Player FM - Internet Radio Done Right
Checked 17h ago
추가했습니다 four 년 전
Torah Learning Resources. and Rabbi Eli J. Mansour에서 제공하는 콘텐츠입니다. 에피소드, 그래픽, 팟캐스트 설명을 포함한 모든 팟캐스트 콘텐츠는 Torah Learning Resources. and Rabbi Eli J. Mansour 또는 해당 팟캐스트 플랫폼 파트너가 직접 업로드하고 제공합니다. 누군가가 귀하의 허락 없이 귀하의 저작물을 사용하고 있다고 생각되는 경우 여기에 설명된 절차를 따르실 수 있습니다 https://ko.player.fm/legal.
Player FM -팟 캐스트 앱
Player FM 앱으로 오프라인으로 전환하세요!
Player FM 앱으로 오프라인으로 전환하세요!
들어볼 가치가 있는 팟캐스트
스폰서 후원
T
The 85 South Show with Karlous Miller, DC Young Fly and Chico Bean
West Coast legend Ice Cube pulls up to the trap to talk about his new album and kick it one good tine with Karlous Miller, Chico Bean, DC Young Fly and Clayton English! Off the rip they start talking about DC being in the New Friday movies. Cube takes it all the way back to how he started in Compton and Karlous asks about the lyrics to "Today Was A Good Day!" The squad talks about The Big 3 and the struggle to build an all new league. Cube talks about how the govt opposition to his early music and talks about how he got involved in developing a political plan for Black People. From Mike Epps to Bernie Mac, the conversations sways to talking about how comedians impact the movies. Cube talks "All About The Benjamins" and tells a crazy story from the time he was filming Anaconda with J Lo. This is the coldest podcast! || 85 SOUTH App : www.channeleightyfive.com || Twitter/IG : @85SouthShow || Our Website: www.85southshow.com See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
The Hanukah Miracle; Customs Regarding Working and Festive Meals During Hanukah
Manage episode 458748840 series 2882849
Torah Learning Resources. and Rabbi Eli J. Mansour에서 제공하는 콘텐츠입니다. 에피소드, 그래픽, 팟캐스트 설명을 포함한 모든 팟캐스트 콘텐츠는 Torah Learning Resources. and Rabbi Eli J. Mansour 또는 해당 팟캐스트 플랫폼 파트너가 직접 업로드하고 제공합니다. 누군가가 귀하의 허락 없이 귀하의 저작물을 사용하고 있다고 생각되는 경우 여기에 설명된 절차를 따르실 수 있습니다 https://ko.player.fm/legal.
The holiday of Hanukah begins on the 25th of Kislev and continues for eight days. As the Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (21) relates, on the 25th of Kislev the Hashmonaim defeated the Greek oppressors and rededicated the Bet Ha'mikdash. As part of this process they kindled the Menora with the only jug of pure oil they found, and the candles of the Menora miraculously burned for eight days. The Bet Yosef (commentary to the Tur by Maran, author of the Shulhan Aruch) raised the question (in Orah Haim, 670) of why we celebrate this miracle for eight days. The Gemara clearly states that the jug contained enough oil to sustain the candles for one day. If so, then the first day's burning was not miraculous at all, and the miracle was in fact only seven days. Why, then, do we celebrate Hanukah for eight days? The Bet Yosef suggests three answers. First, he writes that the Kohanim anticipated that it would take eight days for new pure oil to arrive, so already on the first day they divided the small jug of oil into eight parts, and lit the candles with one part each day. The miracle was thus that each day, one-eighth of the jug of oil sustained the candles for an entire day, a period that normally required an entire jug. Hence, the miracle in fact spanned the entire eight-day period. Secondly, the Bet Yosef suggests that when the Kohanim entered the Mikdash each morning, they noticed that the jug remained full – even though they had used all its oil for kindling the Menora the night before. This occurred each morning for eight days, and thus the miracle was indeed an eight-day event. Finally, the Bet Yosef writes that perhaps the lamps of the Menora remained filled with oil each morning, and the miracle was thus that the oil in the lamps burned without being depleted. This, too, would account for the eight-day celebration. The holiday of Hanukah was enacted by the Sages, and thus does not have the status of a Torah obligation. For this reason, we do not add a ninth day to this holiday in the Diaspora, the way we add a day to other holidays. This extra day is observed only in conjunction with holidays