|
|
|
|
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
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
|
|
|
|
|
# 815 Enjoying the Fruit of Your Labor
|
|
|
Q. I have a few cherry trees in my back yard and we are now harvesting the new fruits. Do you make a Shecheyanu Bracha on them since you can find cherries all year round? Is the fact that they are dear to me since I planted the trees and rejoice on collecting the fruits of my labor enough reason to bless shecheyanu?
A. Mishna Berura (225: 18) rules that on does not recite shehecheyanu on seasonal fruits that can be stored and kept fresh all year round, unless there is a significant difference between the fresh ones and the ones kept in store (See also Piskey Teshuvos 225: 2)
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that the fact that one has an emotional attraction to the fruits he himself farmed and rejoices eating them, is not enough of a reason to recite shehecheyanu, unless they are significant better or different than the ones available all the time.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/26/2015 3:24 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 814 Waiting for Redemption
|
|
|
Q. A woman gave birth to a baby boy in Yerushalayim on Sunday night י"ג סיון, fifteen minutes after shkia. At the time of the Pidyon Haben the parents and baby will be iy"h in Lakewood. According to the shita that Pidyon Haben is after 29 days 12 hrs etc. the zman of pidyon will be either Tuesday morning (י"ג תמוז) or Monday night (taking into consideration the 7 hr difference between EY and the US). According to the opinion that one waits until day 31, the pidyon would be either Tuesday or Wednesday. The shaila is, being that delaying the pidyon to the next day would constitute a ביטול מצוות עשה, when is the proper time to do the pidyon? In the event that the pidyon is pushed until Wednesday, is it proper to wait until after Chatzos to do the pidyon as many are נוהג?
A. Most Poskim maintain that the pidyon haben should be done on the thirty first day (Mishna Berura 339: 27 et. al.), since he was born during the shkiah we would have to wait for the later day. See also Betzel Hachochmo (1: 75-76) who avers that when the bechor travels by different time zones, where days may be longer or shorter, we wait until thirty complete days have passed on the bechor himself. Other Poskim remain in doubt. (Sheorim Hametzuyonim 164: 6, Yisroel Vehazmanim 21)
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that to comply with the different doubts and rulings the pidyon should be done on Wednesday morning. He maintains that there is no need to delay after chatzos to do it berov am or with a larger crowd.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/19/2015 5:31 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 813 A Stirring Shailah
|
|
|
Q. I recently heard in Rav Miller's name that there is no איסור
הגסה (prohibition of stirring) in a crock
pot even before removing the insert as long as the food is
(completely cooked) מבושל כל צרכו. I found this
quite surprising, is this accurate?
A. Mishna Berura (318: 113) quotes Beis Yosef who permits extracting well cooked food from a pot still on the fire, although Eliahu Rabba is stringent. In regards to stirring he quotes in n. 118 and in Sharei Tzion (ibid. 136) the Kol Bo that thorough mixing of well cooked food is prohibited when the pot is still on the fire. However, Chazon Ish (Shabbos 37: 15) permits when the fire was left uncovered and therefore the pot cannot be removed, since one will not be able to return it to the fire. Igrois Moshe (O.H. 4: 74: 9) is stringent even in regards to stirring a heavy pot that cannot be easily removed from the fire. The reason quoted is that there may be left small still uncooked pieces in the pot.
In regards to a crock pot, Thirty Nine Melochos (2: p. 646) permits extracting from it when left without separation of the insert, as one would not be able to return it to the crock pot.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that when the food is already well cooked, even when the pot is still on the fire, non-extraction constitutes a distant stringency since stirring crock pots is not a common way of cooking and the presence of small still uncooked pieces is unusual. Therefore one may extract food from the crock pot itself and when needed for food removal, perform also light stirring.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/19/2015 5:29 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 812 Safe Flyers
|
|
|
Q. Re- on question; When a deceased is being transported from Canada for burial in Israel, is it permitted or advisable to delay the kevura for the sake of a safer Halacha environment for the Cohanim travelling on the same air plane to Israel? El Al provides a Halacha recommended caskets for minimizing the tumah prohibition involved.
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that indeed it is correct to delay the kevura and fly by El Al in order to avoid or at least minimize the inherent prohibitions for the Cohanim on board by using the special caskets they provide. The above is usually not available when travelling with another airline.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/19/2015 5:23 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 811 Medical Dressings
|
|
|
Q. I am a patient in hospital. I am usually dressed in hospital issue clothing, which consists of a shirt and trousers, basically pajamas. I put my tzitzis on over my shirt in the daytime.
