|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
# 2330 The Reality of Halacha
|
|
|
Q. A friend asked another friend traveling to the states to kindly take for him a small suitcase. He did so but when they stopped to rest, the locked car was broken into and the suitcase was stolen. The driver claimed that he was after all only a shomer chinom, an unpaid agent, as he was just doing a favor, so he is exempt from any restitution.
However, when the driver was asked by the suitcase owner, if he recited tefilat hadderech, he truthfully replied that he did not. So now the owner claims that he is a poshea or negligent shomer, since if he had recited the tefila, likely no wrong would have happened. Does he have a claim?
Would he have a claim if he kept the suitcase in a room without a mezuzah?
A. Poskim maintain a separation between Halacha matters that depend on actual facts and the proven and expected realities of life as opposed to more spiritual, unproven and immaterial issues, such as blessings, tefilos and segulos, that although tremendously important and essential, lack the sensory reality and physical presence, necessary in monetary rulings and other aspects of Halacha.
Maharsham (3: 225), deals with the prohibition of writing amulets on Shabbos, even with the intention of saving someones life. He relates about a local Dayan who permitted the writing of a note with a name of a dangerously ill person by a non-Jew, that he then, carried to the city of Brod, to be delivered to the Belzer Rebbe for a blessing. Rav Shlomo Kluger zt'l, the Rov of Brod, removed that Dayan from office for the chilul Shabbos committed.
In Vehaarev Na, (2: ), Horav Y. Zilberstein, deals with a similar case, of someone leaving the door of the house unlocked on the night of Pesach, relying on the Leil Shimurim promise of that night, and then actually being robbed on that night. He maintains that he is liable to pay for the stolen goods of others.
See also Kehilas Yaakov (Baba Kama 45) in regard to praying for the harm of an evil person and Birur Halocho on daveing during the Shemita year for rains, even when you cannot work physically or water the land.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar and the shomer who did not recite tefilas haderech or placed the suitcase in a room without a mezuza, is not liable for negligence if the item was stolen.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/10/2019 4:25 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2329 Men's Mezuza?
|
|
|
Q. Can a woman living alone, place a mezuza on the entrance of her home?
A. Poskim disagree. Yeshuos Malko (H. Mezuza 5: 10) rules that although a woman is obliged in the mitzva of mezuza, she should not affix it in its place herself, as this is similar to writing the mezuza, which she is not qualified to do. Teshuvos Vehanhogos (4:238), Shaarei Hamezuza (16: 6) and others maintain that on the onset, a woman should not affix a mezuza. Beer Moshe asserts that if done, the mezuza should be removed and replaced by a man without a bracha.
However many Poskim permit. Birkei Yosef asserts that since she is bound to keep this mitzva and she is not allowed to dwell in a home without it, if she was not permitted to place the mezuza herself, she would also not be permitted to make an agent or shaliach to do it for her. The reason being that you cannot have a shaliach perform something for you, if you cannot do it yourself. (Gittin 23b).
Chasam Sofer (Y.D. 210, Eretz Zvi (15), Daas Cohen (169), Yabia Omer (3: 18), Chovas Hadar (9: 3) are some of the Poskim that permit women to affix mezuzos.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that a woman may place lekatchila a mezuza with a brocho.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/8/2019 11:52 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2328 Ask Forgiveness and Get Married
|
|
|
Q. (See question 2327). Can we get married also in the days when selichos are said?
A. Nitei Gavriel (Rosh Hashana 5: 9) writes that the complete month of Elul is propitious for getting married including the days selichos are recited. (See question above). Some however maintain, that it is better to avoid getting married during those days. (Piskei Teshuvos 581: 1: n. 10)
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that the complete month of Elul is propitious for getting married including the days when selichos are recited.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/6/2019 2:59 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2327 Elul Simches
|
|
|
Q. We are arranging our wedding (small - second marriage), and would like to know if there is an issue not to get married during the month of Elul, because of the Days of Judgment? We need a fast answer please.
