|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
# 1389 A Kidush Chidush
|
|
|
Q. If one is in doubt if he made Kiddush Friday night, or if it was made correctly, he cannot repeat it (although it is good to hear it from someone else).
In the event that he cannot hear from someone else, he is allowed to eat normally, although it is forbidden to eat before Kiddush.
Would it be an act of piety to eat the bare minimum that one is required to eat on Shabbos, in such a case, as every bit of food that one enters into his mouth is possibly a transgression of eating before Kiddush? (Obviously, this is talking about a person who is on a high madreiga…)
A. Mishna Berura (289: 10) rules that if someone does not have any wine, chamar medina or bread on Friday night, if he thinks it is likely that he may get some later, he should wait a couple of hours, but not after chatzos. If he is hungry or weak, he may rely on the kiddush (vayichulu) said in maariv, eat what he has, and not nullify the mitzva of oneg Shabbos. When the wine or bread arrive, he recites kiddush and eats a kezais of bread. The above applies if he had in mind to comply with the Biblical mitzva of kiddush when he said vayichulu, otherwise he should repeat it. (Mishna Berura 271: 1, Shaarei Tzion ibid 4).
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that when in doubt if the kiddush was said correctly or maybe even not at all, he should make only the brocho on the wine, since reciting a brocho when in doubt is a Biblical prohibition, while eating without kiddush is only Rabbinical, and permitted when in doubt. (See also Piskei Teshuvos 271: 7)
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/28/2017 12:57 AM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1388 Will Stop At Nothing
|
|
|
Q. (Re- Question 1362) Regarding pausing the Amidah to listen to krias hatorah -Isn't it true that the Chazon Ish and Rav Shlomo Zalmen Auerbach maintained that one may not stop his Shemona Esrei in the middle to listen to Krias HaTorah.
A. Indeed, Piskei Teshuvos (104: n. 108) and others quote this two sources not to be mafsik for krias Hatorah in the middle of the amida, however, Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that on mincha on a taanis since the reading is much shorter while one is slowly reciting the amida, he may stop between the brochos and listen quietly to the Krias Hatorah; while being careful not to stop and be mafsik a stretch longer that the time it would take to recite the complete amida. (Mishna Berura 65: 3, see also s.104). One may however, while they call another reader to the Torah, continue with the amida.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/27/2017 11:12 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1387 Lets Begin
|
|
|
Q. Kavod Harav,
(Re- question 1362 where Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a ruled that once one has started the amida and said the first words of the bracha he should continue with the rest. The reason is that it is improper and disrespectful to interrupt the address being said to the King of the Universe).
Would the rav rule differently if the person merely said Hashem Sefasai etc. but did not begin the actual Amidah (Baruch...). Ben Ish Chai (1st year, Vayakhel 10; Rav Pe’alim Vol. 4, no. 4 says that if a person has said the opening verse, and then encounters kaddish or kedushah, he should answer with the congregation, and then repeat the first pasuk again and begin davening. Mekor Chaim (122:1) writes similarly that one can make a hefsek for the purpose of answering kaddish and kedushah.
A. Although Mishna Berurah (66: 35) maintains that once Hashem sefassai was said it is considered as having already started amida, as you quote many Poskim rule that in mincha one can still answer. Ishei Yisroel (32: H. 47) seems to say that the Mishna Berura would agree. See also Piskei Teshuvos (111 n.14).
As mentioned, Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that by mincha, only when the and the first two words of the bracha were said one should continue and not be mafsik.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/27/2017 10:43 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1386 Hair Peace?
|
|
|
Q. May one say Shalom to a woman whose hair is not covered?
A. This questions involves two Issues. Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 75: 2) rules that one may not read the shema or recite any blessing, including any other expression that is considered a ‘dovor shebekedusha” or holy articulation, in front of a woman who has her hair uncovered, including one’s own wife. (Mishna Berura ibid 1). Most Poskim follow this stringent ruling.
