|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
# 2527 The Naked Truth
|
|
|
Q. I'm a yeshiva bochur in a choshuve yeshiva, thanks to my Zaidy shlit'a. My parents are a bit liberal and we have two large male dogs at home that roam around at their will all over the place and also join us for meals, including Shabbos and Yom Tov.
My question is, since these dogs obviously show all their body parts, is there a problem saying a brocho or divrei Torah when facing them?
A. Talmud (Brochos 25b) rules that one may not read the shema in front of the nakedness of any human. However, it is permitted in front of an animal such as a donkey. (Pri Chodosh O.H. 75: 4, Pri Megodim 75: 1, Ben Ish Chai - P. Bo, et al). Rivavos Efraim (O.H. 5: 44) maintains that even lechatchila, on the onset, it is doubtful that one should be stringent.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is to be lenient.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/7/2020 1:05 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2526 Keep On Davening
|
|
|
Q. Dear Rabbi,
I was distracted today (Rosh Chodesh Shvat), and right after kaddish before Musaf I started davening shmoneh esrei with my tfillin on. I said the first brocha all the ways until "Elokeinu", when I realized that I stil had my tfillin on! I wasn't sure whether it was better to continue davening with my tfillin on, so as to not be mafsik in the middle of shmone esrei, or to take off my tfillin at that point in time, and continue davening after my tfillin were removed. I decided to go with the latter option, as it also had the maileh of not being porush min ha tzibur. Was this the correct decision?
Furthermore, if the etzem reason for not wearing tfillin is because of "keser" during kedusha, would it have made more sense, mikur hadin, to finish private shmonei esrei, than take off tfilin?
Please advise!!
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that one should not be mafsik, interrupt or disrupt the amida. Halacha considers a hefsek in shemone essrei as very severe and prejudicious, as Shulcha Aruch (O.H 104: 1) rules; that even if a King greets one while davening the amida, he should not interrupt and answer.
Although, one should indeed stop, if he is committing a sinful act during the amida, such as praying in an unclean place, davening musaf during Rosh Chodesh does not qualify as such.
(See also question 2397, regarding one that realizes during shemone ezreh, that he is wearing a hat that is not his own).
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/7/2020 12:31 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2525 Made by the Maid
|
|
|
Q. Our maid, without consulting us disconnected the cholent crock pot before she left after cleaning Friday night. On the morning when she returned, she again on her own, reconnected it again. Is it permitted to eat the cholent?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that although the cholent was already cooked and it is likely considered a maachol yovesh or dry food, and once cooked not usually subject to further bishul, that would still be a questionable reason to permit it. in this case.
However, it is still permitted. This is due to the maid reconnecting the crock pot mainly for her own sake. Either to avoid being scolded for having the cholent turning out cold, or since she may also be partaking from it as part of her meal.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/4/2020 2:37 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2524 A Stiff Drink
|
|
|
Q. If someone has for the Shabbos night meal only one challa or non at all, can he beshas hadechak and in need, make kiddush on the mezonos (cakes, doughnuts, etc.) he is using for lechem mishne, (see question above), if no wine or other proper chamar medina drink is available?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that if one eats a proper amount of kevias seuda of mezonos, besides complying with the lechem mishna requirement, he can also recite kiddush on the available mezonos.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/4/2020 2:26 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2523 Let Them Eat Cake
|
|
|
Q. When traveling we realized that for the Shabbos day meal we only had one challa. Can one in such a case use a cake or doughnut as the adjoining lechem mishna?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that if one eats a proper amount of kevias seuda of mezonos he complies with lechem mishna (See similar opinions in Shaarei Teshuva 274: 2, Kaf Hachaim ibid. 6, Ketzos Hashulchan 82: 5, etc.). In this case placing that amount of mezonos next to the challa can be regarded as lechem mishna.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/4/2020 2:25 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2522 Still Immersed in the Immersion Question
|
|
|
Q. Thank you for answering (question 2510). Re the last paragraph, my question was concerning fancy glass or metal dishes that are definitely meant to be reused. Can one eat directly from them if such a platter was sent for a simcha? Does it make a difference if it is considered a serving dish rather than an individual eating dish?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that although these utensils are fancy glass or metal dishes that are definitely meant to be reused, since you are only using them now to take and eat the food already on them, this first time you use them, they do not require tevila.