A. Poskim maintain that on the contrary, the days of Elul are days of good will and bracha. and even those who avoid getting married on the second half of the month when the size of the moon seen decreases, can do so on the month of Elul since it is a blessed month. (Darkei Teshuva Y.D. 179: 8, quoting Bnai Yisoschor. Sdei Chemed - Chasan Vekala 23, where he mentions that his own nuptials were on Elul and all the Gedolei Hador attended. Aruch Hashulchan E.H. 64: 13 and others).
Nitei Gavriel (Rosh Hashana 5: 10) quoting Sefer Chasidim, writes that on the seventh day of Elul one should abstain from getting married.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar regarding
weddings in Elul.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/6/2019 2:57 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2326 Look In on the Look Out
|
|
|
Q. Is using an image baby monitor, without voice the same as a voice monitor, or one can be more lenient?
A. See question above in regard to a voice monitor. Horav Shlomo Miller's opinion is that there may be a greater possibility to be lenient, since no "hashmoas kol" or creating laud noises during Shabbos are involved ("hashmoas kol" is prohibited because it constitutes a weekday activity or "uvdin d’chol," - or a "Ziluzo DeShabbos," a disregard to the holiness of Shabbos. Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Berura 252: 5 - See Ma'ayanei Shlomo 41). In the case of a muted image monitor, no voice is transmitted.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/6/2019 2:47 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2325 Far Cry Baby
|
|
|
Q. Can one use a voice baby monitor or room intercom, if it was left on before Shabbat began, and the controls are taped?
A. On question 1127 regarding why we prohibit using a microphone on Shabbos, and we permit speaking to a person wearing a hearing aid, we wrote: Igrois Moishe (O.H. 4: 85) explains that microphones became prohibited by most Poskim because they involve "hashmoas kol" or an activity that is publicized and creates awareness to all that a prohibited melocho is possibly being transgressed, which is not the case with a hearing aid.
Also, he adds, only a small amount of people in need require hearing aids, thus it is a "milsa delo shechiach" or an uncommon occurrence, that our sages usually do not prohibit.
On question 1126, we quoted an additional reasoning that in reality the melocho is not done by the hard of hearing, but by the one who addresses him, and he is "eino mechaven" (does it without intention). Igrois Moishe maintains that it is not an unavoidable melocho (psik reisha) prohibited also when done without intention, since the hard of hearing may not even be listening.
Regarding a baby monitor Poskim disagree. Some are stringent, since unlike a hearing aid, it also involves "hashmoas kol" (Teshuvos Vehanhogos 1: 230, Ma'ayanei Shlomo 41, Vayaan Dovid 1: 69 and others).
However, other Poskim find more room for leniency regarding baby monitor, since an infant is considered to be “an individual ill with a non-life-threatening illness", because even when he is healthy he is constantly in need of his parents’ care.
Hacham Ovadia Yosef’s grandson Horav Yaakov Sasson rules that one who wishes to be lenient regarding a baby monitor has upon what to rely. He notes that Hacham Ovadia (Teshuvot Yabia Omer 1:19) concludes, based on discussion with Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, who had a very sophisticated understanding of electricity and Halacha, that no Torah prohibitions are violated when using a microphone. Thus, he maintains that the question regarding the use of baby monitors involves only a Rabbinic prohibition, and in need one can be lenient. Maase Choshev (2: 6), Divrei Sholom (6: 128) and others are also lenient.
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is to be stringent as mentioned above, due to the prohibition of "hashmoas kol," (Ma'ayanei Shlomo 41) unless in case of real need.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/6/2019 2:46 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2324 Flat Fee Match
|
|
|
Q. Since so many negative issues and serious problems are created by shadchanim or marriage brokers who favor customers who are wealthy and pay a higher finding fee, should not the Rabbanim join forces together and decree an established fixed fee for any successful shiduch, for all. Thus, also promoting more shiduchim, as the agents would have to compensate their parnassah with volume? What is Horav Miller's opinion and why?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that shadchanus has a significant monetary side attached to it, since usually a dowry and other monetary obligations are being established for the benefit of the prospective newlyweds. Therefore, just as much as for example, a real estate agent or similar who offers a deal that he introduces and represents, is entitled to a compensation based on the value of the transaction, a shadchan may also collect a fee proportional to the amounts that are being offered as part of the marriage agreement.