However, Aruch Hashulchan (O. H. 75: 7) mentions that in our days since many women don’t cover their heads, uncovered hair has ceased from being considered an “ervah” or nakedness, and is similar to the hair of unmarried women that is not prohibited. Igrois Moishe (O.H. 1: 42) in regards to the required height of a mechitza offers a similar lenient ruling in case of need. (See also Igrois Moishe O.H. 4: 15, and so do Ben Ish Chai, Or LeZion. et.al.).
Mishna Berura (ibid. 5), quoting Nishmas Adam, asserts that since this prohibition is only rabbinical, one may just close one’s eyes, when uttering “devarim shebekdusha.”
Whether the word “shalom” is considered an expression of holiness, Mishna Berura (85: 10) opines that if it is said as a greeting, it should not be mentioned in an unclean place such as a bathroom or bathhouse. However, Poskim are lenient on calling someone named Sholom by his name in such a place (Taz ibid, Birkei Yosef ibid. 9). Chayei Adam (3: 36) sugest to say the name incomplete as “shalo.”
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that indeed, in need one may greet a woman with uncovered hair using the word shalom, in need. Preferably, one should use another expression, the incomplete word, or close one’s eyes.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/26/2017 4:36 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1385 A Late Early Meal
|
|
|
Q. The Halacha is that one may not start a meal once it is 30 minutes before alos.
I would like to ask the rav shlita: May one forego this Halacha if there is a mitzvah for him to eat a seuda, such as one who awoke from his sleep shortly before alos and realized that he did not yet eat matzah on the first night of Pesach, in which case he has a chiyuv d'oraysa to eat matzah (since some hold you can eat it until alos) or even one who needs to eat melava malka?
A. Mishna Berura (89: 27) rules that the prohibition to start eating more than an egg-size of bread less than a half an hour before the alos mentioned in Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 652) in regards to the mitzva of lulav, applies equally to the daily reading of shema. Mekadesh Yisroel permits less than a beitza on the onset (Bein Hametzarim 2: 1- See question 347 in this forum).
Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 89: 3) permits eating when done for medical reasons. Mishna Berura (ibid. 24) explains that even if one is only partially ill it is permitted since his eating is not for pleasure. The same could be argued when the eating is for the purpose of complying with a mitzva. Chashukei Chemed (Suka 27a) addresses a similar question if one did not eat a kezais in the suka the first night until less than a half an hour before alos and rules leniently.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that the mitzva of eating matza overrides the above prohibition. In regards to melava malka, he may eat less than a beitza amount.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/26/2017 4:25 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1384 Watch That Watch!
|
|
|
Q. A rebbi who arrived 15 minutes late to a class. One of the young talmidim - bachurim came running over to the rebbi and pointed to his (the bachur's) watch. The rebbi immediately gave the bachur a potch for his chutzpah. Later, it turned out that the talmid was not intending in any way to "rebuke" the rebbi, but rather just wanted to show the rebbi his new watch. In fact, the bachur told his mother earlier (before this incident) that he loved the rebbi so much that he wanted the rebbi to be the first person to see his brand new watch. Does the rebbi need to do teshuva and ask mechila for giving the bachur a potch? Or do we say that since the bachur appeared to be lacking in kavod hatora (it appeared as though he were "rekubing" his rebbi), there is no problem with what the rebbi did (potching him), even though the bachur in actuality did nothing wrong?
A. I presented this question to a few local Rabbonim, and I got wide-ranging answers. Some argued, that giving occasionally strong rebuke to a child, even when not actually deserved, is in the spirit of
“He who holds back his rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him early.” (Mishlei 13: 24). Parshas Mattos seems to support the point, since Moshe strongly rebuked Bnei Gad and Bnei Reuben, as it turned out, without reason, and there is no record of any apology or that the tribes themselves protested. S’fas Emes explains that they felt honored and grateful to be the recipients even of the undeserved mussar of Moshe.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that the rebbi should ask forgiveness from his talmid and explain to him that even teachers make mistakes. He should use the experience to teach how careful and cautious one should be when rebuking others, even children.
