|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
# 2075 Is This a Mitzva? Really?
|
|
|
Q. is it true that the Chasam Sofer says that not saying tachanun on Purim Kattan is a mitzva of the Torah?
A. Indeed Chasam Soffer (O.H. 208) does mention that the reading of the megilla, eating the seuda and shalach monos during Purim are only Rabbinical mitzvos. However, even doing a small remembrance to the miracle of salvation on Purim and thanking Hashem for it, is a Biblical mitzva. This includes not eulogizing a hesped or fasting, even on Purim Kattan as mentioned in Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 697: 1).
The mitzva, he explains, is the Kal Vachomer, mentioned in Megila (14a) "if from servitude to freedom we recite shira, so much more from death to life."
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 3/1/2019 12:00 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2074 A Clean Brake?
|
|
|
Q. Can you wash your hands netilas yodaim by immersing them in snow, as when exiting the house after touching boots or shoes?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that it is permitted. However, one must be careful not to grind or mash the snow into water by rubbing one's hands together.
During weekdays, one may immerse hands three times in snow that has a volume of more than forty saah or the amount of water in a mikva, when exiting a cemetery and remove the ruach raah from them.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 3/1/2019 11:47 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2073 Some Opinions of the Salt of the Earth
|
|
|
Q. Can one scatter salt or sand on the snow during Shabbos to prevent people from falling?
A. Poskim permit scattering salt and even sand on snow or ice, since the salt melts and there is no intention for the sand to stay, but rather to be washed out with the later defrosting and rain. Therefore there is no prohibition of boneh or building. Mishna Berura (313: 55, 320: 14). Shemitas Shabbos K. (25: n.49).
In regards to placing it on the street to prevent accidents, where there is no eruv. Shemitas Shabbos K. (25: 9) permits if it is not a Biblical reshus horabim.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 3/1/2019 11:45 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2072 Insides On Stressed Out
|
|
|
Q. Re - question above. If one is allowed to violate Shabbos when one is under extreme mental and emotional pain and stress?
A. Igrois Moshe (Y. D. 2: 174) explains (Sefer Melakhim I: ch.17), that Eliahu, who was a Cohen, was permitted to touch and revive the dead Ben Hatzarfatis because of pikuach nefesh and danger of life, not of the child, but rather of the mother who was suffering tremendously and in extreme mental pain for loosing her only miraculously given child. That extreme pain placed her life in danger. (See Tosafos, Baba Metzia 114b).
However Nishmas Avrohom (O. H. 5: 334: p.39) quotes Horav Yehoshua Neuwirth as questioning why then someone (l"a), watching his house being consumed by fire during Shabbos and all his wealth going up in flames, is not permitted to intervene due to the extreme agony, worry and mental pain his losses are causing.
Minchas Shlomo (7) and Shemiras Shabbos K. (41: n. 8) mention that even when there is a possibility of loosing a major limb, and one is then subject to the ensuing extreme emotional pain for the great loss involved, it is not considered as pikuach nefesh or a life threatening situation. In all those cases we urge the victim to exercise trust in Hashem, calm down and take control of himself. (See HaDeres, Over Orach 334).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar, unless one is dealing with an extreme aged or debilitated and emotionally ill individual, when this very painful situation may indeed cause his sudden collapse and death.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 3/1/2019 10:28 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2071 Taking Great Pains with Great Pains
|
|
|
Q. Does extreme pain such as a severe tooth cavity qualify as pikuach nefesh or danger of life to violate Shabbat and drive to a dental clinic?
A. Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 328: 2) rules that situations that are clearly pikuach nefesh or life-threatening, such as one who is dying of a disease and will die without medical intervention, one has to desecrate Shabbos without delay and save that life.
In the case of a severe tooth cavity with extreme pain, Shulchan Aruch (328: 3) and Mishna Berura (ibid. 8), consider this to be tantamount to an inside body wound and constitutes pikuach nefesh, Shevet Halevy (1: 70) permits also in the case of a severe dental infection, while Tzitz Eliezer (8: 15) permits only in extreme pain.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar, however the Rov pointed out that sometimes an aggressive food particle or similar may be the cause of the great discomfort, and it could be promptly removed without any chilul Shabbos. The Rov also pointed out that severe and extreme physical pain may even on external wounds constitute pikuach nefesh, as it may reflect great malady and infection that can place in jeopardy the life of the victim.