We should also mention that past experiences have shown when trying to establish Takanot to limit expenses in weddings etc. were not successful. Since after all the monetary rules of the free market are hard to control.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/6/2019 2:23 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2323 A Hair-Raising Tradition?
|
|
|
I know that Rabbi Miller stresses keeping one's family's traditions very much. What would rabbi Miller say about a woman whose family custom is to leave a tefach of hair uncovered? should she continue that family tradition or should she take on a stricter custom of covering all her hair if she wants to?
(She is married, but the women in her husband's family do not cover their hair at all).
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that it is obvious that you do not have to observe and keep traditions that promote unnecessary or non recommended leniencies, and this is clearly one of them.
The proper way to act is indeed, to take on the stricter but accepted and common custom of covering all her hair.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/6/2019 2:11 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2322 A Foot in the Door
|
|
|
Q. Regarding the psak not to open the door for a mechallel Shabbos who carries, if one needs to enter or exit the shul and no other door is available, may one be lenient, or should one miss tefilla b'tzibur rather than open the door for this person?
A. On question 2293 we wrote: "The opinion of Horav Dovid Pam and Horav Aaron Miller Shlit'a, (Rabbonim at the Toronto Kollel), is that one should not open the door for someone carrying a bag and entering from a reshus horabim to a private domain, as he will likely transgress if not on a Biblical prohibition, at least on a Rabbinical one. And since the individual carrying cannot enter without the help provided, not only the prohibition of "mesayea" or helping someone commit a sin is activated, also the Biblical transgression of "lifnei iver" or placing a stumbling block in front of the blind, may be involved.
Our Sages teach that it is permitted to deviate occasionally from the strict truth, when it is done for the sake of maintaining the peace and avoiding conflict, offense and disputes. (Lishnos mipnei hashalom - Yebamos 65b). Therefore, when entering one may say that he just realized that has forgotten the right password, and when exiting he may show some sudden pain and just apologize and walk away. If then he cannot enter or exit by a different door, he should wait until that person is gone."
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that although one should not provide any assistance to someone engaged in transgressing even a Rabbinical prohibition, if one will miss tefila betzibur by not entering, he may open the door for himself and enter slowly, thus the fellow carrying an object will unassisted gain the opportunity to enter after him on his own, and hold the door open himself.
The Rov indicated, that it is quite possible that the fellow carrying, may have already entered the reshus of the shul, if there are steps or a front fenced area facing the door, etc., and no prohibition is done now.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/6/2019 2:06 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2321 From and For a Firm Frum Froy
|
|
|
Q. I'm a frum woman that attends an exercise class for women in a gym where the trainer is not Jewish. Is there an issue of tznius in front of non- Jewish men, since it is not one of the seven mitzvos that apply to them?
Would someone be allowed to go swimming at the women's hour, if the lifesaver is a non-Jewish man?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is that even if no actual prohibition may have been transgressed and no "lifnei iver" or placing a stumbling block in front of the blind applies, there are other most important issues involved, namely tznius or modesty and decency.
Tznius involves not only prohibitions, such a woman covering her elbows and knees, or a married woman covering her hair in public, etc. it involves also the character and spiritual quality of covering herself and her hair all the time, even when she is alone inside her home, only in front of Hashem. In Halachic prohibitions there may be differences between being in front of a Jew or a Gentile. However, on the character and spiritual quality of tznius, a woman should be dressed with modesty wherever she goes, even in a site where there are only Gentiles.
The Rov added that out of her own sense of kavod, self worth and honor, she should always dress in the becoming and decorous ways of a Bas Yisroel, regardless of where she is.