The Rov pointed out that the Halacha is that minors cannot grant forgiveness (Baba Metzia 22b, Baba Bassra 143: 2 ,et. al.), and he therefore may have to wait until they are of age and ask mechila again.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/26/2017 3:15 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1383 A Question Of Interest
|
|
|
Q. Follow up to Q. 210 - Where I live there is a requirement to pay interest on the Security Deposit held by the landlord. The interest rate is set by the local Housing Department.
What would be the best practice for the landlord to follow when returning such a deposit to a Jew? Does one have to assume that any specific tenant is a Jew if they don't have first hand knowledge?
Thank you,
A. Although maybe in some locations the interest paid on the LMR deposit kept by the landlord may not be equal to the authorized increase in rent for that year and therefore also not equal to the needed increase in the Last Month Rent deposit, which could be more or less (historically, usually the interest is more) when not linked to each other by the Housing Authority.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that the landlord may negotiate with a tenant and make it equal. In case the interest is higher and the tenant may not be willing to forgive the small amount of difference coming to him, the landlord may deduct it from the rent to be paid, lowering the rent on that month.
In principle, unless you know otherwise, you follow the majority rule when in doubt, for determining if the tenant is Jewish.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/21/2017 3:44 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1382 Nu? New Month?
|
|
|
Q. If one is in the middle of reciting the Amidah, and he does not know whether or not it is Rosh Chodesh, but he thinks that it might be Rosh Chodesh, should he say yaaleh veyavo?
If it turns out that it was a regular day, is he still yotzi?
(Let's assume that he is davening privately, or he is davening with a minyan but the chazzan already passed Retzei and the person was not paying attention to the chazzan.)
May he speak during SE to ask somebody?
A. Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 108: 12) rules that if someone said yaaleh veyavo on a day that does not require it, after the fact, he does not have to repeat the amida. However, Mishna Berura (ibid.: 38) mentions that the majority of Poskim disagree and consider it similar to talking unnecessarily in the middle of the amida and therefore a hefsek.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit”a opinion is that preferably one should just walk to the luach and check the day, while being careful not to speak and then promptly return to his place and continue the amida.
If that is not an option, he may say yaaleh veyovo, since even if it is not Rosh Chodesh he is mafsik beshogeg or he is unwittingly speaking, and after the fact, he still complies. The Rov also mentioned that he may point to yaaleh veyavo in the siddur to a friend, to signal his doubt. He should avoid asking verbally when other options are available.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/21/2017 3:11 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1381 Witness Protection Program
|
|
|
Q See above question 1380 (Is the signature of the parties enough). Should the chosson better sign personally the kesuva in case it turns out that one of the witnesses are not kosher?
(Sometimes you want to honor someone, but are not sure of his private commitment to all mitzvos).
A. Tashbatz (Responsa 4: tur 3: 1), mentions that it was customary in his location that the groom would sign the kesuva, in case with the passage of time, when the kesuva came eventually to be collected, no witness could be found anymore to corroborate the signature of the original ones who may not be alive anymore or it is now forgotten who they were. However the signature of the groom would be easier to corroborate.
He rules that in such a case the former wife would collect even from encumbered properties (see above question). Nachalas Shiva (12: 73) writes that it was the tradition in Ashkenaz that the chosson would also sign the kesuva, but not in the same place where the witnesses signed, rather on the opposite side, so he would not be mistaken as a witness on his own kesuva.
This is the common practice today in many Sephardi congregations. Shevet Halevy (8: 285) recommends to have the chosson sign, even when many don’t follow that minhag today, since we usually follow the opinion of the Nachalas Shiva.
However, when the witnesses turned out to be disqualified by being related or not kosher, Tashbatz (ibid.) maintains that the signature of the groom will be of no help, since the document is considered as integrally falsified (mezuyaff mitocho – see Baba Basra 170). Mutzal Meish (1: 34) expresses a similar opinion. Nonetheless, Maharshach 3: 41) disagrees and maintains that the kesuva is kosher just by dint of the chossons signature.
