on the same question. Horav Zalman Nechemia Goldberg Shlit'a maintains, that the fact that our sages instituted these changes in the last two brochos, carries a meaning that makes it essential. He suggests on the sheva brochos after the meal, to ask one of the participants that did not hear that brocho to recite it now properly for all to hear. However, under the chupa, where there is no obligation for the attendants to hear, it should be repeated.
Horav Ephroim Greenblatt zt’l opines that after the fact one is yotze and since the change is minimal it is not considered as altering the established matbea of the brocho. So is the opinion of Horav Yisroel Meir Lau Shlit'a and Horav Gavriel Tzinner Shlit'a (Nitei Gavriel)
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/23/2017 12:23 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1244 Account Your Blessings
|
|
|
Q. 3) See prior question 1242. What happens if one of the sheva brochos was said with mistakes that change its meaning, such as instead of Shehakol Barah Likvodo in the first brocho, one said Shehakol Nichye Bidvaro or Yotzer Haadama instead of Yotzer Haadam?
A. If instead of Shehakol Barah Likvodo on the (first) second brocho, one said Shehakol Nichye Bidvaro, it would seem obvious that one does not comply as it is a totally different brocho (Birchas Hassanim p. 227).
However Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a pointed out that this may depend on the pronunciation of the shehakol brocho. Magen Avraham (O.H. 167: 8) quotes two opinions as to the correct vocalization; Nihiyo (past tense) or Nihiye (present tense). Nihiya means "by whose word everything came to be" whereas Nihiye means "by whose word everything continues to be". Beeir Heitev, Shaarei Teshuva (204: 20) and Biur Halocho (204: 13) all maintain that we should say Ninhye since that is what most people say.The prevalent practice is that Ashkenazim say Nihye and Sephardim say Nihya.
The Rov maintains that if one said Nihya, it is possible that he complied with the brocho of Shehakol Barah Likvodo, also said in past tense.
As far as saying Yotzer Haadamah instead of Yotzer Haadam, Shevet Hakehuna (p, 129) rules
that it is clearly two different blessings, and if he didn't fix it immediately (toch kdei divur), he has to repeat. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/20/2017 1:31 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1243 Mixed Blessings
|
|
|
Q. 2) Re – See prior question 1242. What happens if one of the sheva brochos was said before the other, and the order was changed?
A. Be'er Heitev (E.H. 62: 1) quoting Ig'rois Horambam and other Poskim who also cite Maseches Kalah Rabossi (1: 1), assert that the order of sheva brochos in principle is not essential and when one brocho is mistakenly omitted, it can be recited later on.
However, Atzei Arozim (62: 1) mentions as an exception to the above rule, the two blessings finishing with yotzer haadam. He quotes the Talmud (Kesuvos 8a) that the reason for this two repetitive similar ending brochos is that there were two creations involved in making man. One before separating Adam from Chava and the other the separation itself, mentioned in the second one. Since there is an inherent order tho this two brochos, he maintains that having mistakenly said the second one first, you don’t recite the first one anymore since it was included already in the wording of the second one. Beis Avi (E.H. 3: 143) after debating at length if the second brocho includes the first, maintains in practice to follow the ruling of the Atzei Arozim.
Igrois Moishe (E.H. 4: 88) opinion was also not to recite anymore since we are lenient in sofek brochos, and we do not recite brochos when in doubt. Kerem Shlomo (17), Rivevos Efraim (O.H. 3: 156) and Nitei Gavriel (Nisuin 2: 95: 15) rule likewise.
However, Shita Mekuvetzes and Meiri (Kesuvos 8a) explain the repetitive yotzer haadam blessings as the first applying to Adam while the second refers to Chava. Following this opinion, Shulchan Aruch Hamekutzar (206: n. 549) maintains that the first brocho is essential and should be recited after the second.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is also not to recite the first brocho of Yotzer Haadam once the second one has been said.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/20/2017 12:51 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1242 Trial By Error
|
|
|
In recent times more family members and friends are being honoured with reciting sheva brochos and some of them are not very learned to say the least. This gives rise to brochos said with mistakes or omissions. I would like to know what is the correct thing to do in the following cases.