There is a shul in the hospital. If I was home, I would be horrified to be in shul in pajamas. May I enter the hospital shul in my hospital pajamas and daven, or is it better to daven in my room (without a minyan, etc.) It somehow seems to be a bizayon for the kedushah of the Beis HaKneses to be there in pajamas. And just because my body is sick, does my soul need to become desensitized to the need to show reverence for He Who dwells there?
A. Shulchan Aruch (98: 4) opines that one should don befitting and pleasant, dedicated clothing for engaging in tefila, similar to the use of special clothing by the Cohen when performing service at the Beis Hamikdash.
However when that requisite directly conflicts with the necessity to daven in a shul with a minyan, Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a maintains that the minyan and shul requirement preempts the clothing prerequisite. He recommended that the patient wear a befitting robe, akin to what people often use even for davening, commonly known as a house bekeshe or similar.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/19/2015 5:20 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 810 No-Name Bracha
|
|
|
Q. Re- last questions Someone that davens nusach Ashkenaz-Sefard (Chasidish) is he obligated to answer Omain after Mekadeish Shmoi Berabim, when there is no mention of Hashem's name?
If he is not obligated, is he allowed to answer Omain at the conclusion of that bracha? How about Boruch Sheptaruni that people recite without the Shem?
A. As mentioned in prior question Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 215: 2) rules that one is obligated to answer omein after hearing a brocho. However Poskim rule that this incumbency is limited to a brocho that contains at least one of Hashem's names.
Shaarei Efraim (4: 25) rules that in places where the bar-mitzva blessing of baruch sheptarani is said without mentioning Hashem's name, omein is usually omitted, although it could still be said.
So it would seem from the fact that one answers omein at the end of birchas hazimun after the meals (Shulchan Aruch O.H. 198: 1) or after the chorachamons of birchas hamozon.
Betzel Hachochmo (5: 89 and 90) differentiates between brochos. The ones that were established from the onset to be recited with Hashem's name, if the name was omitted there is no point in saying omein although it is still permitted. The above applies also to doubtful brochos where Hashem's name is omitted. Another category would be brochos that were constituted to be recited without Hashem's name, on these one should answer omein after them.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar, he added that one may answer omein to these brochos as one should after hearing any blessing. brocho or tefila said by or to an individual.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/12/2015 6:27 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 809 In Heavens Name
|
|
|
Q. If I hear someone make a bracha, perhaps the chazan in shul, and he mispronounces Hashem's Name as is unfortunately common, either by saying Adinoi or Adeenoi, instead of Ado-noi,
3) May one say Boruch Hu Uvoruch Shemo after the mispronounced Name?
4) Or is it perhaps forbidden to bless such a name?
A. Answering “Boruch Hu Uvoruch Shemo” after hearing Hashem's name in a brocho is not mentioned in the Talmud, however, it became tradition in many communities, but not all. Therefore it is omitted when one is in the middle of a prayer he may not interrupt.
Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a pointed out, as an example, that those who follow Brisker minhogim do not answer that praise at all. As mentioned in prior question (808), after the fact one complies with a brocho that contains one of Hashem's mispronounced names, therefore, one may also answer this corresponding praise.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/12/2015 2:55 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#808 Omain in Vain?
|
|
|
Q. If I hear someone make a bracha, perhaps the chazan in shul, and he mispronounces Hashem's Name as is unfortunately common, either by saying Adinoi or Adeenoi, instead of Ado-noi, I have four (see next shaile) questions:
1) Is one obligated to say Omein at the conclusion of that bracha?
2) If he is not obligated, may he answer Omein at the conclusion of that bracha?
A. Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 215: 2) rules that one is obligated to answer omein after hearing a brocho. How much of the brocho he has to listen to in order to answer, is debated by the Poskim. Mishna Berura (ibid. 6) seems to agree with the opinion (Eliahu Rabba and Chaye Adam) that just listening to the end qualifies, as long as one knows what brocho was said.
Shulchan Aruch (ibid. 4) also avers that when reciting an unneeded brocho (and obviously one in vain), no omein should be answered. Biur Halocho (ibid.) maintains that when in doubt answering omein is not obligatory, but could be said.
Mishna Berura (214: 4) also maintains that even if one omitted totally one of the two names of Hashem recited in most brochos, he complies with the brocho after the fact. In Shaarei Tzion (ibid. 2 and 3) he further explains that even mentioning one of the other seven names or a name in another language is also bedieved enough.