In such cases the Rov asserts one is to be machmir and exercise stringency in maintaining a life, that will then keep many more days of Shabbos.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 3/1/2019 10:26 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2070 Slack on the Black Widow?
|
|
|
Q, I understand that a widow whose two previous husbands died is called a Katlanis, literally "a killer", a woman who is dangerous to marry or forbidden to marry (not sure which). I understand that the reason is because it is suspected that her Mazal is that her husbands die.
What if a woman actually murdered her first husband? Then she is for sure a Katlanis. Is it forbidden to marry her?
A. Shulchan Aruch (Even Haezer 9: 1) rules that a woman that was previously married to two men and both died, should not marry again. However, if she did get married she could stay with her husband. Remah (ibid.) adds that the above applies only if they died a natural death, but not if one of them was killed.
Poskim disagree as to the severity of this prohibition. Beis Shlomo (18), Yashresh Yaakov (Yebamos 26a), Ksav Soffer (13) an others (quoting Ritvo), maintain it is due to the danger of life involved and it is a Biblical edict. They add that the story of Yehuda and Tamar, seems to give echo to this prohibition. And they thus explain why even after two cases the proscription applies, when normally a chazaka requires three instances, since Chamiro Sakanto, we address danger of life more severely than a common prohibition.
However, Beis Yitzchok (1: 46), Besomim Rosh (276), Teshubos Harematz and others maintain it is only a Rabbinical prohibition, and thus after the fact she may remain married.
There are two reasons mentioned in the Talmud as to the nature of this decree. It is due to her bad mazal and defective luck that affects her husband too, or to the marital relations involved. The difference may include whether she actually got married or was only engaged, the husband was killed and was his fault, and other cases.
As to the question where the woman murdered her husband, (assuming that it was in self defense and she is set free or it was accidental), it would seem to depend on the above reasons mentioned and you would still need two instances.
Therefore, Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that she is permitted to remarry.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/26/2019 11:24 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2069 Snow Alert
|
|
|
Q. Regarding a recent shiur given by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a addressing shailos in snow related activities during Shabbos, it is worthwhile to present them to the many readers of this forum worldwide.
Is snow muktza in Shabbos and can one shovel it to clear a path and be able to exit and enter one's domain?
A. Shulchan Aruch (338: 8) and Mishna Berura (ibid. 30) permit the use of rain water collected during Shabbos, as long as it is clean and fit to use. Most Poskim maintain that the same applies to snow (Mekor Chaim 320: 11, Eishel Avrohom (312), Shemiras Shabbos K' (16: 44) and others.
However, Igros Moshe (O. H. 5: 22) maintains that snow is different and there is an inherent nolad prohibition on it. Tiltulei Shabbos quoting RS"Z Auerbach zt'l suggests that snow in our days should be considered muktza, since it does not have any use and should be like stones and dirt. Nevertheless. Poskim are lenient, since people play with it and shovel it too. (Piskei Teshuvos 338: n. 144).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that it is not muktza. Therefore, one is allowed to shovel a path during Shabbos when in need. The Rov added that when there is no eruv, one can still shovel the snow just to the immediate close by area, but not when it is taken out from one domain to another or when it piles up over ten tefachim (1 m.) high.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/26/2019 11:01 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2068 Aliyas Neshama on Purim
|
|
|
Q. Regarding one that has yortzait on Purim and wants to make a siyum, Horav Shlomo Miller advised that if possible, in this leap year, he should make a siyum on both days of Purim, as one does with reciting kaddish (see question 999).
On a regular year he does the siyum during the Purim seuda. On this year on the first Purim since there is no seudas Purim, it would be difficult to do a special seuda for the siyum during the day or the afternoon, as it is a working day. Is it possible to arrange the siyum on the eve of Purim (leil Purim), when family and friends could be invited?