Igrois Moishe (E.H.1: 100), mentions the chosson does not sign, as an outcome of being concerned he may sign in the same place as the witnesses.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that in case of need, such as when there is reasonable concern about the validity of the witnesses (and they cannot be refused), one may ask the chosson to sign the kesuva also, being careful as mentioned above, to sign separate from the witness. The Rov added that such situation may be unlikely, since if we are uncertain of the validity of the witnesses, we would determine their status by placing them under chezkas kashrus or presumption of remaining kosher.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/21/2017 2:52 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1380 The Power Of Your Signature
|
|
|
Q. In our times, do legal documents need 2 kosher witnesses (or are is the signature of the parties involved enough)?
for example - when one writes a kosher will.
is his signature enough, or does it need 2 kosher witnesses.
A. Responsa Tzemach Tzedek (10) in dealing with the validity of cheques in Halacha, rules that one’s signature carries all the force of witnesses, and obliges equally the signer, see also Rashbo (Tesh. 3: 67, 4: 7). However, one’s signature on a loan or any promissory obligation or payment without witnesses does not create a lien on real properties (real estate) and cannot be used to collect from properties that were sold subsequently.
Bach Responsa (15) rules similarly and compares it to a document common in their times know as “memarani,” that only carried the signature of the borrower or payer, Igrois Moishe (C.M. 2: 15 in regards to sh’mitas k’safim writes that since a cheque has validity as payment by the law of the land, although it does not have any witnesses, only one’s signature it has the same effect. (See also Minchas Yitzchok 5: 120, et. al.).
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion in regards to wills is that in principle the testator's signature is binding without the need of witnesses, however, there could be other complicated issues involved besides collecting from encumbered properties mentioned, and cases differ. Therefore a competent Rabbi should be consulted before writing a will.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/21/2017 2:24 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1379 It’s About Time
|
|
|
Q. If one holds that Shabbos is out 72 minutes after shkia, may he wash for shalosh seudos until 40 or so minutes after shkia?
A. Mishna Berura (299: 1) rules that you can wash for shalosh seudos until a half an hour before nightfall. Shaarei Tzion (ibid. 2) explains that this is due that the mitzva overrides the prohibition of eating after the shekia.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that there are a number of variables that one must consider to obtain a correct answer, such as location and time of the year. In this location during Tamuz, it should be closer to thirty minutes after the shekiah.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/17/2017 10:58 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1378 Different Cuts From The Same Cloth
|
|
|
Q. Can I order by a tailor a suit during the 3 weeks take then measurements and try on the unfinished or finished suit during the 3 weeks or the 9 days? I will only make sheheyanu when I use it first time for a wedding after T’beav.
A. Shulchan Aruch (O. H. 551: 17) rules not to recite shecheyanu bracha during the three weeks. Sefer Chasidim (840) and Mogen Avrohom explain that it is not proper to say this brocho during times of distress and suffering. Therefore, Poskim restrain the buying of new clothing and items on which one would recite this blessing (Shiurei Knesses Hagedola 12, Bach end of 551, Kitzur Sh. A. 122: 2).
Consequently, since one does not recite this brocho when placing an order for tailoring a suit it is not prohibited.
However, during the nine days it is prohibited to sew or stitch new clothing. (Shulchan Aruch O.H. 551: 7)/
Therefore, Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that one may order a new suit during the three weeks and try it on and fix it, only before the beginning of the nine days, but not afterwards.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit’a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/17/2017 3:47 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1377 Though Act To Follow
|
|
|
Q. 1) A baal teshuva who lives with his not-yet-frum parents - the parents sometimes go shopping on Shabbos and buy food, including food that they buy specifically for the baal teshuva. How soon after Shabbos, if at all, may the baal teshuva eat this food?
(One who desecrated Shabbos on purpose may not benefit ever. Here, the baal teshuva is not desecrating Shabbos, but his parents are desecrating it specifically for his sake.)
2) A married couple where the husband became a baal teshuva, what should he do with food on Shabbos, until his wife joins him?
A. Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 318: 1) rules that if prohibited work was intentionally done on Shabbos for someone, the recipient may not derive any benefit from that forbidden activity until the end of Shabbos.