Piskei Teshuvos (1: 5: 6) quotes from Nimukei Orach Chaim, that although one should be very careful to pronounce Hashem's names correctly, articulating the daled of A-doinoi with a chirik, sounding as A-dinoi, may be acceptable after the fact.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that all individuals, but specially the sh'liach tzibur should see to pronounce properly every word of the tefila and particularly every one of Hashem's names, however, in your case, omein should be answered, since one complies with the brocho after the fact.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/12/2015 2:46 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 807 Prohibited Ta'am Kiker
|
|
|
Q. Is it correct that when lo alenu an ambulance comes to pick up a sick person or there is an emergency such as a fire, the passersby and curious neighbors all concentrate to watch the pain and misfortune of another person at the time they may be very sensitive and add embarrassment and humiliation to their hurt? Should not the Rabbis educate the olam on this important issue?
A. Indeed Poskim rule sharply against those who out of offensive curiosity and nosiness, congregate around a victim or his property in times of distress. Kehilos Ya'a kov (Baba Basra 5) explains that chezek reiah or damage done by gawking or staring into someones property involves three different issues; damage done to the individual, to his property and the prohibition of inflicting pain or embarrassment.
Chashukei Chemed (Baba Basra 60a) and Mishpetei Sholom (p. 83) add that if our Sages permitted Biblical prohibitions for the sake of settling down the mind of the endangered ill, (O.H. 320: 1) certainly the one who causes anguish and distress to the afflicted, transgresses severely.
Chasukei Chemed further rules that all unnecessary spectators and gawkers including children should be removed immediately and instructed that if they are truly concerned for the welfare of the stricken, they should promptly recite Tehilim for them somewhere else.
Sidras Hamidos (p. 165) points out to the Mishna in Avos (4: 23) "Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: do not attempt to see (your fellow) at the time of his ruin (or downfall – kilkeloso)." Although, “kilkeloso” is interpreted by Rashi, Bartenura and others as sinfulness, Beis Avos and others translate the term as misfortune.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is similar.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/5/2015 6:22 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 806 Good Grief
|
|
|
Q. If one is in the year of aveilus, is he permitted to buy A) a cottage to be used as a vacation home or B) any other investment property that may also serve as a vacation home?
Thank you
A. The period of avelus for one's parents, based on the obligation to honor them, extends to twelve months in regards to attending festive occasions and even for wearing new clothes (Remo 389: 3). Da'as Kedoshim (7) rules that making new clothes is also forbidden not just wearing the new clothes.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that if the main reason of the buying of the cottage is to have a good, usable investment while owning a functional vacation home too, it is permitted. However, if one is not very concerned about the investments value, rather the primary purpose of the purchase is for the use of it as a vacation facility, one should avoid buying it during the year of mourning.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/5/2015 1:45 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 805 Family Discount
|
|
|
Q. What if he (one being paid for reciting kadish – see prior question 802) has to say kadish for his own parent?
A. Chelkas Ya'akov (3: 157) rules that one is allowed to accept the kadish recitation for someone else at the same time he is already saying for his parent. He recommends to use part of the money received to purchase additional candles for the benefit of the soul of his departed father. However, he advises not to continue reciting into the twelfth month after the demise of his parent, as that would be insulting to the memory of his progenitor. (See Kol Bo on Avelus p.376, Mourning in Halacha p.363).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that the obligation of a son is to recite at least one kadish per tefilah. If he has complied with that, any additional available kadesishim could be said for other deceased.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/5/2015 1:42 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 804 You Get What You Pay For?
|
|
|
Q. I recently heard in the Daf that one of the Gedolim (I think it was Rav Shternbuch) recommended to say in the mi sheberach after one gets an aliya and offers to give a donation, the word “Lekesheyiten” or “Baabur Sheyiten” instead of “baabur shenodar” since once he says beli neder, there is no neder and no motivation for him to pay the neder anymore, unless the brocho depends on his actual giving. Does Rav Shlomo agree? Can one change the already established Mi Sheberach nusach?
A. Teshuvos Vehanhogos (2: 476) rules that even when someone clearly states at the time of donating for a mi sheberach that this is done beli neder – without an oath, he is still liable to pay the tzdaka he accepted on himself. Therefore, he implemented that the gabay should mention that the brocho will commence at the time he delivers the monies he committed to.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that one should maintain the established nusach of the mi sheberach.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/5/2015 1:35 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 803 A Blessing in Disguise II
|
|
|
Q. Re- question 760 ( A Blessing in Disguise) on saying brochos in English for the purpose of kiruv. If one is in doubt whether to say a brocho or no, can it be said in English?