However, since they were already immersed in a questionable tevila at the store, (see question 2510), for future use. you should immerse them without a brocho or together with others that do require a brocho.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/4/2020 1:40 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2521 Parevenu?
|
|
|
Q. Good afternoon Rabbi. I saw this (see attached picture) in the grocery store and I was thinking, I could make Kosher cheeseburgers.
Is there any prohibition to do this? (Attached is an image of a package of Beyond Burger, containing plant - based burgers produced by Beyond Meat).
A. Before considering the use of this vegetable based meat substitute with cheese, one must firstly ascertain that it is a kosher-pareve certified product.
On question 1223 regarding kosher cultured meat, that the Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a considers pareve, and why is there no prohibition of ma’aris ayin? (wrong appearances), we wrote:
"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 and therefore pareve,” there is no more reason to prohibit it, than there is in the case of kosher pareve milk or soya vegetarian sausages." (Or kosher margarine or pepperoni pizza).
The Rov mentioned that although the above is permitted in principle, one should put effort on achieving kedusha and holiness, by abstaining from unnecessary and peculiar eating pleasures.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/31/2020 3:23 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2520 An Open Book to Forgetfulness
|
|
|
Q. I have seen that when some people stop learning in the beis hamedresh to go temporarily outside, they turn the sefer being learned around, so the upside now faces the top of the table, is that proper?
Others use another closed sefer and place it on top of the exposed written text being learned, in order to cover it, is that correct?
A. Shach and Taz (Y.D. 277: 1) quote Bach and Yerushalmi Megila, that the one who stops learning and goes to another room, leaving an open sefer, will forget his learning. They quote Cabbala sources which teach, that an angel named Shed (the first letters of Shomer Dafim or the one watching over the Torah pages), will become empowered and make the one who so behaves forget the Torah he has learned.
The above is based on Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 277: 1) which rules that if after writing a page of a Sefer Torah, if the ink is wet, to avoid dust falling on the wet letters while they dry, one should avoid turning around that page around, as this is considered disrespectful and derech bizayon. One should rather leave the wet page up and cover it with a hanging cloth until it dries.
Mishna Berura (154: 31) advises not to use another sefer to cover the first open one.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that one leaving temporarily the room should indeed not maintain the sefer being learned open. He should close it (he may leave a page mark to find the place).
If need be, to keep his seat from being taken by others, he may just leave the book cover open.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/31/2020 9:44 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2519 Siyum Partners in Torah
|
|
|
Q. We are celebrating an important Siyum Hashas for our group of lerners in a few days. We have invited a large crowd to a catered seuda that is also a fundraising event essential for our shul.
Sadly l'a our Maggid Shiur became severely ill and will not be able to attend. We chose the most and best learned attendant to the shiur to perform the siyum in his place. The shaila is that not he or anyone else has learned the totality of Shas, besides the Maggid Shiur. Can we make now a siyum when no one can claim to have learned it all by himself? Likely all together yes, but how can one stand up and say "As I have finished ...?" Moving the siyum at this late stage is not an option.
A. On question 195 regarding a fleishig siyum on the Nine Days, if each one in the group learned only a few dafim leiluy nishmas a friend and then they joined for the siyum, We wrote: "The source for celebrating the conclusion of the study of a tractate of the Talmud is found on Talmud Shabbat (118b): Abaye said: “May I be rewarded for that when I saw that a disciple had completed a tractate, I made it a festive day for the scholars”. I would seem from this saying that we are considering the study of an entire tractate by at least one individual, although many may be learning together. Igrois Moishe (O.H. 1:157) proving why we may do a siyum banquet on the termination of a mitzva that involves a lengthy time span, quotes the Talmud and Rashbam in Baba Basra (121). It mentions that the 15 day of Av was considered a day of rejoicing, as it marked the conclusion of the cutting of the wood needed for the altar. Igrois Moishe explains that it was not made a compulsory day of celebration or an occasion that requires a seudas mitzva, since no single individual cut the whole wood supply required, rather it was done by many.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit”a opinion is that indeed, we require at least one individual to complete the whole tractate, and then the many who are friends or related acquaintances, may join for the seudas mitzvah."