Biur Halacha (ibid.) maintains that the above applies even on rabbinical prohibitions. (Although he also quotes the disagreeing opinions of Hagra and Chaye Adam). Shulchan Aruch asserts that it is permitted immediately at the end of Shabbos and one does not have to wait until the time it would take to perform anew that melacha after the end of Shabbos; a condition usually needed when a Gentile performs a melacha for a Jewish recipient. However, Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that in this case it may apply to everyone, since the reason for the difference, cited by Mishna Berura (ibid. 5) is that having a Gentile do work for one’s sake is seen as a weak prohibition and it may become a common occurrence. In this particular case of the parents transgressing for the benefit of their son may also become a constancy.
On question 526 in regards to a recent baal teshuva who’s parents are still non-orthodox but very suportive of their son and insist on he spending Pesach, as always together. I quote from the question; I came to an understanding with my parents and they are letting me use a small kitchen in the basement that I kashered. I buy my own kosher food and use disposable dishes. But for the Seder, I have to join the family and the food is not kasher lepesach or otherwise. Can I sit with them, place a napkin and eat my own food and recite together their shortened version of the hagadah?
A. Shulcha Aruch (O.H. 440: 3) rules that you are not to seat on Pesach at the same table with one that is eating chometz even if you are using a separate tablecloth. Mishnah Berurah (ibid. 18) explains that although in other prohibitions this may be permitted, chometz in Pesach is different since even a very small amount is forbidden. The best scenario ideally would be if you could convince your parents to observe a proper kosher seder. Since that may not be possible yet and I presume you are trying to change their attitude to religion by being kind, cooperative and respectful your best bet may be to go along with the following guidance from Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a. Since I presume you are in the Toronto area the shkiah this year at the first seder will be at 8.00 PM. Most likely your parents will make an haalachik unacceptable early seder before Pesach even begins. At that time you can still eat without making kidush. You can eat your own kosher l”pesach food sparingly so you don’t satiate, but not matza. You can also recite and sing along with your family their shortened Hagadah English version, explain to them the real meaning of Pesach and finish before shkiah. Then when night falls you can either do your own private seder or better get invited to a proper seder. Similarly, in your case although he cannot partake from the food his parents or his spouse prepared illicitly on Shabbos, for the sake of Shalom Bais and eventual kiruv of his parents or wife, he should sit together with them, sing zemiros and say divrei Torah, while he consumes his own food.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/17/2017 2:44 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1376 Good Hair Day
|
|
|
Q. There is a Rosh Kollel who came over to me in beis medrash, put $100 into my hand, and told me to get a haircut (because he felt that I have long hair). I subsequently cut my own hair, as I do not trust the barbers to be careful with my peyos and beard. Am I obligated to return the money to the rosh kollel, or may I do with it as I see fit?
I do not feel comfortable asking him this question myself (if I should return the money to him), as he is a tzaddik and a yirei shomayim and money means nothing to him (and, of course, he is not going to demand the money back from me, a bachur, due to his exceptional derech eretz); however, I want to do the right thing halachically, and at the same time I could use the money for other things. So the question is whether or not I should return the money to this tzaddik?
Another question is - Is it Ok for me to give myself a haircut (before Shabbos), even though it won’t be as good as in the barbershop, due to the above-mentioned reason of not trusting the barber even though he is frum, regarding the issue of peyos?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that in principle you can keep the hundred dollars, even if a haircut costs much less or you did it yourself, since it was given as a gift and most likely not only for a haircut. However, “lifnei meshuras hadin” or choosing to “take the high road,” you should offer to give it back, explaining why.
As far as taking a professional haircut likvod Shabbos as opposed to cutting your own hair, that may not provide the same optimal results, if there is an Halacha concern in regards to the proper cutting of the peyos by the barber, it overrides the honor of Shabbos.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/14/2017 7:06 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1375 Head's Up!
|
|
|
Q. Does one say Keil Erech Apayim before Krias HaTorah on Mondays & Thursdays only on days when Tachanun is said, or is there no such connection and it should always be said?