A siyum is a seudas mitzva. Does the (marbim beseudah) adding to a seuda that the Rema advises to do on Purim Rishon qualify as a seudas mitzva?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that the seuda of the siyum should be done during the day, as the regular Purim seuda is done and on it more food should be added to comply with the opinion of the Rema. As far as getting family and guest to join, which may be difficult in the afternoon, one can start the seuda while it still day and have the rest of the guest join later.
Horav Shlomo Miller's opinion is that even when there is no siyum, the adding to a regular meal during Purim is considered a seudas mitzva, since after all Purim Rishon also commemorates the nissim that occurred, and this constitutes a seudas hodo'a. (See Chassam Soffer O.H. 208).
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/25/2019 12:40 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2067 Of Biters and Pickers
|
|
|
Q. May a nail-biter or a skin-picker swallow the nails or the little pieces of skin he bites off, due to the prohibition of eating human flesh or disgusting things?
Is it permitted to do so in a day of fasting?
A. On question 2039 in regard to transgressing the prohibition of bal teshaktzu for one that can eat food that the majority of people consider repugnant, but to him it is not, we wrote; P'ri Chodosh (Y.D. 84: 3) based on the Mishna (Chulin 77a) maintains that a food item that most people find repugnant and repulsive but this particular individual does not, he does not have to follow the usual majority rule, and he is permitted to eat that food. Therefore, Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that as far as nails and fingernails cuticles is concerned, if one is not disgusted when swallowing them, there is no bal teshaktzu prohibition.
There are different opinions in respect to the prohibition of eating human flesh. 1) Rambam (H. Maacholos Asuros 2: 3) maintains that since the Torah enumerated the kosher animals and told us that these are permissible, the ones not included are prohibited only by the dint of a positive commandment, namely "these are the ones you shall eat." 2) The Reoh (Shita Mekubetzes, Kessubos asserts that one transgresses a negative commandment.3) Ra'abad (ibid. 3: 4) and Ramban opine that there is no prohibition on human flesh, besides b'al teshaktzu. 4) Rashbo (Tesh. 1: 364) holds that it is Rabbinically prohibited.
Therefore, Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that one should not eat the skin cuticles.
As far as nails is concerned, the Rov maintains that since they are not fit for consumption, one may swallow them if he does not find that disgusting.
The Rov advises that cuticles are prohibited to swallow in a day of fasting.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/25/2019 12:15 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2066 My Cup Runneth Away
|
|
|
Q. If someone left a small closed cup of common commercial yogurt on a table in the communal kitchen of a Torah institution. He then left the room and when he came back, he found a similar cup on another table. If he is not sure if it his cup (they all look the same), or maybe it belongs to someone else, since it was in a different site and he cannot claim any siman or mark to recognize it. Can he eat that yogurt?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that he should wait some reasonable period of time to see if someone else returns and takes it. If not, and he feels that if there was really another yogurt cup owner, he would have already returned and claimed it, then he can take it as his and keep it.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/25/2019 11:56 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2065 First Come, First Served or on Second Thought?
|
|
|
Q. I have been a member of the local Chevra Kadisha for over twenty years. Recently we relocated to another city and I also joined their Chevra Kadisha. In the past, whenever there was a leap year. the members of the Chevra Kadisha fasted and then celebrated the traditional seuda of the Seventh of Adar, the yohrzait of Moshe Rabenu, on the second Adar, when we also observe Purim. But the new Chevra Kadisha I joined do so on yhe first Adar. Do I have to be matir neder if I'm to change my tradition? Should I now do both months?
A. On question 996 we wrote: "Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a pointed out, that although it is custom for the chevra kadisha societies to fast and commemorate their traditional seudah on the seventh day of second Adar, Mishna Berura (580; 15) mentions that the fasting for Moshe Rabeinu’s yortzait is on the first Adar.”
Indeed, Imrei Pinchas (p.130) elucidates that Zain Adar should be commemorated on the first Adar, since it then coincides with Parshas Tetzave. As the Ba'al Haturim explains that Moshe Rabbenu's name was omitted to comply with the “Erase me from Your sefer” dictum.
However, many Poskim maintain that Adar Sheni is main (Sheilas Yavetz 1: 117 quoting his father the Chacham Tzvi, Chasam Sofer O.H. 163, Melamed Lehoil 113,2, et. al.) Nitey Gavriel (Purim 13: 4) writes that some observe both dates.