established by the Torah, as opposed to the Rabbinically-ordained festivals of Hanukah and Purim. The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 670:1; listen to audio recording for precise citation) writes that it is forbidden to fast or eulogize on Hanukah. Working, he writes, is permissible, though there is a custom for women to desist from working while the Hanukah candles burn (or at least during the first half-hour after they are lit). The Magen Abraham (Rabbi Abraham Gombiner, Poland, 1637-1683) explains that this custom commemorates the story of Yehudit, a Jewish woman who heroically killed a Greek general. (Some sources indicate that the story of Yehudit did not occur during the Jews' battle against the Greeks, but rather earlier, during the period of Greek oppression. Either way, her heroism is certainly worthy of commemoration on Hanukah.) By contrast, the Maharil (Rabbi Yaakov Halevi Moelin, Germany, 1355-1427) held that both men and women should refrain from work while the candles burn. The Bet Yosef explained that this practice serves to demonstrate that the candles were lit to publicize the miracle, and not for personal use. By abstaining from work while the candles burn, we show that we did not kindle them to provide light for our normal activities, but rather to commemorate the great miracle of Hanukah. Additionally, this custom helps ensure that a person spends some time reflecting on the Hanukah miracle. It is thus proper after lighting the Hanukah candles not to immediately return to one's normal affairs, but to instead sit and spend time celebrating the miracle. The Kaf Ha'haim (Rabbi Yaakov Moshe Sofer, Baghdad-Israel, 1870-1939) comments (670:10) that there are women who vow during times of danger to refrain from working while the Hanukah candles burn. Many women, he writes, have earned salvation by taking such a vow. It is thus a valuable and worthwhile custom to refrain from work while the Hanukah candles are lit, at least for some of the days of Hanukah. The Shulhan Aruch rules that there is no obligation to eat festive meals on Hanukah, since this holiday celebrates a spiritual, rather than physical, victory. The Greeks sought not to destroy the Jewish people, but rather to destroy the Jewish religion. This is as opposed to the Purim story, when Haman sought to annihilate us as a people. The physical salvation of Purim is thus celebrated through festive eating and drinking, while Hanukah is observed as a mainly spiritual victory, rather than a physical triumph. Nevertheless, some authorities write that it is admirable to have festive celebrations on Hanukah, to commemorate the completion of the Mishkan's construction in the wilderness, which took place on Hanukah. The Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles, Poland, 1525-1572) writes that if these meals contain words of Torah and songs of praise to God, then they certainly have the status of a "Misva meal." Of course, on Rosh Hodesh Tebet (which falls on Hanukah) one should have a special meal, just as on every Rosh Hodesh. This obviously applies to Shabbat Hanukah, as well. The Ben Ish Hai (Rabbi Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) records a custom to light a special candle on Rosh Hodesh Tebet in memory of the famous Tanna, Rabbi Meir Ba'al Ha'nes. There is a custom to eat cheese and other dairy products on Hanukah, since Yehudit (in the incident mentioned above) fed the general dairy products which eventually led to him going to sleep, whereupon she succeeded in assassinating him.
…
continue reading
79 에피소드
The Hanukah Miracle; Customs Regarding Working and Festive Meals During Hanukah
Daily Halacha Podcast - Daily Halacha By Rabbi Eli J. Mansour
Manage episode 458748840 series 2882849
Torah Learning Resources. and Rabbi Eli J. Mansour에서 제공하는 콘텐츠입니다. 에피소드, 그래픽, 팟캐스트 설명을 포함한 모든 팟캐스트 콘텐츠는 Torah Learning Resources. and Rabbi Eli J. Mansour 또는 해당 팟캐스트 플랫폼 파트너가 직접 업로드하고 제공합니다. 누군가가 귀하의 허락 없이 귀하의 저작물을 사용하고 있다고 생각되는 경우 여기에 설명된 절차를 따르실 수 있습니다 https://ko.player.fm/legal.