Q. 1) By error the boreh pri hagefen was omitted at the beginning of the sheva brochos by the chupa, when should it be said?
A. There are two options; one can recite immediately hagefen after shehakol barah and continue the rest of the brochos in their order, or recite the hagefen after the brocho achrono, as you would do in all the subsequent sheva brochos after the chupa. Kovetz Beis Aharon (y. 5753 – n. 4) carries an article by Horav Yechezkel Grubner zt”l, that debates at length the different options and their merits, without favouring one.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that it is better to recite the hagefen brocho immediately.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/20/2017 10:00 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1241 Clean Your Plate
|
|
|
Q. Thank you for the answer (See question 1029, I was making an omelette in a milchik pan... ). If the eggs are made on butter with cheese (on a milchik pan), and you accidentally put them on a fleishik plate?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that if the fleishig plate is a ben yomo and it is of material that cannot be kashered, it should not be used again; plastics can be kashered. If it is not a ben yomo, the eggs are permitted after the fact. As far as the plate concerns, one should wait until next day and use it after kashering.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/16/2017 10:15 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1240 Risk Of Showers
|
|
|
Q. Is there basis for being able to use hot water for showering on Yom Tov because in today’s times when people have the luxury of having hot showers in their homes it seems to have become much more “shave lkol nefesh"?
A. The Mishna (Beitza 2: 5) records Beis Shamai's opinion that one may only heat up water for washing one’s feet and only to a temperature that one would be able to drink, while Beis Hillel permit heating up the water even as hot as needed to bathe. Shulchan Aruch 511:2 rules that one may heat water only to wash face, hands and feet, but not the complete body, even when not washed at the same time. Mishna Berura (ibid. 10) quotes Tosafos opinion that this is due to the prohibition of performing melachos that not everyone does or needs (shave lekol nefesh). Although the Shulchan Aruch permits to wash on water heated before Yom Tov, Rema (ibid.) prohibits.
Mishna Berura (551: 9 -18) rules like the Rema, that one may not take a full body shower with hot water on Yom Tov even if it was heated before Yom Tov. However, one may wash one's whole body part by part with water heated before Yom Tov and one may heat up water on Yom Tov to wash one's hands, feet, and face.
Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchoso (14: 7) discusses the topic at length and although he maintains that there is some grounds to be lenient, nonetheless he remains stringent. So is Tzitz Eliezer (6: 20, 11: 64), Avnei Yoshfe (3: 55) quoting Horav Elyashiv zt”l, Horav Yisroel Belsky zt”l (quoted in Halachically Speaking), Rivevos Ephraim (16: 265, 8: 248: 1) and others.
Halacha Yomit mentions that Maran Harav Ovadia Yosef Shlit”a maintains (for Sephardim) that if the water was heated well before the onset of Yom Tov and the boiler’s operation on Yom Tov serves only to retain the water’s heat but not to reheat it, one may use this water to wash his entire body on Yom Tov.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is to be stringent following the Poskim mentioned above. If one usually uses the shower as tisha kavim (instead of immersing in a mikva) the Rov's opinion is that he may use a lukewarm shower for tisha kavim. Same would apply to one suffering significantly from excessive heat and perspiration on a hot Yom Tov day. A hand shower is also recommended.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/13/2017 2:47 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1239 Blessed Berries
|
|
|
Q. What bracha do you make on cranberries and strawberries? What happens if you made the wrong brocho?
A. Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 203: 2) rules that one recites hoadama on berries grown on bushes that yearly loose their trunk and only the roots remain next year. Therefore on strawberries the correct brocho is hoadama and so rule many Poskim (See Mishna Berura ibid.3, Igrois Moishe 1: 86, Maharsham 1: 196, Vesein Bracha p. 392-394, Shaarei Bracha P. 707 n.758 et. al.)
If the plant grows within 3 tefachim (9 inches) of the ground, such as cranberries, we treat them as bushes and thus we recite on them hoadama. (Vesein Bracha p. 392-394, Shaarei Bracha P. 437 n.758 et. al.) The Halachos of Brochos quotes the p’sak of Horav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, z’tl, “Cranberries grow on creeping vines which grow along the ground. Although the plant produces fruit year after year, nevertheless, since cranberries grow within nine inches of the ground, its brocho is hoadamah.”
