|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
#7 - Washing dishes with liquid dish soap & cold water on Shabbat
|
|
|
Q. Shalom,
Washing dishes with liquid dish soap & cold water on Shabbat is allow as
far as I know.
May I use a dish cloth or sponge to make the dish & tableware 100% clean?
Thank you for your previous help.
A. Washing dishes in general is only permitted if there is a possibility that
the clean dishes will be used again during this Shabbat, or the unclean dishes
may attract flies or other insects. (Shmirath Shabbat 12,1-3).
Using cold water and liquid soap is permitted, even if it creates bubbles,
(Beer Moishe 8,248). It is preferred though, to further dissolve the soap by
mixing it with water before Shabbat (Igroth Moisheh 1, 113).
You cannot use a cloth or a sponge for dishwashing on Shabbat or Yom Tov as
the absorbed water is squeezed out causing S’chita, (a Toldah or derivative
Melachah of Dosh or threshing), even if the sponge has a handle or vinyl backing
attached. Using them when totally submerged underwater is also prohibited.
Scrubbing with a brush whose fibres are soft and dense will cause S’chita
too. However if the bristles are of stiff synthetic material and are sparse
enough not to hold water then brushing is permitted. The same applies to wire
mesh or plastic mesh pads whose coils and fibres are thin and netting is widely
spaced, where the liquid is merely trapped by surface tension but not truly
absorbed. Shmirat Shabbat (ibid. note 46), quotes the explanation of Rav Shlomo
Z. Auerbach Zt’l, that in this case you do not regard the brush or pad as one
single absorbing unit, but it is more like a vessel or pipe that contains and
stores the liquid. Pouring from it, as pouring from a bottle, would not be a
Melochoh. This could be tested before Shabbos, by submerging the brush or pad in
water and observing if water drains out readily as it is removed, or has to be
squeezed out. (see 39 Melachoth sec. 3/H/g)
Rabbi Abraham Bartfeld - Revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/12/2009 12:00 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 - Commercial activity as a chessed with profits going to Tzeddakah. Can this count as Maiser money?
|
|
|
Q. Sometimes I do a commercial activity as a chessed. For a variety of reasons, I
let the person I do it for know that 100% of the money they give me will go to
tzeddakah (charity). Can we both count this as maiser money?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a pointed out that the person you do your
commercial activity for, is obviously receiving a benefit and he is paying you
for it. The only one contributing to Tzedakah is you, as you can do with that
money as you please, not him. So only you can count it as "Maaser Money". He
would be considered though as a "Mesaayeah Lidvar Mitvah", somebody who
helps his fellow do a Mitzvah.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/12/2009 12:00 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 - Does a tooth require a proper Burial?
|
|
|
Q. The dentist took out a broken tooth in 2 parts, I wanted
to keep the "broken tooth", but the dentist put in the garbage, what
does the Halacha say regarding this issue? Thank you.
A. The Mishnah in Ohaloth 3-3 mentions that "everything of a dead body is
Tameh with the exception of teeth, hair and nails. But when still attached (to
the body) they are all Tameh".
The Talmud (Berachos 5b) quotes Rabbi Yochanan saying; "this is the bone of
my tenth son", Rashi explains that Rabbi Yohanan had ten sons, all who died in
his lifetime. He would carry with him a bone of the tenth son wrapped in his
shawl as a reminder of his bereavement. (Rashbam explains that he used to
console other mourners and alleviate their suffering by demonstrating that he
had survived a tragedy greater than theirs). As of the problem of carrying an
item that transmits Tumah, and the requirement to bury any bodily part, the
Aruch, Ritvah and Rashbam mention that it was a tooth that fell while alive and
does not transmit Tumah and also does not have to be buried. It is commonly
accepted that if there is no Tumah there is also no need of burial. (see Yehuda
Yaaleh, Yoreh Deah 352 and others). However, there are dissenting opinions,
Birchos Moishe (ibid.) states that burial may be required because of "Bizayon
Hameth" (defilement of the dead) or since it is a "Isur Hanoe"
(prohibition of benefiting from the dead) see Gesher Hachaim 1 ch.16-2. Then
again, that would apply only to a cadavers tooth.
Horav Shlomo Miller Shlita's opinion is that a tooth extracted by a dentist
can be simply discarded, and that is the accepted custom.