There is a further disagreement of our sages as to when Moshe Rabbenu was niftar. If it was a year with two Adars and in which of the two was his petirah. (Yalkut Yehoshua ch. 5) as there is also a disagreement when he was born (Sota 12b.) There are also different opinions as to if he passed away on the same Adar he was born. (Hilchos K'tanos 2: 173, Ya'aros Devash 2: p. 140)
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit”a opinion is that in principle each Chevra Kadisha should consult with the competent Rabbi in charge of the group and follow his opinion. When that is not an option, they should follow the already established minhag they have. If it is a newly created Chevra, they should follow the tradition of the majority of the established chevros in the city."
In your particular case, Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that you do not have to be matir neder and it is enough if to kee the minhag of the new Chevra Kadisha you have joined.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/24/2019 11:34 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2064 Davening For or Before Food
|
|
|
Q. If the available davening is late and the seuda will be close to chatzos or after, can one eat fruit, yogurt or cheese before davening?
A. On question 1202 we wrote: "Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that you can drink coffee or tea before davening and avoid fasting. Although Mishna Berura (89: 22) maintains that these beverages should be drunk without milk or sugar, many Poskim permit and the Rov agrees with them when in need. Maharsham Daas Torah 89: 3, Aruch Hashulchan 89:23, and Kaf Hachaim 89:31 Ishei Yisrael 13:25, Piskei Teshuvos 89:17, Sheorim Metsuyim BeHalacha 8:1, and others, mention that the minhag is to have coffee or tea even with sugar or milk before the tefila because it enables one to daven with more kavana, and is not an act of arrogance."
However, Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that eating fruit, yogurt or cheese before davening is not permitted, unless it is required for medical reasons.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/24/2019 5:04 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2063 Meals on Wills
|
|
|
Q. If one made Kiddush (Shabbos morning after Shacharis or Musaf) and ate a kezayis of cake, or drank a cup of wine, is it OK to delay the actual seuda after chatzos? Or should one in all cases wash and eat bread prior to chatzos, like the Aruch Hashulchan says? And what is one to do if he is a guest by people who will start later?
A. Ohr Letzion (2: 21: 4) and others maintain that once kiddush has been recited and a kezais mezonos eaten, in need one may wait and eat the day seuda after midday. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a is similar.
On question 361 we wrote: "Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit”a opinion (as also other Poiskim) is that if one recites Kidush and drinks a Reviis of wine (a minimum of 86 c.c.) it would already be considered as reciting Kiddush in a Seudah. It is better to drink a Melo Lugmov or a cheek full of wine followed by a complete reviis."
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/24/2019 4:34 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2062 An Early Drink?
|
|
|
Q. Regarding the time of the Shabbos day seuda- is it OK to have a drink of water before davening and then start the seuda after chatzos? Or only b'dieved?
A. Shulchan Aruch (O. H. 288: 1) rules that it is prohibited to fast until chatzos on Shabbos. Therefore if one drank even water and certainly other foods, he is not considered as fasting. (See next questions as to what is permitted).
Rambam (H. Shabbos 30: 9) maintains that the second seuda of Shabbos should be before midday. Similar opinions are to be found in Sifrei Cabbalah (see Kaf Hachaim 291 : 2 quoting Zohar), Aruch Hashulchan (ibid. 2).
Bach (quoted in Mishna Berura (324: 2), seems to maintain that even after the fact one may not comply with the mitzva of the second seuda after chatzos. However, many Poskim disagree, as mentioned in Mishna Berura (288: 2) in the name of Eliahu Rabba, that one may be lenient when it is for the need of Torah learning or davening. (See Piskei Teshuvos 288: 1, that the six hours may be counted from the time one awakens).
On a similar question (1943) we answered: "Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that on the onset, one should not wait to eat the seuda on Shabbos morning until after chatzos, even if one drinks something before."
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that, one should on the onset eat or at least begin the day seuda of Shabbos before chatzos.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/22/2019 4:29 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2061 Export Permit
|
|
|
Q. Recently a Sephardi Rabbi (Yonatan Halevy) posted on Facebook that Fruits and Vegetables from Israel grown for markets outside Israel do not require Terumah and Ma’aser according to the rulings of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef.