However, the Laws of Brachos by Rabbi Binyomin Forst, writes that the brocho on cranberries is haeitz. In Halacha, when the proper brocho is hoadama, the recitation of haeitz would be incorrect, and would result in a bracha levatala and in effect no first bracha having been recited on the food at all. If one recited haeitz, some Poskim maintain that he should take a small bite and then out of doubt, make hoadama on a vegetable or similar. (Vesein Bracha p. 392-394, Shaarei Brocho 17 3 n. 4).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that, the correct brocho on both strawberries and cranberries is hoadama. However, on strawberries even bedieved, after the fact, the haeitz recited on them is levatala (on vain), and a new hoadama blessing should be recited. For cranberries, after the fact, one should follow the last above mentioned opinion.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/13/2017 1:12 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1238 Bugged By Frozen Bugs?
|
|
|
Q. Hi. I am wondering which frozen fruits/vegetables need a hechsher and which don't. I know that frozen produce like mango and blueberries does not, but do frozen raspberries, strawberries, and blackberries require a hechsher? What about frozen green beans, cauliflower, and broccoli? I live in Ottawa, Ontario and the laws here in Canada are pretty strict about thoroughly washing produce before freezing and selling it. Thank you in advance!
A. The cRc Fruit & Vegetable Policy is that all freeze dried vegetables & fruits require a reliable hashgacha. Generally, The cRc web site provides a list and adds, “It is impossible to cover all of the different varieties, so if a particular product is not found on this list, please call the cRc office.”
Montreal M.K. also provides a list.
Chabad Org. Writes, “Most frozen vegetables are acceptable for year-round use (excluding Passover), as the freezing process does not pose any Halachic concerns; though you should always be on the lookout for insects which occasionally infest vegetables.
It appears that due to the strong likelihood of insect infestation in the following frozen vegetables, they should only be bought with a reliable kosher certification: broccoli, cauliflower, brussel sprouts, asparagus, cut onions, spinach, potatoes, and artichoke hearts.”
Star K in regards to Pesach maintains that, Frozen Vegetables require reliable Kosher for Passover certification since pasta blends are produced on the same equipment. Plain, frozen, unsweetened fruit pieces would be acceptable without special Passover certification. Sweetened frozen fruit pieces could be sweetened with liquid sugar or corn syrup, requiring strict Passover supervision.
I also forwarded your question to Rabbi Tsvi Heber, Director of Community Kosher – COR. This was his reply:
Frozen fruits are kosher without a hechsher. If there is an infestation issue (strawberries, raspberries, blackberries) then it can be used as a puree or in a liquid form.
Frozen vegetables from North America can be considered kosher without a hechsher. If there is an infestation issue (cauliflower, broccoli) then it can be used as a puree or in a liquid form.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is similar to the above last. However, he added, that when there is an infestation issue you may check out and inspect properly the fruits and vegetables, provided that you know how to do it. (You have to know the shape, colour and size of the infecting insects, how to make them visible and how to remove them).
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/12/2017 10:17 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1237 Enjoy Your Anniversary Meal
|
|
|
Q. Is that seuda considered (a seuda on the fiftieth yortzait – see prior question) a seudas mitzva?
A. As mentioned on the last question, it is difficult to find a source for a special “fiftieth year seuda” minhag.
However, Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that if the minhag of that family or congregation is to make a seuda with a siyum or other divrei Torah on any yortzait (as is the case of many offering a tikun after davening), it does become a seudas mitzva.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/12/2017 10:14 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1236 Kidush on Kadish?
|
|
|
Q. Is there a source for making a special seuda at the fifty year yortzait?
A. It is difficult to find a source for this minhag. In the quarterly journal Tzefunos (5752, Vol. 18) there is a letter from the Zichron Shmuel answering a query from a talmid of the Chasam Sofer on making a special seuda on the fiftieth yortzait of the Chasam Sofer. He writes that although there is mention of arranging a day of learning on the day of yortzait of a great person (See first Rashi, Yebamos 122a) by his kever, or the seudos of Lag Baomer in honour of Rav Shimon Bar Yochai, (and other tzadikim and parents every year), there is no mention to do so especially on the fiftieth anniversary. He debates whether there may be an issue of chukos hagoim involved (see prior question). Nitei Gavriel ( Avelus 2: 77: 22 n. 40) mentions that the chasidim of Gur do not make a seuda on the day of the yortzait of their Rebbes after fifty years, with the sole exception of the S'fas Emes.