The holiday of Hanukah begins on the 25th of Kislev and continues for eight days. As the Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (21) relates, on the 25th of Kislev the Hashmonaim defeated the Greek oppressors and rededicated the Bet Ha'mikdash. As part of this process they kindled the Menora with the only jug of pure oil they found, and the candles of the Menora miraculously burned for eight days. The Bet Yosef (commentary to the Tur by Maran, author of the Shulhan Aruch) raised the question (in Orah Haim, 670) of why we celebrate this miracle for eight days. The Gemara clearly states that the jug contained enough oil to sustain the candles for one day. If so, then the first day's burning was not miraculous at all, and the miracle was in fact only seven days. Why, then, do we celebrate Hanukah for eight days? The Bet Yosef suggests three answers. First, he writes that the Kohanim anticipated that it would take eight days for new pure oil to arrive, so already on the first day they divided the small jug of oil into eight parts, and lit the candles with one part each day. The miracle was thus that each day, one-eighth of the jug of oil sustained the candles for an entire day, a period that normally required an entire jug. Hence, the miracle in fact spanned the entire eight-day period. Secondly, the Bet Yosef suggests that when the Kohanim entered the Mikdash each morning, they noticed that the jug remained full – even though they had used all its oil for kindling the Menora the night before. This occurred each morning for eight days, and thus the miracle was indeed an eight-day event. Finally, the Bet Yosef writes that perhaps the lamps of the Menora remained filled with oil each morning, and the miracle was thus that the oil in the lamps burned without being depleted. This, too, would account for the eight-day celebration. The holiday of Hanukah was enacted by the Sages, and thus does not have the status of a Torah obligation. For this reason, we do not add a ninth day to this holiday in the Diaspora, the way we add a day to other holidays. This extra day is observed only in conjunction with holidays established by the Torah, as opposed to the Rabbinically-ordained festivals of Hanukah and Purim. The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 670:1; listen to audio recording for precise citation) writes that it is forbidden to fast or eulogize on Hanukah. Working, he writes, is permissible, though there is a custom for women to desist from working while the Hanukah candles burn (or at least during the first half-hour after they are lit). The Magen Abraham (Rabbi Abraham Gombiner, Poland, 1637-1683) explains that this custom commemorates the story of Yehudit, a Jewish woman who heroically killed a Greek general. (Some sources indicate that the story of Yehudit did not occur during the Jews' battle against the Greeks, but rather earlier, during the period of Greek oppression. Either way, her heroism is certainly worthy of commemoration on Hanukah.) By contrast, the Maharil (Rabbi Yaakov Halevi Moelin, Germany, 1355-1427) held that both men and women should refrain from work while the candles burn. The Bet Yosef explained that this practice serves to demonstrate that the candles were lit to publicize the miracle, and not for personal use. By abstaining from work while the candles burn, we show that we did not kindle them to provide light for our normal activities, but rather to commemorate the great miracle of Hanukah. Additionally, this custom helps ensure that a person spends some time reflecting on the Hanukah miracle. It is thus proper after lighting the Hanukah candles not to immediately return to one's normal affairs, but to instead sit and spend time celebrating the miracle. The Kaf Ha'haim (Rabbi Yaakov Moshe Sofer, Baghdad-Israel, 1870-1939) comments (670:10) that there are women who vow during times of danger to refrain from working while the Hanukah candles burn. Many women, he writes, have earned salvation by taking such a vow. It is thus a valuable and worthwhile custom to refrain from work while the Hanukah candles are lit, at least for some of the days of Hanukah. The Shulhan Aruch rules that there is no obligation to eat festive meals on Hanukah, since this holiday celebrates a spiritual, rather than physical, victory. The Greeks sought not to destroy the Jewish people, but rather to destroy the Jewish religion. This is as opposed to the Purim story, when Haman sought to annihilate us as a people. The physical salvation of Purim is thus celebrated through festive eating and drinking, while Hanukah is observed as a mainly spiritual victory, rather than a physical triumph. Nevertheless, some authorities write that it is admirable to have festive celebrations on Hanukah, to commemorate the completion of the Mishkan's construction in the wilderness, which took place on Hanukah. The Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles, Poland, 1525-1572) writes that if these meals contain words of Torah and songs of praise to God, then they certainly have the status of a "Misva meal." Of course, on Rosh Hodesh Tebet (which falls on Hanukah) one should have a special meal, just as on every Rosh Hodesh. This obviously applies to Shabbat Hanukah, as well. The Ben Ish Hai (Rabbi Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) records a custom to light a special candle on Rosh Hodesh Tebet in memory of the famous Tanna, Rabbi Meir Ba'al Ha'nes. There is a custom to eat cheese and other dairy products on Hanukah, since Yehudit (in the incident mentioned above) fed the general dairy products which eventually led to him going to sleep, whereupon she succeeded in assassinating him.