He further advises, that the frum attendants to the gym or pool, should join forces to procure a woman trainer or lifesaver.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/5/2019 11:13 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2320 Run To Help
|
|
|
Q. In the shul I daven the tzedaka collectors sometimes don't wait until you find some change to give them, since for them time is of the essence and they have to move along. After I do find the money and the collector is gone, since in tzedaka, thought is what counts, do I have to run after him since I had already made up my mind as to what to give and to whom? What if I can't find him, do I have to give that money to another similar tzedaka?
A. See similar questions 1849 and 1850. Remah (Y.D. 258: 13) rules that one becomes obliged to give to charity just by truly committing himself in his mind to donate. Although, there are dissenting views, as in Shulchan Aruch, (C.M. 212: 8, see Piskei Teshuva Y.D. ibid. et.al.) one should be stringent when there was indeed a real serious commitment, even if only in one's mind.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that in your case since as you mentioned, sometimes the collectors don't wait, therefore your commitment may not be that serious and it does not necessarily become a neder.
The Rov added in the prior questions that one should always be “Mosser Modoah” or declare, preferably in front of the beis din when he makes hattoras nedorim or the annulment of past oaths, vows and pledges on Erev Rosh Hashana, that any future commitments and pledges done for charity, even done only on ones mind, should not be counted as a nedder or an oath. One can do that declaration any time and does not need be necessarily in front of a beis din or court of three.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 9/5/2019 2:36 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2319 Meet the Greet
|
|
|
Q. I learned that an avel is prohibited in giving and even returning greetings. Is it permitted for the visitors to the home of one in mourning to greet each other? Is a comforting hug between non-aveilim permitted?
A. Aruch Hashulchan (Y.D. 343: 4) writes that at the mourners home people should not exchange greetings. Since it is a place of sadness and sorrow, it is not correct to display and show that one is at peace and harmony. Even Yaakov (55), mentions that it may be considered ‘loeg larosh,’ or mocking the unfortunate. See also Sefer Hapardes (Avelus p. 22), Shibulei Haleket (Smochos 22), Nitei Gavriel (Avelus 89: 1) and others. However, some Poskim are lenient. (Even Yaakov 55, Yabia Omer 4: 33: 1, Yalkut Yosef 7: p. 142)
Mourning in Halacha (10: n. 3) writes: It is reported that Hagaon R' M. Feinstein zt'l. would not even extend his hand in greeting while in the home of a mourner.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is similar. However, the Rov maintains that greetings where there is no asking or replying about peace and welfare or when not expressing that times are good, such as a simple hug, are permitted.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 8/30/2019 5:14 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2318 Like Father Like Daughter?
|
|
|
Q. If the wife is traveling and will not be at home during Shabbos, who should light the Shabbos candles, the husband or an unmarried daughter that is already bat mitzva?
A. Beer Moshe (8: 7) quoting Pri Megodim maintains that on the onset the father should light with a brocho. However, if he so desires he may ask his daughter to light instead with a brocho. (See Piskei Teshuvos 263: 10, Miyam Halocho 3: 64).
Horav Shlomo Miller's Shlit'a opinion is similar.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 8/30/2019 1:07 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2317 Equal Candle Rights
|
|
|
Q. A friend from my yeshiva days told me that the minhag in his family is that the husband also lights the Shabbos candles with a brocho! Is that possible?
A. Shulchan Aruch (O.H. 263: 2-3) rules that both men and women are obliged to light Shabbos candles. However, women are primarily selected to light them, since they are usually at home and deal with the Shabbos needs and preparations. Mishna Berura (ibid. 11) asserts that even if the husband would like to light by himself, his wife has priority. However, if there are many candles he may also light. He adds that on the first Shabbos after giving birth, the husband lights. He also mentions that it is proper that the husband should prepare the candles.
Torah Lishmah (78) mentions that the husband may on the onset, light in another room with a brocho, since the obligation is on both. He adds that she may not prevent him from doing so. Lev Chaim (2: 49), presents a similar opinion.