On the present question, Horav Shlomo Millers Shlit'a opinion is that although there may not be an obligation to make a siyum, one may still celebrate the Siyum Hashas, even if none have learned the complete Shas, since they are all partners in one single mitzva and endeavor. It is similar indeed to the conclusion of the cutting of the wood needed for the altar done by many, that was declared a Tom Tov. Additionally, it is very likely that at least one of the participants finished a complete tractate of the Talmud.
The Rov added that when the learners put indeed all their effort and exert themselves to come to a daf for over seven years, they do became one unit and it may indeed counted as if all of them have together finished Shas, which may not be the case regarding a siyum on the Nine Days, if each one in the group learned only a few dafim for being able to eat a fleishig meal.
The Rov recommended that the nusach of the words at the siyum should be said in plural, including all the learners.
Also public recognition should be given to the Magid Shiur, who may be watching it from his location. Additionally, Tehilim and a mi sheberach should be recited by all, for his refuah shleima
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/31/2020 9:35 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2518 Pull Down a Chair?
|
|
|
Q. Does a son inherit the seat acquired by his father, or assigned to him as a tribute to his eminence, after the death of his father? (See question 2517 above).
A. Poskim explain that the Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 240: 2), seems to infer that calling one's father by his first name, is prohibited even after his demise. However, seating on his seat is permitted after a father's death. (R' Ch. Plagee in Chaim Beyad Y.D. 125: 48, Miyaam Hachalacha 2: 20).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that as far as the seat acquired by his father is concerned. it will mainly depend on the conditions and stipulations that normally the shul maintains for seat acquisitions.
Regarding the seat assigned to his father as a tribute to his eminence as a Talmid Chacham or as a tribute to his distinction in any other areas, it will depend if indeed the son fulfills similarly those same conditions.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/30/2020 12:55 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2517 On The edge of Your Seat
|
|
|
Q. Is it permitted for a son to seat himself on the place assigned to or acquired by his father in shul, when the father is not attending?
A. Talmud (Kidushun 31b) and Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 240: 2) rule that a son should not seat on his father's place, as part of the mitzva of fearing and honoring one's father.
Binyan Olam (Y.D. 47) maintains that the above depends on the reason why this particular seat was assigned to the father. If it was acquired by him via the payment of a fee, the son may also use it.
However, if it was allotted to the farther as an honor to his eminence as a Talmid Chacham or as a tribute to his distinction in any other areas, the son should not use that seat.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/30/2020 12:52 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2516 A Mohel "Mit a Farmachten Moil"
|
|
|
Q. Could an onen (one who lost a close relative, before burial) be the mohel at a bris, if no one else is available?
A. Chassam Soffer (C.M. 39) maintains that if the body of the deceased has already been transferred to the Chevra Kaddisha, it is permitted if no one else is available and the burial cannot be done before.
Yehuda Yaaleh (356), writes that in such a case the father or the sandak should recite the needed brochos.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/30/2020 12:39 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2515 Figure that Speech
|
|
|
Q. Can an onen (one who lost a close relative, before burial) partake at the seuda (meal) of the bris of his grandchild? If yes can he be asked to speak publicly. (See question 2514 above).
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's opinion is that although an onen in principle can eat a meal with others, he should abstain from attending a happy celebration as in the case of a seudas simcha fpr a bris, where he is bound to be greeted and saluted with expressions of joy and mazal tov.
He should also not speak at the seuda even if he just enters for delivering his words or in the shul after the bris, since he is prohibited from learning and teaching divrei Torah. This applies even when the body of the deceased has already been transferred to the Chevra Kaddisha, (See Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341: 1).