As mentioned in the prior question there are reasons for tikun (mending and correction) in a fifty year period. (See also Ramban Shemos 21: 6)
I enquired a number of Rabbonim in the city if they are aware of such a minhag, to no avail.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/11/2017 11:03 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1235 Kadish Leolam?
|
|
|
Q. Is it true what some say that you don't have to recite kaddish on the yortzait more than fifty years?
A. Some Poskim do write that there is a fifty year limit for maintaining a yortzait and reciting kadish. (Yalkut Yosef – kivud Av Va'em 13: 61, Nitei Gavriel – Avelus 2: 77: 22 n. 40, quote Hedras Kodesh (p. 72) in the name of Mahara'Sh of Belz zy”a, Chaye Yitzchak, More Horim in the name of the Divrei Chaim and others).
Nitei Gavriel explains in their name, that after that time the neshama has already found its tikun (mending and correction) and has reached its correct most elevated place in Gan Eden. He also quotes that the fifty year period reflects the time frame that the Talmud (Shabbos 89b) considers common and correct for the liability of sins. (See Ben Ish Chai, Behar)
Orchos Rabbeinu (1: p. 305 and ibid.) quotes from the Steipler Gaon zt”l, that: “After about fifty years the soul departs totally from the body, and there is no more benefit in visiting the kever. Occasionally, he adds, Hashem leaves the neshama of a tzadik longer, so there will be someone left to pray for them in troubled times. Alternatively, the tzadik himself, may desire to stay longer.”
However, Remoh (Y.D. 376: 4) and Maharil rule that for parents, kadish on the day of yortzait is recited forever. Rav Poalim (4: 17) mentions in the Arizal's name, that some neshomos even after a millennium may still be reaching for their proper, most sublime and exalted place that corresponds to them, so they would greatly benefit from the good deeds of their children. Minchas Elozor (4: 33) adds that one should not even mention the fifty year limit, since it may be part of the chukos hagoyim and carry Gentile roots.
Orchos Rabbenu (1: p.310, see above) mentions that the Steipler Gaon zt'l recited kadish and davened for his parents even after fifty years. Yalkut Yosef, Nitei Gavriel (ibid.) and others also mention that most Poskim rule to maintain the Yortzait and kadish for parents even after fifty years.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that for other relatives that one has honoured them with kadish on the day of their yortzait, such as grandparents, one does not have to continue doing so after fifty years. However, for parents due to the inherent mitzva of kivud Av Va'em that applies even after their demise, one should continue honouring them even after fifty years.
The Rov added, that for other relatives, if one stops reciting kadish after that period, there is no need to be matir neder (annulment of vows), as one can rely on the hataras nedarim declaration said before Rosh Hashana.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/11/2017 10:59 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1234 Mystery Meat
|
|
|
Q. (Re- above question on cultured kosher meat). Also what was the status of the meat that was created miraculously in Biblical and Talmudic times?
A. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 59b) relates that angels would roast heavenly meat and serve it to Adam while he enjoyed the Gan Eiden. Similarly, Rabi Shimon ben Chalafta, was walking on the road, when he encountered a pair of lions. He quoted from Psalms: “The young lions roar for prey and to beg their food from G‑d,”and two lumps of flesh descended from heaven. They lions ate one and left the other. He brought it to the Bais Hamedresh and consulted: Is this fit (for eating) or not? He was answered: “Nothing unfit descends from heaven.” Rabbi Zera asked Rabbi Abahu: “What if something in the shape of a donkey were to descend?” he rejoined, that he was just told, that no unfit thing descends from heaven”
Miraculous meat appears again (Sanhedrin 65b), Rabi Chanina and Rabi Oshaia would spend every erev Shabbos learning the “Book of Creation” by means of which they created a calf and ate it.