…
continue reading
79 에피소드
모든 에피소드
×If one violated the prohibition of Borer B'Mezid (intentionally), the selected food is forbidden to benefit from. The only solution is to mix it back in with the P'solet (waste) and start again by selecting in a permitted fashion. If one violated Borer B'Shogeg (unintentionally), Hacham Ovadia and Hacham David in Halacha Berura bring several factors to rely upon to be lenient. First, there is the opinion of Rabbi Meir who permits benefiting from all prohibited Melachot performed B'Shogeg. Second, it is only forbidden to benefit from Melachot similar to Bishul (cooking) in which there is an intrinsic change to the object. E.g. raw food becomes cooked food. However, Borer, is similar to the Melacha of Hosa'ah (carrying) in which the food is moved about, but nothing is done to the food. In such cases, the Hayeh Adam (Rav Abraham Danzig of Vilna, 1748-1820) rules that there is no problem benefitting from the Melacha. Moreover, there was a permitted way to perform the Borer, and therefore it is not actually considered benefiting from a prohibited Melacha, since he could have done it the permitted way. SUMMARY If one violated Borer unintentionally he may benefit from the food on Shabbat.…
It occasionally happens that some liquid sits on top of yoghurt in the container, and many people prefer spilling out the liquid before eating the yoghurt. At first glance, this would appear to be forbidden on Shabbat, as it entails removing Pesolet (an undesirable substance) from Ochel (the desirable substance). In truth, however, many Halachic authorities permit pouring out the liquid from the top of the yoghurt. Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Israel, 1923-1998) writes that when one pours out the liquid, we may consider him as removing Ochel from Pesolet, and not Pesolet from Ochel. By tipping the container in such a way that the yoghurt remains, one essentially removes the yoghurt from the liquid, and thus it is permissible. Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in Hazon Ovadia – Shabbat (vol. 4, p. 229, in the annotation; listen to audio recording for precise citation), advances a different argument, claiming that the liquid and yoghurt are not actually mixed together, and thus removing the liquid cannot be considered "separating." Since the liquid sits on top of the yoghurt, and is not mixed together with it, removing the liquid would not constitute Borer and is thus permissible on Shabbat. This would apply as well to one who wishes to pour out the liquid from a can of olives or pickles. Here, too, one could argue that the person is separating the olives from the liquid, and not the liquid from the olives, and, furthermore, the liquid and olives are not actually mixed together. Hence, Hacham Ovadia Yosef ruled (in Hazon Ovadia, ibid., and in Yalkut Yosef, in the laws of Borer) that it is permissible to pour the liquid out of a can of olives or pickles on Shabbat. He noted that the work Shemirat Shabbat Ke'hilchatah (by Rabbi Yehoshua Neubert, contemporary) forbids pouring the liquid out of a can in such a case, but in the 5770 (2010) edition of the work the author retracted this view and ruled leniently. This is, indeed, the Halacha, and one may pour the liquid out from a yoghurt container or can of olives and the like on Shabbat. Summary: If there is liquid sitting on top of a yoghurt container, one may pour it out so he is left with only the yoghurt. Similarly, it is permissible to pour the liquid out from a can of olives or pickles.…
There are three conditions that must be met for one to be allowed to separate on Shabbat: 1) He must separate the Ochel (desirable food) from the Pesolet (undesirable substance), and not the other way around; 2) this must be done by hand, and not with a utensil; 3) this must be done just before the food is to be eaten, and not for later use. The reason why Borer is permitted for immediate use is because it is then considered part of the process of eating. Just as chewing is obviously allowed on Shabbat, and does not violate the prohibition of Tohen (grinding), similarly, separating the desirable food from the undesirable substance is permitted as part of the process of eating. It is therefore allowed immediately before eating, but not earlier. How soon before the meal must this be done? When do we consider the Borer (separation) as taking place "immediately" before the meal such that it is permissible? This issue is subject to debate among the Halachic authorities. The Bet Yosef (commentary to the Tur by Maran Rav Yosef Karo, author of the Shulhan Aruch), in Siman 319, cites the Mordechi (Rav Mordechai Ben Hillel, Germany, 1250-1398) as saying that as long as the separating is done within an hour of the meal, this suffices to allow Borer. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in Parashat Beshalah (1), takes this ruling literally, and permits separating food up to an hour before the food is to be served. Others, however, explained the Mordechi differently, claiming that he did not actually refer to a full hour before the meal. The Shebet Halevi (Rav Shemuel Wosner, contemporary) claimed that the Mordechi meant a half-hour before the meal, and thus one may separate only until a half-hour before the food is going to be served. Others rule even more stringently. Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001), in his work Menuhat Ahaba (vol. 2), notes that from the beginning of the Mordechi's comments, it appears that he requires the separating to be done immediately before the food is served. This is the ruling accepted by Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in Hazon Ovadia (p. 180, Halacha 5; listen to audio recording for precise citation), where he writes that Borer is allowed only if it is done within a few minutes of the meal. Hacham Ovadia notes that this was the position of the Hazon Ish (Rav Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz, 1878-1953), who ruled that separating may be done no earlier than five minutes before the meal. He adds that in a situation where one is preparing a very large meal for a large number of people, and many foods need to be prepared, then one may begin the preparations already a half-hour before the meal is scheduled to be served. In an ordinary case, however, when a woman is preparing a meal for her family and simply needs to peel some fruits or vegetables, and perhaps separate the leaves of lettuce from the spoiled leaves, this should be done only within a few minutes of the meal, and no earlier. This means that a woman should not do separating in preparation for Shabbat lunch before she goes to the synagogue on Shabbat morning. Of course, other preparations are permitted early in the morning, but preparations involving Borer may not be done earlier than a few minutes prior to the meal, or within a half-hour if many guests will be attending, as discussed. Summary: One is allowed to separate desirable food from an undesirable substance on Shabbat if this is done by hand and within a few minutes of the meal when it will be served. If one needs to prepare for a large meal with many guests, then the separating may be done within a half-hour of the meal, but no earlier.…
The Shabbat prohibition of Borer forbids removing undesirable items that are mixed together with desirable items. The question arises as to whether it would be forbidden to remove bones from fish as one eats on Shabbat. The Hid"a (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806), in his work Birkeh Yosef, cites a debate among the Aharonim (post-Medieval Halachic authorities) as to whether the Borer prohibition applies to separating Pesolet (undesirable food) from Ochel (desirable food) during the eating process. On the one hand, one might argue that the Borer prohibition applies regardless of when the separation is performed; it is never permissible to separate Pesolet from Ochel on Shabbat. On the other hand, separating during the "hand to mouth" eating process might be considered an integral stage of eating. Since the Torah clearly allows eating on Shabbat, it perhaps allows separating Pesolet from one's food during eating, as this constitutes an important stage of the eating process. The Hid"a cites the Mahari Abulafia as permitting separating Pesolet from one's food as he eats, whereas the Rav Yom Tob Sahalon (1559-1638) rules stringently, and applies the Borer prohibition even to separating during the eating process. Of course, according to all opinions it is forbidden to separate Pesolet while preparing food to be served, even just before serving. The Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933), in his Be'ur Halacha, notes that this issue was already debated earlier, by the Rishonim (Medieval Halachic scholars). The Ramban (Rabbi Moshe Nahmanides of Spain, 1194-1270) allowed separating during eating, while the Rosh (Rabbenu Asher Ben Yehiel, Germany-Spain, 1250-1327) ruled stringently. As for the final Halacha, the Hid"a writes that since a Torah violation of Shabbat is at stake, we must follow the stringent opinion, and refrain from separating Pesolet from food even as we eat. Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001), in his Menuhat Ahaba, likewise rules stringently, but he adds that the lenient ruling of the Mahari Abulafia may be taken into account in situations where there are other considerations warranting a lenient ruling. With regard to removing bones from fish, Rabbenu Hananel (early 11th century) held that since the meat of the fish is attached to the bone, removing the bone does not violate the prohibition of Borer. Furthermore, some authorities held that since fish is normally eaten by first removing the bones before bringing the meat to the mouth, this would not constitute Borer, and is rather the usual manner of eating. Rabbi Moshe Halevi thus rules that in consideration of these arguments, combined with the ruling of the Mahari Abulafia, who permits separating during the eating process, we may allow removing bones from fish while eating on Shabbat. He adds that adults feeding children may separate the bones before giving the food to the children, since the children are incapable of doing so themselves. Summary: It is permissible to remove bones from fish while eating on Shabbat. One may not, however, separate the bones before serving the fish, except when serving children, who cannot separate the bones themselves.…
The Shabbat prohibition of Borer forbids separating undesirable food from desirable food on Shabbat, except under certain conditions. The Poskim addressed the question of whether this prohibition would apply to removing the inedible peel that surrounds a vegetable or fruit. Would one be allowed, for example, to peel an onion, or a clove of garlic, on Shabbat? On the one hand, peeling entails removing the undesirable substance (the peel) from the desirable substance (the onion), and this situation would thus seemingly qualify as a case of Borer. Peeling would then be permissible only under the conditions that apply to Borer generally. Conversely, however, one might argue that peeling does not constitute Borer because the two substances are not mixed. Borer means separating undesirable food from desirable food in a mixture. In the case of an onion, however, the peel simply covers the edible food, and does not combine with it to form a mixture. One might therefore argue that the Halacha of Borer should not apply to peeling fruits and vegetables. This issue is subject to a debate among the Halachic authorities. The work Tal Orot held that Borer does not apply to peeling, and one may therefore peel fruits and vegetables on Shabbat without any restrictions. Most other authorities, however, disagree, and held that peeling indeed constitutes Borer, because the peel is attached to the edible food and they are thus considered a "mixture" of sorts. These authorities allow peeling on Shabbat only "Samuch La'achila," just prior to eating the food item or prior to the meal at which it is served. One may not, however, peel an onion in the morning in preparation for Se'uda Shelishit later that afternoon. Since, according to this view, the restrictions of Borer apply to peeling, it is allowed only just prior to the meal. This is the ruling codified by the Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles, Poland, 1525-1572) in Siman 321, and is