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/30/2020 12:37 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2514 A Sad State of Fair
|
|
|
Q. Can an onen (one who lost a close relative, before burial) be a sandak at the bris of a grandchild?
A. Chidushim Uviurim (11) maintains that if the body of the deceased has already been transferred to the Chevra Kaddisha, it is permitted. (See also Mourning in Halacha 5: 46).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar. The Rov added that the onen should depart after the bris and not stay to be greeted with mazal tovs and brochos.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/30/2020 12:34 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2513 A Shaila In Hot Water?
|
|
|
Q. Is it permitted during Shabbos to open or increase the water dripping into a humidifier connected to the heating furnace. The warm air rushes by a metal net or mesh, that spreads the droplets of water into the air exiting the furnace and it evaporates into it. The temperature of the air at that point is less than 40 C. Is this allowed?
Is it permitted to add water to the tank of a cold-water room humidifier, that has some water but needs more to keep working the whole day?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that in regard to adding water to the tank of a cold-water room humidifier, in case of need it is permitted, since it is already working and no bishul or cooking of the water is involved.
However, regarding the humidifier units connected and feeding moisture to a hot air furnace, although some furnaces at some points of their heating cycle may indeed be forcing air that is bellow 40 C at the area next to the humidifier, most heating units are way above that temperature when close to the ignited area and usually the humidifier unit is adjacent. Therefore, the Rov maintains that during Shabbos no changes should be done to the amount of water entering the unit. Nevertheless, it is permitted during Yom Tov.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/24/2020 3:33 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2512 Add And Adapt Adam?
|
|
|
Q. We are B'H a baal teshuva family, and Hashem just graced us with a baby boy. We want to know if we can give the name of a dear deceased grandfather named Adam to our newborn. Adam was always of great help to us and we want to honor his memory. Is that uncommon name permitted?
A. Mabit (Teshuvos 1: 276) maintains that on the onset, one should not use names of individuals that were alive before Avrohom Avinu, for naming a child. The above would include Adam and Noach. (See Pischei Teshuvos 265: 6).
However, Birkei Yosef (Y.D. 265: 10) quoting Knessess Hagedola, questions that ruling, since we find Sages that were named with those ancient names, such as Binyamin bar Yefes (Brochos 33a) or Akavia ben Mahalalel (Avos 3: 1).
However, Teshuvos Vehanhogos (1: 605), writes that he never heard of one being called Adam, although the name of his wife Chava is common. He deduces that there must be a valid reason why.
He adds, that if the name is given to honor a deceased relative and not in the name of a Biblical personage, it is permitted. He writes that some choose a name that is mentioned in the current weekly parsha, such as Noach. (This name is more common than Adam).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that it is permitted. The Rov quoted the example of Adam Baal Shem of Rofshitz, the teacher of the Baal Shem Tov and originator of the Chassidik movement. (See Meditation and Kabbala by Rav A. Kaplan).
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/23/2020 11:54 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2511 It's All In Your Mind
|
|
|
Q. We recently learned in the daf that the intention for doing a mitzva deuraisa (Biblical) is essential in the compliance of the mitzva. Since during the day we do many mitzvos such as learning Torah or helping others, should one at the beginning of the day declare that all mitzvos one will do, will be with that intention? Since we rule that "kol haosse al daas rishona hu ose" (one who performs does so following the initial intention), the kavana should apply at least for that day.
A. Addressing a similar question (363) we answered: "Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a pointed out that in regards to Kavanah in Mitzvos, there is a difference between the commandments Ben Adam Lamakom, or the ones that involve only complying with the will of Hashem and the ones that additionally benefit others or society too. On the former you need intention, on the latter, it is generally accepted that after the fact you comply with the Mitzvah even if performed without intention, as the benefit was done nonetheless.
The following Poiskim maintain a similar view; Ahavas Tzion , drush 10 in the name of his father the Noda B’eyehuda, Yabia Haomer Y.D. 6: 29, also Chida in Pesach Einaim in regards to Tzedakah and Ridbaz 3: 441. However, Bais Halevy drush1, disagrees in regards to Tzdakah and Binas Simcha p. 144 compiled an extensive list of Mitzvos Ben Adam Lechavero that he considers require Kavanah. (See similar in Ahavas Chesed 2: 23: 2).