The Malbim ( Vayera 18: 8) explains that meat created using the “Sefer Yetzira” is pareve. That is why Avraham Avinu was able to give the visiting angels a meal containing both milk and meat; the meat was pareve, as Avraham created it that day. See also Pirkei D’R’ Eliezer (cited in Yalkut Reuveini on Parshas Vayera, and Darchei Teshuva (87, 29). Cheshek Shlomo, ( Y. D. 98) maintains that milk from a cow that was created via the “Sefer Yetzira” is also pareve. Shelah (2, Torah Shebeksav, Vayeishev), maintains that this was the disagreement between Yosef and his brothers and what the Shevatim ate while Yosef assumed it was eiver min hachai.
Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a explained that although this miraculous meat is pareve the sages mentioned above used it for Shabbos, since after all it is an honorable and important as well as palatable dish to honor Shabbos with.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/9/2017 10:20 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1233 Deceiving Appearances
|
|
|
Q. Regarding the above question of kosher cultured meat, why is there no prohibition of ma'aris ayin? (wrong appearances).
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that indeed there is a valid concern for ma'aras ayin. However, once this meat has been properly marked and advertised as being “cultured,” there is no more reason to prohibit it, than there is in the case of pareve milk or soya vegetarian sausages.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/9/2017 10:17 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1232 Size up
|
|
|
Q. One wants to replace an old pair of Tefillin (that was used for over 20 years) with a new pair.
The new pair is smaller than the old one, but is more Mehudar (parshiyos, batim and retzhuos). Does the size matter; does the new pair have to be same as, or bigger than the old pair?
What about RaSH”I and R”T? Do both pairs have to be of same size, or can one be bigger than the other?
Thank you
A. Or Zarua (Tefilin 568) quotes Shimusho Rabbo that the size of Tefillin should be two fingerbreaths (etzabaos) by two fingerbreaths, but if they are more or less, they still are kosher. Biur Halacha (27: 9) maintains that the Tefillin should not be bigger than four etzbaos by four etzbaos including the titura (base) and the ma'avarta (the extension where the retzua goes through). Horav Chaim's Noe zt”l (Shiurei Torah) opinion is that an etzba measures 2.0 cm. While the Chazon Ish measurement is 2.4 cm.
The smallest tefillin are sized such that two pairs can be worn simultaneously; both those made according to the opinion of Rashi in added to those made according to the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam. Many Jews of Sephardic descent wear both pair of tefillin at the same time. When donned together some also maintain different sizes for this two pairs. The standard size tefillin made for such use today is about 2.0 to 2.2 cm. (Yalkut Yosef 34: 2 – he maintains that this includes the titura and ma'avarta, which is surprisingly small.
See also Minhagei Hachida p. 18). Ase Lecha Rav (p. 137) writes that each pair is 4.0 cm and the correct place for tefillin is a total of 8.cm. The largest size recommended for tefillin are as large as two of the smallest pair tefillin combined. This size of tefillin is commonly worn by Chabad Chasidim ranges from 40 to 43 mm.
As far as the tefillin being considered mehudar (beautiful or enhanced), a greater emphasis should be placed on the quality of the parshios. The size of the batim, as long as it is not too small or too large, as mentioned above, does not really matter.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/6/2017 12:39 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1231 The Crown Of A Good Name
|
|
|
Q. If in a second marriage, there are 2 kids from a previous marriage named after the mother's side and one kid from a previous marriage after the father's side and then they have a daughter together, does one follow the minhag of naming the fist kid after the mother's side or do we say the mother has two and it is only fair that it is the father's turn?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that the most important and overriding rule in name giving is to maintain sholom bais and both parties should be forgiving and most tolerant. The name thus created and given, will bring the best mazal and hatzlacha to their child.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/5/2017 11:05 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1230 The Meat Of The Matter
|
|
|
Q. Some time ago I sent this question and I didn't get an answer yet, I would like to know the answer.
Is artificial meat created by starting cells taken from live animals. They are put into a culture media where they start to proliferate and grow, independently from the animal, all nutrients are vegetarian. This process would be efficient enough to supply the global demand for meat, and it is the future. All this would happen without any genetic manipulation, i.e. without the need to interfere with the cells’ genetic sequences, only by using animal DNA and plant nutrients. Producing cultured meat for processed meat products, such as sausages, burgers and nuggets should be comparatively simple, an in-vitro steak is considerably more of a challenge.