A. As we mentioned on question 760 in case of need, when one lacks the know how, one may recite brochos in other established languages (Shulchan Aruch O.H. 62:2, 185:1, 187:1, 206: 3, Igrois Moshe O.H. 2: 49). However, Poskim disagree if when someone is in doubt if he has to recite a brocho or no, (He may not remember if already said or no, or if is in doubt if he ate the right amount) if one should recite the blessing in Aramaic or any other language.
Some (Maharsham 1: 205, Rav Poalim O.H. 3: 7, Pnei Yehoshua - Brochos 12a) maintain that one may recite and there is no prohibition on mentioning Hashem's name in vain. Aruch Hashulachan ( O.H. 202: 3) adds that one should then keep in his mind that if he is liable to recite the brocho, his intent is so. If not it is to be only a praise.
However Rabi Akiva Eiger zt”l (M. K. 25) maintains that since for the purpose of oaths and promises, Hashem's names in other languages are valid, one equally transgresses, if they are said in vain. Similar opinions are the Ran in beginning of Nedarim, Chavas Daas (Y.D. 110, Emek Hashaila (Yisro Sheilta 53: 2), Kaf Hachaim (167: 70), Pischei Teshuva (Y.D. 328, 1), Igrois Moshe (O.H. 4: 40: 27)
There are disagreements as to what the opinion of the Chasam Sofer is (See Maharam Shick – Sefer Hamitzvos 69, Shem Mishimon Y.D. 24).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that one should not say the full brocho in Aramaic or other languages when in doubt if he recited a brocho after eating. However, one may recite it without mentioning the Rach-mana name, but he should include Malka Dealma (King of the Universe) in the blessing.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/5/2015 1:27 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 802 Kadish for the Oilom?
|
|
|
Q. Can one person who is being paid for saying kadish, do so for other people at the same time and does he have to inform them?
A. Many Poskim rule that one may accept payment to recite kadish for a number of deceased (Even Ya'akov 50, Be'er Moshe 4: 97, see also Dovev Meishorim 2: 15, Minchas Yitzchok 3: 144, et al.).
However, Igrois Moshe (Y.D. 1: 254) maintains that one should recite at least one kadish a day for each of the niftorim. Therefore, the number of departed he can accept to recite kadish for them is limited to the number of kadeishim he can recite each day. Nevertheless, he may also attend a second minyan or include the kadish after learning in the list (ibid.). He should also keep a roster of the names of the deceased and mention them before each particular kadish.
Igrois Moshe (ibid.) also opines that he has to inform each of his clients that he is only reciting one kadish per day and that in Halacha it suffices. Unless, it is already well known fact at that venue, that this is the normal procedure of the people hired to recite kadish. (See also Kol Bo p. 376, Mourning in Halacha p. 363).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is similar to the Igrois Moshe.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/2/2015 3:49 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 801 Lo Yoda Mordechai
|
|
|
Q. After hearing our Baal Korei attempt to read Mordechai's name in the Megillah with the pronunciation of the Chataf Komatz under the Dales, I realized that he was pronouncing it like a Komatz. Ostensibly, a Chataf Komatz should not be pronounced like a Komatz, otherwise there would be a Komatz. (Is this correct?)
A. Minchas Shai (on Chomesh Megilos p. 127, Neviim Uksuvim p. 154, and other locations.) mentions that some maintain that there is a chataf-komatz under the letter daled of Mordechai.
Piskey Sh'muos (630) quotes Horav Sh. Z. Auerbach zt”l who opines that some would read it with a chataf-komatz, and that was tradition in Shaarei Chessed. However, he mentions that Horav Ch. Kanievski and Horav N. Karelitz Shlit”a disagree.
Boruch Mebonim (p. 135) explains that the tradition of some of Bnei S'farad was that only certain Mordechai names were read with a chataf-kometz)
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that those who do follow this tradition have to be careful to pronounce I correctly, as the change in articulation is slight.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 5/31/2015 2:12 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 800 A Lift With a Real Lift
|
|
|
Q. If I drive to the supermarket (see prior question #799) can I give my neighbors a lift when I know that they are buying non-kosher meat?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'”a opinion is that you should still help them but offer to pay the difference between kosher and non-kosher meat. They will surely get the well delivered kind message and most likely pay themselves for the kosher meat.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 5/29/2015 4:02 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 799 Don't Bug the Neighbors
|
|
|
Q. I help my non-religious elderly neighbors by doing shopping for them. When requested can I buy raspberries for them? If I instruct them how to wash them properly and inspect them, can I trust them that they will follow through, or should I better just tell them that I could not find any?