It is also important to note that the mindful intention has to be close to the fulfillment of the Mitzvah, as Mishna Berurah (60: 7) writes: “To intent before he begins”. Piskey Teshuvos (ibid. 5) mentions that the amount of time before should not be longer than the span of Hesech Hadaas, or time enough for the mind to dwell on something else. (Once you begin doing the Mitzvah with proper intention you fulfill the obligation even if you were latter Masiach Daas, see Minchas Shlomo 1:1).
Therefore a declaration of intention at the beginning of the day may not result in great benefit. However, Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a suggests that it may serve as a reminder to later have proper Kavanah, as we carry on with the daily Mitzvos."
We should mention. that the Baal Hatanya in his siddur indeed mentions to say once a day Leashem Yichud before Boruch Sheomar and following Divrei Pinchas (2) and Shaarei Halocho Uminchag (1: 61), it is effective for all tefilos and mitzvos.
As mentioned above, the Rov maintains that it is worthwhile for one at the beginning of the day to declare that all mitzvos one will do, will be with the intention leshem mitzvah.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/23/2020 11:34 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2510 Immersed in this Immersion Question
|
|
|
I received a gift of prepared desserts, meant to be eaten straight from the individual glass jars that they came in.. I was told by the store personnel that the jars were already toiveled. I was advised to retoivl without a bracha.
My question is, was it preferable that the store not toivl the jars? and if so, is it permissible to eat the desserts straight from the jar? (it 's not nogeah to empty the contents into another dish because it ruins the dessert).
What about when a gift of chocolate platter or such is sent to celebrate a simcha - do those (glass or metal) dishes have to be emptied and toivled at home before using them at the simcha?
A. On question 1268 we wrote: "Poskim disagree on reusing food jars (such as pickle, conserves jars or wine bottles) that are usually only used once and discarded once empty. Teshuvos Vehanhogos (1: 446) Tevilas Kelim (4: 13) and others rule stringently in reusing them a second time without tevila.
However, Igrois Moishe (Y.D. 2: 2 and 137) maintains that since the intention of the consumer is to acquire only the food and the jar is of no consequence to him, prior to his unusual decision to reuse it. Therefore, at that decision time it turns from a usually disposable throwaway into a new usable utensil. Since it is now in his possession it does not require tevila. Chelkas Yaakov (2: 57), Ohr Letzion, Shearim Metzuyanim Behalacha (37) quothing Maharil Diskin and others are also lenient.
Taking into account that food storage utensils that one does not usually eat directly from them, some Poskim maintain that they do not require tevila (Halichot Olam 7: 8. See Tzitz Eliezer 8: 26: 3), Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that on glass jars, (as opposed to metal), in need one can be lenient not to require tevila.
If the recipient of the gift, is usually from the machmirim, one should inform him that the jar was not immersed."
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that in your case since the dessert glass jars are likely intended for a one time use, even if later on one decides to reuse them, they do not require tevila as mentioned above, especially since there is a possibility that they were already immersed by the store.
Horav Aharon Miller Shlit'a added that the tevila done at the store may not be valid since at that time those utensils were held by the store owner only for the purpose of selling them, and not for using them themselves as klei achila or eating utensils. Poskim disagree whether such utensils have to be immersed or not.
The same applies to a glass or ceramic platter that is intended for a one time use. A metal platter may be intended for keeps and require tevila without a brocho, as the immersion in the store was questionable.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/23/2020 11:21 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2509 More Intents and Purposes
|
|
|
Q. Referring back to the previous question (2496), davening before neitz standing versus sitting in the car after neitz. If there would be no difference in kavana, what would be the better option?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that is better to daven before the neitz standing than on the proper time seating in a car, even if the kavana remains similar.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/23/2020 10:53 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2508 Know This Like The Back Of Your Hands
|
|
|
Q. Often people pour down water during Netilat Yodaim on the top of their hands over their wrist, to properly cover with water the complete hand. However, as the hands are bend downward into the sink, the result is that often the water reaches the area of the wrist and bellow only on the top side of the hand, but not in the down side. Is that correct?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's opinion is that since lechatchila, on the onset, the complete hand up to the wrist should be covered with water, one should turn around each hand with the downside facing up while he pours water on them. The above is done while each hand is slanted down.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 1/23/2020 10:43 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
Important Numbers