However, Eishel Avrohom (Butshatch) writes that he would also light Shabbos candles with a brocho in a separate room, but then he read in Shulchan Atzei Shitim, that no brocho should be recited. A similar opinion is mentioned in Piskei Teshuvos (263: 12).
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 8/30/2019 12:59 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2316 The Mind on the Frame
|
|
|
Q. Can one leave turned on a free standing smart frame photo display, that is on always during the week and looks like a regular picture frame on the furniture?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that since one does not usually change the displayed photos and is not similar to a computer at all, see questions 2314-2315 above, is permitted.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 8/30/2019 12:45 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2315 Real or Virtual Daf?
|
|
|
Q. See question above. When one is travelling and due to today’s weight restrictions did not take seforim with him, can he leave his laptop on with the daf on the screen, so he can learn it during Shabbat?
A. Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that learning a daf from a laptop, a tablet, a computer screen or an iPhone, should not be done on Shabbos, even if it was left on before Shabbos began and the keyboard or control buttons are taped or covered. Since one may become engrossed in his learning and alter them, without thinking. This case is not comparable to learning Torah by a normal light that could be modified, since that is unusual when the light is already good and is therefore permitted. (See Ch. Bame Madlikin, and Shulchan Aruch O.H 264). Not so with the above instruments, where one is used to constantly altering them regardless.
Besides, one may easily approach the hotel desk or business center with his laptop etc. and ask them to print that page.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 8/30/2019 12:39 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2314 Screening Shabbos?
|
|
|
Q. If someone staying in a hotel, does not have the permitted battery or connecting incandescent lights with filament bulbs for Shabat. He also does not want to light real candles and is simply leaving on the LED lights in the room. He has however, a screen saver in his laptop that shows two virtual flickering lighted Shabbat candles on silver candlesticks. He will not be making a bracha on the lights on the screen or on the LED lights in the room, but just for the sake of the Shabbat feelings, he wants to live on the laptop screen. Is that permitted or recommended?
A. On question 1791 regarding a very large screen in a family room that serves as a virtual picture frame. It changes according to the times it is programmed, into different scenes, images and pictures of nature that the family greatly enjoys. It also displays family photos, portraits etc.
We wrote that Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a permits leaving on during Shabbos the picture displayed on the screen, if it does not change and stays the same during the complete Shabbos. He also maintains that the controls should be covered and inaccessible. The same should apply in your case.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 8/30/2019 12:37 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2313 Touch this Fire
|
|
|
Q. Are glow sticks that were turned on before Shabbat and will light for a few hours muktza? Can one move them to another room?
A. See questions above. Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit’a opinion is that even if there is a possibility that when moving them, a further mixing of the chemicals in them may occur and result in an increase of the light they emit, since it is not a certainty and therefore not a “p’sik reisha’ and it is also not intentional, it would be permitted to move them. Therefore, the lighted glow sticks are not muktza.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 8/30/2019 12:34 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2312 Throw Some Light on this Light
|
|
|
Q. In case of emergency, when electricity is cut off and the lights go off or when you are camping, can you use glow sticks on Shabbat or Yom Tov?
A. If the light is needed for protection or needed essential care in saving lives on life threatening situations, their use would be permitted as would any other melacha, including lighting candles.
A glow stick is a 'self-contained, short-term light-source. It consists of a translucent plastic tube containing isolated chemical substances that, when combined, create light through chemiluminescence, and it does not require an external energy source." (Wikipedia). Therefore the prohibition of activating and using them, does not involve the regular hava' arah or lighting a fire melacha, but rather nolad.
On question 997 regarding the use of liquid soap and soap that changes from liquid to foam on Shabbos, we wrote: “Remoh (O.H. 326: 10) prohibits using solid soap that dissolves into the water used for washing since it involves creating a new presence and this constitutes “nolad,” (born.)
Nolad refers to things that come into existence on Shabbos, for example breaking ice in order to produce water prohibited by the Talmud (Shabbos 51b.) Sefer Hat’rumah and Remoh, (318: 16 – see M”B 320: 35) explain that the reason is creating a new being.