A. According to most Poskim Kel Erech Appaim follows the saying of Lamenatzeach and is recited even when no tachanun is said ((See Remo O.H. 131: 1, Shulachan Aruch Horav 129: 12,, Chayei Adam 32: 34, Kitzur S. A. 25: 2, et. al.).
Some maintain That in the days you do not say tachanun you also omit Kel Erech Apayim (Shiurei Knesses Hagedola 131, Pri Chodosh ibid. 1, Siddur Hattania, Shulchan Hatohor 131: 19, et al.).
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit”a opinion is that one should follow the nusach of the congregation where he davens.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/14/2017 2:53 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1374 Open And Shut
|
|
|
Q. Kavod Harav,
A follow-up to the shaila (1364) regarding opening the window near the plants - may one open the window just before the rain shower is about to begin, judging by looking at the sky and/or knowing the weather forecast (but it is not presently raining), even though in a few moments it will probably start raining and the water will go on the plants? It seems to me that opening a window before the rain shower has started is not any melacha whatsoever.
A. Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that this is an indirect or grommo act and since his intention is to let in fresh air and not to water the plants, it is permitted.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/14/2017 2:47 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1373 Seeing Things?
|
|
|
Q. When we are in doubt as to whether a Jew has sinned, it is meritorious or obligatory to judge him favorably.
I assume by inference, that if this doubt occurs with a gentile, we are not likewise obligated.
In the Kinnah by Moreinu HaRav Shimon Schwab zt"l concerning the Holocaust, there is a phrase therein about the tragedy that the Nazis turned Jewish bodies into soap.
An official in Yad Vashem informed me that they have a department that is involved in researching claims by survivors about atrocities committed in the Holocaust. They say that they have researched this claim and found that there is no evidence that the Nazis ever turned Jewish bodies into soap, and the soap found with the label RJF that was thought to be an abbreviation for Reine Judische Fett did not contain any fat, human or otherwise.
They say that they investigate these rumours and declare those that they find without evidence as unsubstantiated so as not to allow the Holocaust deniers any fuel to suggest that just as these unsubstantiated rumors are fact less, so too is the rest of Holocaust history.
On the other hand, evidence was presented at the Nuremberg trials that German reserchers had developed a process for the production of soap from human bodies. Additionally, it has been quoted in several books the admission by Col. Rudolph Hoess yimach shemo, the Commdandant of Auschwitz, that human fat was collected from the crematoria to produce soap (although I have not yet located this exact transcript).
Considering this doubt, are we permitted to assume that the Nazis did make soap from our Jewish brethren, and that this justifies our mournful cry on Tisha B'Av?
A. Although a quick search on the articles on-line seems to mostly agree that human-fat soap was not mass produced by the Nazis, it seems that it was experimented on and done in small quantities.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that in general, not seeing something does not prove it does not exist, (“Lo roinu eino ra’aya” - Edyios 2: 2, Kesubos 23, Zevachim 103b). There is definitely no reason to be “melamed zechus” on most evil individuals, however the truth should always be told when it is evident. In this particular case, as mentioned, it remains on the eyes of the beholder.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/14/2017 2:42 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1372 A Solid Answer
|
|
|
My wife often serves ice cream for dessert on Shabbos. Because of the doubt as to whether ice cream is a solid (and thus would require a Shehakol) or a liquid (and would require no blessing), she places a piece of chocolate in the bowl. The idea is that we make a Shehakol on the chocolate which then covers the possible obligation for the ice cream.
Considering that the Poskim discuss the doubt as to the proper blessing on chocolate, whether it is Shehakol or HaEitz, is this the proper food to use?
Would candied sprinkles on the ice cream work, or would they be Tafel to the ice cream?
Since Rav Miller is a veritable fount of knowledge and ideas about life in general, could he suggest the most optimum addition to the dessert to solve our dilemma.
[I often eat the ice cream with matza or challah to avoid this problem, but not all our family members find this idea appetizing.]
A. Please see Q. 1134: “If one said Kiddush on wine before a Seudah (Shabbos/Yom Tov), does one say Shahakol on ice cream if it is served as dessert (for those who are accustomed to make a bracha on ice cream during a meal)?