It is interesting to point out a responsa of Rav Menashe Klein Shlita
(Mishneh Halachot 16-113) where he quotes a tradition that was common in his
country of birth, that when a child lost a milk tooth his parents would have him
throw the tooth into a mouse's hole and would have him repeat (in Yidish) "Little mouse, little mouse here you have a bone, take a tooth and give me
back iron-strong teeth". He explains this as a form of burial deriving from
their tradition of burying all parts of a human body and not wanting to stress
unnecessarily a small child on things he wouldn't comprehend. He also relates
a story of the Nodah B'yehuda, that even though his opinion is that it is
not essential to bury (a tooth), he appeared (after his death) in a dream to his
son, and instructed him to find a lost tooth of his, He miraculously found the
tooth hidden in his fathers bookshelf and buried it on his fathers Kever.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld - revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlita
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/7/2009 12:00 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 - Framing a Picture of a Rainbow
|
|
|
Q. BS"D Dear Rabbi, A child took a picture
of the the rainbow. Since it is a beautiful natural scene he would like to
frame it. Is that ok? Thanks!
A. The Gemara mentions on
Chagigah 16-a: “Whoever has no heed for the honor of his Creator, it would have been better for
him had he never come to the world. Rabi Abba said; This refers to someone who
gazes at the rainbow”. The Gemara further explains quoting a verse in Ezekiel
1,28, that the appearance of a rainbow on a rainy day is similar to the
likeness of the glory of Hashem. Tosafot Rid adds that it is because a rainbow
is an inherently ambiguous sight. One cannot clearly see where the band of one
color ends and the next one begins. Similarly, one cannot attain a clear perception of the Divine Presence.
Other reasons are to be found in Hagadic literature. Furthermore the Gemara
there mentions that whoever gazes at the
rainbow it causes his eyes to grow dim. See also Kidushin 40a.
Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim
229-1 states that it is prohibited only to gaze intently, but one that happens
to see a rainbow recites a Bracha over it. Yalkut Hagershuni (ibid. 2) indicates that the prohibition applies also
to a reflection of the rainbow as seen on the water or a mirror. Rabbi Shlomo
Miller Shlit”a expressed that the prohibition would be only on the original
natural appearance on a cloud, not on a printed picture, yet it still would not
be recommended to frame it as a picture
or art on display.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld - Revised
by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/20/2009 12:00 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 - Megule in the Refrigerator Over Night
|
|
|
Q. B"H Dear Rabbi, A person had opened a
soda can and I put it (somewhat opened) in the refrigerator over night. What is
the halachic status of the soda can drink regarding "Megule"?
A. The prohibition of “Gilui”
or uncovered is a rabbinic injunction mentioned in Mishnayot Terumoth 8:4,
Talmud Chulin 9b, Avodah Zarah 30, and other places, and was instituted as a
protection for fear that a snake drank from the liquid while it was unguarded
and cast its venom into it. This prohibition applies to wine, water and milk
that were left uncovered without supervision long enough for a snake to come
out of a hole nearby, drink from it and return to its hole unobserved. The
sages issued this prohibition based on the Biblical command of “Greatly beware
for you soul’ (Devarim 4:9). The Gemara in Chulin (ibid.) adds that a
prohibition instituted because of fear of danger has to be treated more
strictly than an ordinary prohibition. Tosafot on Avodah Zarah 35a comments
that in our days when snakes are not prevalent in settled areas, this
prohibition does not apply anymore. Based on the above, Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh
Deah 116:1, states that: In our days when snakes are uncommon it is permitted”.
However, Pischei Teshuvah
(ibid.) quotes the opinion of the Shelah that a careful person should distance
himself from them as they (Gilui prohibitions) are all mentioned in the Tur. He
mentions too that the Gaon of Vilnah was extremely cautious on this
prohibition.
P’as Hashulchan2:32, adds
that they are other hidden reasons to Gilui besides the one quoted in the
Talmud. The Be’er Moishe (Rav Moishe Stern) p. 230, mentions that nowadays only
“Yechudei Segulah” are stringent on this prohibitions, yet his own mother was
very careful not to drink water that was left uncovered all night, and that in
Eretz Yisroel in certain places (where snakes are common) the prohibition
applies. In sefer Shaarei Torath Habais p. 313, after mentioning that the Gaon
of Vilnah and the Chazon Ish were stringent, and it is indeed a quality of “Chasidut”
to do so, however it is not for everyone, and if someone is unaware of the
details of this Halacha, he should not be stringent and discard good usable
food or drink, because of the inherent prohibition of “B’al Tashchis”
(destroying usable items) which is more severe.
It should be mentioned that
in regards to Kidush on Shabbat, Mishne Berurah 272:3 mentions that wine that
was left uncovered for a long period should not be used for Kidush. Not because
of the Gilui prohibition as above, but because it is not anymore of the prime
and highest quality of wine that should be used preferably for Kidush.