On question1328 in regard to using an electronic key-card on Shabbos, we wrote:
Beis Yitzchok (Y.D. 2: 31: index) and others maintain the proscription of closing and activating an electric circuit is molid (Making changes to an object or substance. Creating a new entity on Shabbos). He writes: Creating a current flow (molid zerem) is rabbinically forbidden because in doing so one has created something new – a functioning appliance. (See Minchas Shlomo pp. 71-74; Tzitz Eliezer 1:20:10, Tz’lach Hachadash, Kuntres Acharon 1).
Poskim also assert that activating any electrical equipment involves “makkeh bepatish,” literally, striking with a hammer; an act of completing an object and bringing it into its final useful form. These Poskim cite as precedent those who prohibited winding a watch for this reason. (Chazon Ish, O. H. 50: 9; Mishp’tei Uziel 1: 13; Tzitz Eliezer 6: 6; Edus Leyisarel (Rabbi Y. E. Henkin) p. 121. (Rabbi Henkin states that perhaps only a Rabbinic prohibition is involved. The prohibition of metaken mana, is a sub-prohibition of makkeh bepatish). Other Poskim disagree because makeh bapatish refers to a fundamentally permanent act that requires great effort, and turning on an electrical appliance is fundamentally temporary because it will be turned off, and requires a minimal amount of effort.
Glow sticks emit light when two chemicals are mixed. The sticks consist of a tiny, brittle container within a flexible outer container. Each container holds a different solution. When the outer container is bended, the inner container breaks, allowing the solutions to combine, causing the necessary chemical reaction. After breaking, the tube is shaken to thoroughly mix the components. The light cannot be turned off and can only be used once. (ibid.)
Since Poskim debate whether molid is a Biblical or a Rabbinical prohibition, It would be better in case of emergency to use a glow stick than to light a candle.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 8/30/2019 12:32 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# 2311 In Glowing Terms
|
|
|
Q. When you travel or go camping and can't light Shabbat candles because of the hotel restrictions or the wind that will turn them off, can you use glow sticks? Can you se them in Chanuka?
(A glow stick is a 'self-contained, short-term light-source. It consists of a translucent plastic tube containing isolated chemical substances that when combined, create light).
A. In question 667 of this forum we mentioned "that in regards to electric lights Beis Yitzchok (Y.D. 1: 120) opines that they could be used instead of Shabbos candles but not as Chanuka lights since they lack pirsumey nissah. Poskim offer other reasons why electric lights do not qualify. One being that there is no actual fuel present at the time of lightning; it is constantly being generated at the power stations (Pekudas Elozor O.H. 23, Shmiras Shabbos Kechilchoso 43 n.22, et. al.) Accordingly they would permit the use of a battery powered incandescent light bulb. However, some Poskim do not regard the tungsten filament as a wick (Maharshag 2: 107, Levushey Mordechai 3: 59). Most Poskim would not sanction the commonly used fluorescent and LED lights for Chanuka use. Lehoros Nossan (11: 17) permits battery powered incandescent lights when in need and no other option is available, such as one hospitalized. Nitey Gavriel (Chanuk,a Teshuva 1) quotes Be’er Moshe’s opinion, that one should light the incandescent light without a brocho.
Although as mentioned, there are Poskim who are stringent, but the more prevalent ruling is to allow lighting incandescent bulbs even with a blessing (Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 43:4).
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit'a opinion is also not to recite a brocho even on battery powered incandescent filament lights on Chanuka, but permits to do so on Shabbos.
If battery operated incandescent bulbs are not available, other types of bulbs, such as fluorescent or LED, could be lit but without a brocho.
Horav Shlomo Miller’s Shlit'a opinion is that the same would apply to glow sticks. See next question.
Rabbi A. Bartfeld as revised by Horav Shlomo Miller Shlit'a
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 8/30/2019 12:29 PM |
Tell a Friend
| Ask The Rabbi |
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
Important Numbers