Does this ruling only apply to the Sephardim? Or is this something that applies to all Jews?
He used the following references:
—Edit: As was pointed out (evident in the notes of the Chazon Ovadia) the Rambam and Maran rule this explicitly in Hilchot Terumot 1:29 (22 in some editions).
—They believe that these fruits and vegetables require “Terumah” and “Ma’aser” tithes taken from them, something which is not entirely true. Produce grown in Israel - for the Israeli market, require tithing. But what about produce grown in Israel for export to other markets?
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef was asked this exact question in his monumental work Yabia Omer (also codified in his concise book of laws, Chazon Ovadia) - and ruled leniently in this matter, declaring all such produce permissible without any need to take tithes from it.
A. Rambam (H. Trumos 1: 22) rules that fruits grown in Eretz Yisroel that were exported to Chutz Laaretz, are exempt from Trumos and Maasros. However, Ra' abad, Mishne Lemelech and others disagree with the opinion of the Rambam, especially if the produce became already liable for the gifts while in the land.
Beis Avi (1: 85-86) and Hagraz Meltzer zt'l (Otzar Terumos 2: 128) maintain leniency if the produce was grown specifically for export purposes.
However, Chazon Ish, Igrois Moshe (Y. D. 3: 127) and Mishnas Aharon (1: 40) are stringent and rule that they do require separation of Terumos and Maasros. Mishne Halochos (2: 238) follows their opinion, unless there is added doubts on the liability, such as a separation was already done etc.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is to follow the established opinion of the Poskim that are stringent, as is already the tradition of most accepted kashruth organizations.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/20/2019 11:24 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2060 The Doubt of the Benefit
|
|
|
Q. Can I rent a property to a non-Jewish restaurant that constantly serves cooked milk and meat dishes, since I would be benefiting from isurei hanaah or items prohibited in benefit when they pay their rent? A similar question could be asked for Pesach, but after all it is only eight days and the rent could be received for the rest of that month.
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that it is permitted since the rent is due regardless of the income created by the business, so there is no direct benefit to the landlord. However, if the rent includes a percentage based on the income of the business, it would not be permitted.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/18/2019 3:00 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2059 We Know Moshiach Now!
|
|
|
Q. I once read that Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetzky responded to a query about when Moshiach was going to arrive, "Those who know don't say and those who say don't know."
How does that statement square with today's news report (see below), and what is Rabbi Miller's opinion about the report and similar statements popularized?
A young talmid chocham from Chutz L’Aretz visited Rav Chaim Kanievsky on Shabbos and asked the Rav if he should apply for Israeli citizenship in order to vote in the Israeli elections being held on April 9.
“There is no need,” Rav Kanievsky reportedly responded. “Moshiach will already be here before the elections.”
The young man was unsure that he had heard the rabbi correctly so after he departed from the house, he asked Rav Chaim’s grandson, a venerated rabbi in his own right, to confirm the answer. The grandson entered Rav Chaim’s chamber and asked again: ‘Should the young man apply for citizenship before the elections?’
The Godol Hador responded, “I already told him that there is no need. Moshiach will be here before the elections.”
A. Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a pointed out that it is not unusual for Gedolei Yisrael to possess a very high and strong belief in the immediate coming of Moshiach, as the Chofetz Chaim zt'l and others did.
These great tzadikim are constantly preparing and becoming fully ready to receive him, and measure constantly all future occurrences in the light of this undeniable fate.
After all, the later of the "any maamins" are not any less real and factual than the first ones. These great luminaries express themselves often by seeing the world in that very light that guides them.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/18/2019 2:54 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2058 A Value Judgment
|
|
|
Q. (Re- question 2057 above). On a second but connected question. Can Shimon have a claim that Reuven made his property go down in value. Let's say Shimon had an offer on his house for $500k but after Reuven got permission to build that buyer backed out and will now offer on $400k. Is that a valid claim? If not for actual money compensation but can Shimon insist on Reuven doing somethings such as planting trees or other stuff that will minimize the loss (and quality of life change) to Shimon? Some of these changes won't cost Reuven anything while others will. Is there a difference between in if it costs Reuven money or not? The ones that do cost money will be less then the loss of value that Shimon is having on his property. Thank you
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlita opinion is that the mentioned loss of the property value does not even qualify as a "gromo" or indirect causative damage, that in Halacha cannot be collected anyway. This is due to the fact that the value of real estate is determined by many different unrelated and ever-changing factors.