As is, originally Gilui
prohibition applied only to the drinks mentioned above, even wine is only
prohibited when it is not bubbly (as during fermentation, see Tur ibid.), Even
if the type of bubbles may be different, so there should be no reason to be
stringent on a partially uncovered can of soda (as is the nature of the opened
cans today), specially when it was left inside a refrigerator. Notwithstanding
the above, it is worthwhile to mention that I know of a case were someone left,
during the summer days, an uncovered can of sweetened drink, and when he later
drank from it, he was painfully stung by a bee on the inside of his mouth.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld - Revised
by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/20/2009 12:00 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 - Wearing (carrying) glasses on Shabbat in Reshus Harabim vs hearing aides w/batteries both medical
|
|
|
|
Q. Wearing (carrying) glasses on Shabbat in Reshus Harabim vs hearing aides
w/batteries both medical. Are both they allowed?
A. Wearing prescription glasses when needed is permitted in a Reshus harabim.
Hearing aids for people who need them critically (as in hearing the incoming
traffic on the street) are permitted when turned on before Shabbos. It is
preferable to use hearing aids that fit snugly in the ear and are constantly
used and seldom removed. Hearing aids that are part of glasses are permitted as
above (Rav Shlomo Z. Auerbach Zt”l quoted in Shmirat Shabbos 32-28 and Rav
Shlomo Miller Shlit”a.
From Rabbi a. Bartfeld - Ask The Rabbi - Frum Toronto
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 12/31/2008 12:00 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 - Are Full Throttle energy drinks Kosher in Canada?
|
|
|
Q: I was recently in Vancouver and ate at the JCC which is under the BCK.
I noticed that they were selling Full Throttle energy drinks (made by
Coca Cola) but not bearing any hechsher. I do know that these drinks DO have
an OU on them in most places in the US. Is Full Throttle kosher in
Canada?
Thank you.
A: All of the Full Throttle Energy drinks (including the ones sold in
Canada) are produced in the US.
I spoke to Rabbi Morrison at the OU and
verified the flavours sold at Navas in the JCC are indeed certified kosher
even without the OU on the can.
Rabbi Mendy
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 12/31/2008 12:00 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1 - Can you explain the Akaida Yitzchok to me?
|
|
|
Q: Can you explain the Akaida Yitzchok to me? I heard he did die but didn’t go to shamayim and came back to Avraham years later.
A: In Vaikrah 26-42 the verse says: ”Then I
will remember My covenant with Jacob, and also My covenant with Isaac, and also
My covenant with Abraham I will remember”. A Midrash and Sifra quoted in
Rashi explain: “Why was there not stated “remembering” in reference to Isaac?
However the ashes of Isaac appear before Me, heaped up and lying on the altar”.
There is another version to the Sifra
which includes the word “Keilu”, “as if” it were heaped, but not in reality, as
Isaac survived the ordeal (see: Beur Stumoth Rashi p.219). Another more common interpretation is that it
refers to the ashes of the ram, who took Isaac’s place as an offering on that
altar. Some add that: “Shelucho shel odom kemoto”, “An agent acting on ones
behalf, is like oneself” (ibid.) so the ram was seen as Isaac himself, though
it would be questionable to apply that principle to animals.
Another Halachick principle quoted is “Kol
Haomed Lisrof Kesaruf Domi”, “Anything that stands to be consumed by fire is
like it has been consumed already” (Ikahen Peer, Vayerah). A term used thorough
the Talmud, so halachakly, Isaac was seen as already consumed by the fire.
A more spiritual interpretation is given in
the Zohar: “When Isaac was offered on the altar his Neshamah (soul) of this
world departed. But as Abraham recited the Bracha of “Mechaiei Hametim”, a new
Neshamah of the World to Come was given to him”. So in that sense, Isaac did
depart partially from this world. (Bosee Learmonee p. 100)
On that line, Maharam M’pano (Chikur Hadin
2-8) adds: that from the departing soul of Isaac the ram acquired a physical
entity. As this ram was formed at the
very end of the days of creation (see Pirkei Avoth ch. 5), it originally had
only a potential existence, it materialized during the Akeidah in conjunction
with the departing Neshamah of Isaac, so the ashes were in that sense actually
Isaacs. This gives special meaning to the Midrash quoted by Rashi (Bereshit
22-13) that: “On every service (on the ram done by Abraham), he would pray and
say: let it be Your will, that this (service) should be considered, as if it
was performed on my son”
Rabbi Boruch M. Ezrahi (Birchas Mordechai –
Bechukotay) construes the following elucidation: “This (the ashes of Isaac that
appear before Hashem) teaches us that sacrifice creates its own reality. Isaac’s selflessness, abnegation, and will to
sacrifice, even if it did not materialize, generated a new certainty by
itself. It is that spiritual
reality what appeared before Hashem.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 12/26/2008 12:00 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
Important Numbers