Is this meat considered meat at all? Is it kosher? Is it a limb from a live animal? (ever min hachai). Can you eat it with milk? Does it need salting?
A. On August 2013 media reported that scientists extracted cells from a cow and, at an institute in the Netherlands, turned them into strips of muscle which they combined to make a hamburger. Although research is ongoing and recently an Israeli start-up company, (Super Meat) began a fund raising campaign to create lab-grown chicken, enlisting the helpful Halachic opinion of some Rabbis. At this point in time, the mass production of cultured meat is still unrealistic in the foreseeable future. Therefore the Halachic discussion is primarily academic, still firmly entrenched in the realm of theory, as it is not known what the final cell extraction process will entail, and what the necessary nutrients to feed the cells will be.
In principle a food that contains only a minuscule amount of a non-kosher ingredient can still be considered kosher if the non-kosher ingredient is nullified (usually) by at least a factor of 60 to 1. This would imply that the Petri dish patty would be considered kosher even if it was harvested from a non-kosher source, as the final patty has 20,000 muscle fibres grown from only a few stem cells. However, the above rule does not apply to a “davar hama’amid,” an ingredient that establishes the shape and consistency of the resulting produce. The essential ingredient can never be nullified, no matter how small it is. (See Shulchan Aruch Y. D. 87: 11).
Some contemporary Rabbis that have dealt with the issue compared it to gelatin extracted from animal sources, that some Poskim permit (SeeYabia Omer 8, Y. D. 11). One of the main reasons for permitting gelatin is that it constitutes “panim chadoshos.” During the process of producing gelatin, the original bones are completely destroyed by the various acids and other chemicals, and the inedible gelatinous results bear no resemblance, not even by taste nor form to the original, and is therefore considered a completely new item. However, most Poskim, including Rav Aharon Kotler zt”l, Rav Eliezer Silver zt”l, Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l, and Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin zt”l, all unequivocally prohibited gelatin, unless it was derived from properly shechted kosher animals. Nowadays, although the Israeli Chief Rabbinate permits gelatin as kosher and has a distinct designation, “kosher l’ochlei gelatin,” no Mehadrin kashrus agency or Badatz in Eretz Yisroel, or mainstream certifying agency in America considers real gelatin kosher, unless it is produced from properly shechted kosher animals.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that the cultured meat is not considered meat. However, since the Mishna (Bechoros 5b) and Shulachan Aruch (Y.D. 79: 2) rule that food extracted from the impure is regarded as impure, even if it is not meat it is still prohibited. Therefore the original stem cells would have to be extracted from a kosher slaughtered animal. When the above was done, and all the nutrients used were kosher, the produce would need no salting and may in principle be permitted even with milk. (see next question concerning ma'aris ayin).
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/4/2017 11:04 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1229 Strangely Enough?
|
|
|
Q. Who should recite viduy with a dying patient, a rabbi that does not know the patient or the patient's son who is there constantly with him?
A. It would seem reasonable that the patient would be less stressed and worried if his son, who is constantly with him recites the shema, viduy and other tefilos, instead of a rabbi who is a stranger he does not know. However, Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that this may not be necessarily true and if possible, the rabbi should do it.
A rabbi when called, should also attend, not only because the inherent mitzva of bikur cholim, but also to provide support, guidance and counsel to the family in difficult times. It is also plausible that the patient may want to discuss and treat with a rabbi, even a stranger, issues that he would not want to address with his own children.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/4/2017 10:55 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1228 Let There Be Light
|
|
|
Q. If on Erev Shabbos Chanuka it is already close to the shkiah, how many people is the minimum needed to light the shul menora with a brocho?