Kehilos Ya’akov (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. (See Shulchan Aruch C. M. 154). Beis Din should indeed establish if and how it applies and what is the right course to follow.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/18/2019 2:45 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2057 Have Your Day D-in Court?
|
|
|
Q. Is one allowed to appeal a decision by the planning board or does he have to go to Beis Din first?
You have two parties. Reuven and Shimon. Reuven applied to be able to build a building next door to Shimons house. While this building is not residential, and not typical for this area, it is allowed according to Township code however it does need to be approved in a case by case basis. The planning board approved the building plus a second type of building as well. While the Township code allows
the first type of building, the second type its not so clear if it is allowed (some lawyers say it's not allowed), however the Township planning board approved it anyway.
In this state, there is a method for appealing the Township planning boards decision. This appeal goes to the county level where a judge reviews whether it was supposed to be approved or not.
So does this need to go to Beis Din before being appealed?
A few reasons why not
1) By Reuven applying for permission to change the use of the property to allow this building, he is bringing it into the non Jewish system already, so an appeal is just continuing what Reuven started
2) Beis Din doesn't have any jurisdiction over zoning decisions, so there is no din of arkoyos.
3) The appeal is not against the applicant (Reuven) rather it is against the Planning Board, so it's not two yidden against each other rather one yid against the Township. (and this is indeed how the appeal is structured).
Or is it even with the above it is still something that one needs to get Beis Dins permission first before going into the non Jewish system.
A. On question 1068 in regard to having to apply to a Beis Din or requesting a Posek to give permission to go to a Gentile court to challenge a landlord’s decision to keep a rent deposit wrongfully, we wrote;
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that you do not need permission from a Beis Din to lodge a complain for redress at the Landlord and Tenant Board or its equivalent. The reason is that enforcing established laws by applying to the corresponding authorities to make their decision if they apply and enforce them, is not considered going to court.
The Rov added that the above applies even when that decision is rendered by a government appointed judge to deal with these cases.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/18/2019 2:38 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2056 A Word on Honor
|
|
|
Q. Hello Rav,
I started learning at the Toronto Kollel in the mornings. As I'm learning, several young rabbis also walk by and come into the room to learn. I'm wondering if I should be standing up fully, sit up a little bit, or not at all as they walk into my 4 amot. I assume any kollel rabbi is considered a talmud chacham and the obligation to stand up would be in effect in theory. If so, would this apply just one time per morning, or each time they pass by?
Thanks so much.
A. On question 1951 we wrote: "Rema (Y.D. 244: 16) rules that a talmid should not stand up before his rebbe more than twice a day. This reflects the teaching of Talmud (Kidushin 33b), that the honor given to a human should not surpass the one given to Hashem, whom we honor every morning and night, (when reciting the shema - Taz). However, the Rema adds, that if others are present, since they may not be aware that one has already stood twice before his master, one should stand again."
On question 1934 we wrote; "Teshuvos Radvaz (8:167) maintains that even when the elderly forgoes his honor, one should still respect him by rising slightly. Horav Y.S Elyashiv zt"l, however, rules that this is unnecessary. (Mevakshei Torah, v. 4, p. 249).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar."
On question 1159 in regards to standing for a Talmid Chacham or an elder who is unaware of the honor given to him, (he is facing another direction), if it is better to make him aware, we wrote: "Horav Shlomo Millers Shlit'a opinion is that in general there is no need to make the recipient of the honor aware that you are standing for him or honoring him, unless he needs to benefit emotionally from that knowledge;( e.g. to rise his depressed spirit).
In principle, the Rov maintains one should rise slightly, as mentioned above, even when the elder is not aware of it"
In our case the Rov maintains that even the elderly Talmidei Chachamim usually forgive their honor, and no standing is customary.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 2/18/2019 1:05 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
Important Numbers