A. Poskim disagree, some (Vezos Habracha p. 98, Birchas Hashem p. 45, Ohr Torah – Sivan 5761 p. 626) maintain that one does not recite a brocho, The reason being mainly that they consider ice cream to be a liquid and the brocho said on the wine exempts liquids that one drinks after the wine. Also, some are in doubt on the above and they rule that safek brachos lehakel, when in doubt, we do not recite.
Others, (Mibeis Levi p. 49, Vezos Habracha ibid. quoting the Staipler Gaon zt”l) maintain that ice cream is solid food and it does not become exempt with the wine brocho.
Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a agrees with this last opinion.”
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that we should follow the opinion of most Poskim that the proper brocho on chocolate is shehakol. He also maintains that the ice cream sprinkles and toppings become annulled to the ice cream. He adds that some people recite shehakol at the kiddush before washing on herring eaten by itself, and they may have then in mind to be yotze the ice cream after the seuda.
See also Q. 944 in regards to the beracha on ice cream and cookies (cookies mixed in ice cream).
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/14/2017 2:35 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1371 The Good Name
|
|
|
Q. Since the month’s name Tamuz is the name of an avoda zara, why is it permitted? Is it not forbidden to mention their names?
A. The name Tamuz is indeed the epithet of an idolatry, as it says in Yechezkel: (8: 1) And He brought me to the entrance of the gate of the house of Hashem that is to the north, and behold there the women were sitting, making the Tamuz weep. Rashi (ibid) explains: There was an image that they would heat up from the inside, and its eyes, which were of lead, would melt from the heat of the fire, It is also true that we are enjoined from using names of idolatry as the Torah ordains: (Shemos 23: 13) The name of the gods of others you shall not mention; it shall not be heard through your mouth. (See Sanhedrin 63: 2).
However, as the Talmud above points out, the names of the avoda zaras recorded in the Torah can be used. Yet, it seems hard to understand why such a title should have been chosen?
Although the month of Tamuz belongs to the group of three months (Tamuz, Av and Teveth,) on which the quality of severe judgment (dino kashio) rests on the world (Zohar on “She hid him for three months” (Shemos 2: 2), and the Mishna, (Taanis 4: 6) teaches that five severe occurrences happened on the seventeen of Tamuz, so did other favorable and beneficial events take place on this month.
It was the month when the Yona was sent by Noach from the Teiva. It was also the month when: The Sun, stood still upon Gibeon, and the Moon in the valley of Ayalon. (Yehoshua 10: 12).On the sixth of Tamuz (1792) the Jews of Ostroha established this day as Purim Ostroha, to commemorate their community being saved during the Russian-Polish war. On that same day (1976) the Raid at Entebbe took place, saving 265 Jews from Palestinian and Ugandan terrorists, On the eight of Tamuz (1834) the Inquisition was abolished. On the eleventh (1927) an earthquake stroke Yerushalayim. The Kaf Hachaim notes (576:26) that although many Arabs died, miraculously not a single Jew was injured, and so on. The month of Tamuz in it’s very name teaches us that even an avoda zara can, with our teshuva and Hashem’s will and help into salvation and benefit.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that Tamuz was the name for heat or fire (as Rashi ibid. also explains). It was used by the idolaters to describe and name their their idol, but the word itself reflected
the forces of nature only.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/13/2017 10:59 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 1370 Floury Question
|
|
|
Q. If one is at an event or there is food being served in a shul or beis medrash and he is not sure if the food being served is yoshon, and it is not possible to investigate, may he eat it, on the basis that "rov" (most) Jewish bakeries use yoshon flour? (I heard such a heter in the name of an adam gadol, and I wanted to ask Rav Miller's opinion.)
A. Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that it depends on a number of factors, such as the usual or most common origin of the food served in that shul or beis hamedresh (what kind of people acquire, serve or donate the food), what time of the year it is being served, what kind of grain or wheat was used, etc. Therefore, it is recommendable to consult with a local competent Rabbi, familiar with the details of the institution.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit”a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 7/7/2017 3:48 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
Important Numbers