A. The prohibition of "Lifney Iver" or "Placing a stumbling block before the blind" is interpreted by our sages as: facilitating or helping others commit a Torah violation. (Talmud Avoda Zarah 6b) This prohibition is codified in Shulchan Aruch in several places such as Y.D. 148:5 pertaining the assisting of a Gentile in committing idolatry and in Y.D. 240:20 in regards to a father's proscription of physically chastising older children, as this will only entice them to hit back, resulting in a capital offense. Tosafos, Ramban and Ran (ibid.) and other Poiskim, are of the opinion that this prohibition is limited to cases where the recipient is unable to transgress without the giver's assistance. If, however, the idolater could reach the item independently, then one may hand it to him despite the certainty of the ensuing violation.
However as Tosafos (Shabbos 3a) and Shach (Y.D.151:6) mention, there is a discrete rabbinical prohibition against helping one violate Mitzvos, called "mesayea lidvar aveiro" ("helping someone commit a sin"). Igrois Moishe (Y.D. 1,72) deals with the question of mesayea when someone would perform the transgression nonetheless. (See question 207 in this forum)
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that in this particular case it is worth doing an act of kindness by washing the raspberries properly for them, while explaining to your neighbors the importance of cleanliness, insect non-contamination and keeping kosher. An act of altruistic graciousness will go a long way in achieving effective kiruv.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 5/29/2015 3:45 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 798 Privacy @ Work?
|
|
|
Q. Can an employer check the e mails of the people that work for him and suspects they may use his computers and paid time for their own private benefit?
A. Avnei Choshen (p. 568) mentions that Rav Chaim Valoshener zt”l instructed the secretary of the yeshiva to open all the students mail; to make sure that the bnei yeshiva would maintain their Torah-righteous level. This “heter” is widely used today by many yeshivos and educational institutions.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that it is indeed permitted since the hired people understand that this may be part of the normal expected office procedure for maintaining proficiency
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 5/29/2015 3:16 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 797 Just the Fax.
|
|
|
Q. Is it permitted to pick up an open fax from the office's fax machine, to see for whom it is, since you would be reading the information of someone else?
A. See answer above in regards to e mails. Hilchos K'tanos (1: 59) prohibits the reading of a letter that was left in an unsealed open envelope. (Leket Hakemach 334, Kol Gadol 120)
However some Poskim (Chevel Nachalaso 84) maintain that faxes by their nature are sent by individuals who may not care who will read them. They compare them to post-cards on which the Aruch Hashulchan (Y.D. 334: 21) sides that there is no cherem since the sender seems not to care. (Miyam Hachalcha;2: 61, maintains that although there is no cherem on reading other people's post-cards, one should morally abstain from doing so when not necessary).
Chasukei Chemed (Bava Basra 60b) debates if faxes are included on the cherem. He suggests that people do mind who reads them but they may not have another alternative. He remains in doubt.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that if there is a cover letter, he does not need see the fax itself. If there isn't, he should only read the address.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 5/29/2015 3:08 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 796 Return To Sender
|
|
|
Q. Since my business e mail address is similar to someone else, I sometimes get sent this individual's e mails by mistake. (I know it is not for me because I have no dealings with the sender. I have also complained to the sender, and for a while it worked but then he does the same mistake again) In order to see if it is an important message, is it permitted to open it, and reply so the sender who would then forward the mail to the right address, or would that be included in the Charem of Rabennu Gershon?
A. At the end of the Responsa Maharam, on the list of the decrees instituted by Rabbeinu Gershom Meor Hagola, he includes the cherem or ban against reading other people's mail. However he adds that if the letter was discarded, it is permissible (See also Kol Bo s. 116, Beer Hagola Y.D. 334). This cherem is still effective today, Poskim write that it should be considered with the same graveness as any other Torah prohibition. (Chikekei Lev Y.D. 49 debates whether three biblical prohibitions are involved). It was embraced and accepted at the time that it was issued by all Jewish communities throughout the world. No time limitation placed on this ban (See Shiltei Givorim – Shavuos c. 5, Chevel Nachalaso 84)
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that e mails are similar to any other letter and are included in the cherem, since people do mind if others read their private e mails. (A similar ruling is quoted in the name of Horav Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg zt”l at ohrsameach.org)
In this particular case, when the e mail was sent by mistake to the wrong recipient due to the similarity of the addresses, Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that it may be correct for the erroneous receiver to open the e mail in order to reply to the sender and make him aware that it was sent to the wrong address if no other option is available. However, it would be better not to open the mail, and just send a new e mail to the sender, making him aware of the error done (the e mail would be identified by the date and time it was sent. Another possibility available in some servers, is to click on the adjacent box to the e mail and without opening, forward or return to sender)
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Millers Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 5/29/2015 3:00 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
Important Numbers