the position taken as well by Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001) in his work Menuhat Ahaba. The exception to this rule is situations where some pieces of fruit are invariably removed along with the peel. When one peels a mango, for example, small pieces of mango come off together with the peel. This occurs as well when one peels certain kinds of melon. In these cases, peeling would not constitute Borer, since one is considered separating desirable food from other desirable food, rather than undesirable food from desirable food. Therefore, it would be permissible to peel a mango or certain kinds of melon on Shabbat morning for a fruit salad to be served later in the day. This would not apply to common fruits such as oranges and bananas, where the peel separates cleanly from the fruit, without any pieces attached. One may peel an orange or banana on Shabbat only just prior to the meal, but not in preparation for later in the day. Summary: It is forbidden to peel an onion, garlic or fruits on Shabbat unless he does so just prior to the meal in which it will be eaten. The exception to this rule is fruits such as mango and certain melons, where pieces of fruit invariably come off together with the peel; these fruits may be peeled even in preparation for later in the day.…
If a person eats on Shabbat a salad that contains, for example, lettuce, tomatoes and onions, and he does not like onions, he may not remove the onions from the salad. Halacha forbids removing on Shabbat Pesolet (an undesirable substance) from Ochel (a desirable substance), and this applies even to a "relative Pesolet," a food which is perfectly edible but one does not want to eat. Therefore, the person in this case would have to take the lettuce and tomatoes from the salad, rather than removing the onions. However, if there is somebody else at the table who enjoys eating onions, one may remove the onions from his salad to give them to that other person. Since he removes the onions not to discard them, but rather for somebody else to eat, this is considered separating Ochel from Ochel, which is entirely permissible on Shabbat. This is the ruling of Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in Hazon Ovadia – Shabbat (vol. 4, p. 188, in the annotation). If some pieces of lettuce in the salad are spoiled, one may not remove them from the salad, as this would constitute separating Pesolet from Ochel. This is the ruling of the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in Parashat Beshalah (2:6; listen to audio recording for precise citation). However, the Ben Ish Hai adds, if one is taking leaves from a head of lettuce, and the outer leaves are spoiled, he may remove them in order to access the fresh leaves underneath them. Just as one may remove a peel of a fruit in order to access the edible part of the fruit, similarly, one may remove the spoiled lettuce in order to access the desirable leaves. Since this is done in order to facilitate eating, it is permissible and does not violate the prohibition of Borer. Hacham Ovadia Yosef (ibid. p. 191) rules that it is permissible on Shabbat to check leaves of lettuce for bugs, and if one finds a large bug, he may remove it. Since the bug is not mixed with the lettuce, but rather constitutes an independent entity, removing it from the leaf is not considered "separating." Nor is this forbidden on the grounds of Mukseh, because it is permissible to remove an item normally considered Mukseh if this is necessary to access food. Hacham Ovadia notes in this context the Halacha permitting removing a bug from a cup of wine on Shabbat (under certain circumstances). The Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles of Cracow, 1525-1572) writes (302:1) that it is permissible on Shabbat to remove feathers from one's garment, as this does not constitute "separating." Similarly, if pieces of food fall onto one's beard as he eats, he is permitted to remove them from his beard, as this is not regarded as "separating." Summary: One who is eating a salad may not remove the vegetables that he does not want to eat, unless he does so to give them to somebody else who wants to eat them. One may not remove spoiled pieces of lettuce from a salad on Shabbat, but one may remove spoiled leaves from a head of lettuce if this is necessary to access fresh leaves. It is permissible to check leaves of lettuce for bugs on Shabbat, and to remove bugs that are found.…
If a person prepared tea with a teabag on Shabbat (following the relevant Halachic guidelines), is he then allowed to remove the teabag from the cup? At first glance, it appears that removing the teabag would violate the prohibition of Borer – separating – as one is removing Pesolet – an undesirable substance – from Ochel – the food he desires. The Halachic authorities discuss this question and rule that one may, in fact, remove the teabag from the cup, on the basis of a ruling of the Maharitatz known as "En Berera Be'lah," which means that the laws of Borer do not apply to removing a solid from a liquid. Just like one may, according to this position, remove an insect from a beverage on Shabbat, similarly, one may remove a teabag from a teacup. An additional question arises concerning the drops of liquid that fall from the bag into the cup during the process of removing the bag. At the moment when the teabag is hovering over the cup, drops of tea drip from the bag into the cup, which seemingly pose a problem of Borer. Even though by holding the bag over the cup one separates the Ochel (the drops of tea) from the Pesolet (the teabag), which is permissible, we should perhaps regard the bag as a Keli – a utensil. One of the conditions for allowing Borer on Shabbat is that the separation is done by hand, and not with a utensil. In this situation, however, one separates with a teabag, as the drops of water fall through the small perforations in the bag into the cup, seemingly in violation of the prohibition of Borer. Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001) writes that one may remove the teabag from the cup even if drops of tea will then fall from the bag into the cup. He explains that even if we indeed regard a teabag as a Keli, it is certainly not a utensil made specifically for the purpose of separating, like a sifter or sieve. As such, the prohibition of Borer potentially applies in this case only on the level of Mi'de'rabbanan (Rabbinic enactment), since the Biblical prohibition applies only when using a utensil especially made for the purpose of separating. And when one removes a teabag from a cup, he certainly does not intend to have drops of tea fall from the bag into the cup, and thus this situation is one of "Pesik Resheh De'lo Niha Leh" – where one performs an action that will inevitably result in an action forbidden on Shabbat, but one has no interest in that forbidden action. "Pesik Resheh" is permitted on Shabbat when the prohibition involved was enacted by the Sages and is not forbidden on the level of Torah law. Therefore, since separating with a teabag is forbidden only by force of Rabbinic enactment, it is permissible to remove it from a cup even if drops will invariably fall from it. However, this line of reasoning suffices to permit removing the teabag only if one indeed has no interest in those drops of tea that fall from the bag. Some people, however, specifically want those drops in their cup of tea, as those drops have absorbed the flavor of the tea. This then changes the situation to one of "Pesik Resheh De'niha Leh," where one is interested in the resulting forbidden action, regarding which we cannot apply the leniency mentioned above. Therefore, the Shemirat Shabbat Ke'hilchatah (Rav Yehoshua Neubert, contemporary) rules that one should remove the teabag from the cup with a spoon, so that any drops that drip from the teabag will fall into the spoon and be discarded along with the teabag, such that no separation is done. This is also the ruling of Rav Yitzhak Zafrani in his Vayizra Yitzhak. Although those who are lenient in this regard and remove the teabag by hand have authorities on whom to rely, it is preferable to follow the stringent view and remove it with a spoon. Certainly, according to all opinions, it would be forbidden to intentionally hold the spoon over the cup of tea in order for drops to fall into the tea. Summary: After preparing tea on Shabbat, it is preferable to remove the teabag with a spoon, and not by hand. Some authorities permit removing it by hand, as long as one does not intentionally hold the bag over the teacup to allow drops to fall from the bag into the cup.…
If a person on Shabbat is eating soup that has vegetables, and he wants to eat only the vegetables, without the liquid, he may not pour the liquid out of his spoon back into the bowl. Since he likes the vegetables and is not interested in eating the liquid, he must regard the vegetables as Ochel (desirable food) and the soup as Pesolet (undesirable substance). The laws of Borer (separating on Shabbat) require removing the Ochel from the Pesolet, and not the other way around, and it would thus be forbidden to spill the liquid out of the spoon so that only the vegetables remain. One would be required in this case to take the vegetables from the liquid, and not the liquid from the vegetables. This is the ruling of Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001), in his work Menuhat Ahaba (listen to audio recording for precise citation). The Menuhat Ahaba also discusses the opposite case, of one who wants only the liquid, but not the vegetables. Of course, if the vegetables are in the bottom of the bowl and the liquid is on top, he can simply take liquid with his spoon without any concern. However, one might want to press down on the vegetables with the back of the spoon so that the liquid fills his spoon, without any vegetables. The Menuhat Ahaba writes that this is forbidden on Shabbat, as it violates the prohibition of Borer. One of the conditions for allowing Borer is that one must separate by hand, and not with a utensil, as separating by hand is considered the normal manner of eating, and not an act of separation. When one uses a spoon in its normal manner of use, filling the cup of the spoon with food or liquid, then we regard the spoon as simply an extension of one's hand, since this is the normal method of eating. However, using the back of a spoon to separate vegetables from liquid is not the ordinary way of eating with a spoon, and this would be considered separating with a utensil, as opposed to separating by hand. As such, separating in this fashion would transgress the prohibition of Borer and is forbidden on Shabbat. This is also the ruling of the Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933). A third issue regarding Borer that could arise when eating soup on Shabbat is the use of a perforated spoon. If one wishes to eat only the vegetables without the liquid, he might want to use a perforated spoon which automatically drains the liquid and leaves the solid food. Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Israel, 1923-1998), in his responsa, allows the use of a perforated spoon on Shabbat, based on several different lines of reasoning, though he concludes that one who is stringent in this regard is "deserving of praise." Most other authorities, however, including the Shemirat Shabbat Ke'hilchatah (Rav Yehoshua Neubert, contemporary) and Menuhat Ahaba, disagree with this ruling, and forbid the use of a perforated spoon on Shabbat. They follow the position of the Vayizra Yitzhak that a perforated spoon is considered a utensil designated for separating, like a sieve, and is thus forbidden to be used on Shabbat with the intention of separating. Although one may use a perforated spoon if he has no interest in separating the liquid from the solids, it may not be used with the specific intention of separating. According to the Vayizra Yitzhak, using a perforated spoon in order to eat the vegetables without the liquid would transgress the Torah violation of Borer, and thus many authorities, as mentioned, dispute Hacham Bension's position and forbid the use of such a spoon on Shabbat. This is, indeed, the Halacha. Summary: If one who eats soup on Shabbat wishes to eat only the vegetables without the liquid, he may not pour the liquid out of his spoon to leave only the vegetables, or use a perforated spoon. One who wishes to eat only the soup without the vegetables may not press down on the vegetables with the back of the spoon so that only the liquid fills the cup of the spoon.…