A. Mishna Berura (671: 47) quotes Darkei Moishe that the hadlaka should be at the time that people begin to assemble in shul. However. if it is late, one should not wait any longer, and perform the hadlaka immediately, since a minyan will eventually assemble and there will be pirsumei nissa (publicizing of the miracle) later on. (Magen Avrohom ibid. 12)
Sha'arei Teshuva (ibid, 12), Mor Uketzia (ibid,) Machazik Brocho (ibid. 7) and others rule that on a regular day one should not light in shul without a minyan. However, on Erev Shabbos, when close to the shkiah one should not wait. Nitei Gavriel (41: 9 n. 15) maintains that it is better not to recite a brocho if there is no minyan in shul yet, since as it is, some Poskim assert that no brocho is said in shul at all. (Shibulei Haleket 185, Maharam Shik Y.D. 10 quoting Chasam Sofer)
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that even a single individual can do the hadlaka in shul when late with a brocho, when a minyan will assemble there later.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/3/2017 2:09 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1227 Bench on a Bench?
|
|
|
Q. If someone is totally homeless and sleeps on a bench in the park, can he light his menora there?
A. Poskim disagree whether some type of minimal dwelling is needed for the mitzva of ner Chanuka. See above question and Rashi's opinion quoted (Shabbos 23a, d,h, Haroeh). Igrois Moishe (Y.D. 3: 14: 5) deduces from Rashi that one sleeping outside, without any shelter, as when sleeping on the desert's sand, is exempt from ner Chanuka (See question 683 in regards to reciting shehecheyanu for the Yom Tov itself). Tosafos (Suka 46a) quotes two reasons why our sages instituted a special bracha for seeing the lights of Chanuka, one of them is that it was acted for satisfying the need of those who don't have any dwelling.
Peninei Chanuka (p. 56) quotes Horav Eliashuv's zt”l opinion that soldiers sleeping in tents less that four by four amos, have to light with a brocho, if they are is at least ten tefachim high. Otherwise the tents are not considered a dwelling at all. Ner Ish Ubeisoi (4: 16 n. 34) quotes also Horav Eliashuv's zt”l ruling that when kindling in a tent without any walls, no brocho should be recited. He seems also to agree that some minimal dwelling is required. Avnei Yashfa (O.H. 5: 94: 2) agrees.
However, Tsitz Eliezer (15: 29) and Beis Sheorim (362) seem to disagree and even soldiers in their trenches should light. Adnei Paz (O.H. 3: 143) and others, after quoting the different opinions of the Rishonim and Poskim, rule that one without any abode, should try to make a shaliach or agent light for him if possible, either way he should light outside without a brocho.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 12/30/2016 3:45 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1226 Bring To Light
|
|
|
Q. Someone vacationing cross country in a trailer, can he place his menorah by the window and keep travelling during the half hour, while it is lit?
A. Orchois Chaim (quoted by Beis Yosef O.H. 677), maintains that one sailing in a boat recites a brocho for ner Chanuka. Although, Rashi (Shabbos 23a) seems to say otherwise, Avnei Yashfa (O.H. 5: 94: 2) explains that the Orchois Chaim refers to someone travelling inside a boat's cabin. Horav Tzi Pesach Frank zt”l (Mikroei Kodesh – Chanuka 18) also rules to light on a ship with a brocho. (See Igrois Moishe Y.D. 3: 14: 5 and next question).
Maharsham (4: 146) asserts that one should light Chanuka candles while travelling on a train, since there is no requirement for an established house (diras keva) as you do need for mezuza. Aruch Hashulchan (O.H. 677: 5) also maintains that you recite the brochos while the train is moving. Shearim Metzuyanim Behalacha (3: 139: 13) deduces from the above, that you are also obliged on ner Chanuka when travelling by plane. See questions 666 and 1212 on this forum as how to comply when flying. See also question 418 about kindling in a car.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that one should light the menorah with a brocho when travelling in a camper. If possible, one should stop the vehicle for the half hour of compliance with the mitzva.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised bt Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 12/30/2016 3:44 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
Important Numbers