One of the rules of Borer – separating foods on Shabbat – requires that one remove the Ochel (food) from the Pesolet (undesirable substance), and not the other way around. The question arises as to whether this Halacha applies to two perfectly edible foods, one of which one happens to dislike. If for example, a person has a pile of apples and oranges mixed together, and he likes apples but does not like oranges, must he ensure to remove the apples from the oranges? Must he consider the oranges "Pesolet" because he dislikes them, or are both fruits considered Ochel since they are both perfectly edible, such that he may separate them in whichever manner he chooses? This issue is subject to a dispute among the Rishonim (Medieval Halachic scholars). Tosafot (Talmud commentaries by Medieval French and German scholars), in Masechet Shabbat (74), write that the status of Pesolet is defined in relative terms, and thus even edible food would be considered Pesolet if one dislikes it. Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki of Troyes, France, 1040-1105), however, appears to indicate that the status of Pesolet is defined by an intrinsic quality, and thus edible food cannot be considered Pesolet. Maran, in the Shulhan Aruch (319:3; listen to audio recording for precise citation), rules that if two edible foods are mixed together, one may separate them in whichever manner he chooses. As long as one separates by hand and with the intention of eating immediately, he may either remove the food he likes or the food he dislikes. Maran thus follows the view of Rashi, that an edible food does not have the status of Pesolet even if one happens to dislike it. The Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles of Cracow, 1525-1572), however, in his glosses to the Shulhan Aruch, indicates that in such a case one must remove the food he likes, in accordance with Tosafot's opinion. The Be'ur Halacha (essays on the Shulhan Aruch by Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) discusses this topic at length, noting that the Shulhan Aruch's formulation of this Halacha is based upon the Rambam (Rabbi Moshe Maimoindes, Spain-Egypt, 1135-1204), who likewise indicates that edible food which one dislikes is not considered Pesolet. In this context the Be'ur Halacha cites numerous Halachic authorities who follow this view, and maintain that when two edible foods are mixed together, one may separate them in whichever fashion he chooses, even removing the food he does not like from the food he likes. Nevertheless, the Be'ur Halacha concludes that since this issue involves a potential Torah violation, it is preferable to follow the stringent view and remove the food one likes from the food he does not like, and not the other way around. Even though the majority view among the Halachic authorities does not appear to require separating in this fashion, it is preferable to do so in order to avoid any possible violation of the Torah prohibition of Borer. This is the view taken by Sephardic Chief Rabbi Shelomo Amar, in his responsa Shema Shelomo (Orah Haim 10). Summary: One should follow the laws of Borer even when separating two edible foods, one of which he dislikes. Even though both foods are edible, it is preferable to ensure to remove the food he likes from the food he does not like, and not the other way around.…
Is it permissible on Shabbat to separate food to serve it to somebody else? For example, may a mother remove edible food from an inedible substance in order to feed the food to her child? Assuming she follows the ordinary rules of Borer (separating on Shabbat) – meaning, she takes the desirable food from the undesirable substance, and this is done by hand and for immediate use – is this permissible, if she is not the one who will eat the food? The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1807), in his work Birkeh Yosef, rules that the rules of Borer apply equally to one who separates food for himself and one who separates food for somebody else. As long as one meets the standard conditions for allowing separating foods, this may be done even to feed another person. The Hida draws proof to this ruling from the Gemara's discussion in Masechet Shabbat (74a) of Rav Bibai, who was serving fruit to the Rabbis on Shabbat, and instead of serving each one individually, he placed the basket in front of them. The Gemara raises the question of why Rav Bibai chose this method, noting that this may have been done simply as an expression of generosity, so that each guest can take as much as he likes. However, the Gemara also raises the possibility that this was done to avoid the issue of Borer. Rav Bibai may have ruled that one may not separate on Shabbat even if he removes the desirable food from the undesirable food, and thus he could not selected fruits from the basket for his guests and had to bring them the entire basket, instead. It is noteworthy that the Gemara did not mention the fact that Rav Bibai would have been separating food for other people, and not for himself. It appears from the Gemara's comments that this was not a factor at all, proving that the standard rules of Borer apply regardless of whether one is separating for himself or for somebody else. The Hida adds that this Halacha applies even if the person who separates the foods is unable to eat the food he is separating, such as if he had recently eaten meat and he is now handling dairy foods. Even in such a case, one may separate the foods for another person, as long as he follows the standard requirements of Borer. This is the ruling of Sephardic Chief Rabbi Shelomo Amar, in his work of responsa, and this is, indeed, the Halacha. Summary: The laws of Borer apply regardless of whether one wishes to separate food for himself or for somebody else. In both cases, separating is allowed if one removes the desirable food from the undesirable substance, and this is done by hand and for immediate use.…
Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Israel, 1923-1998), in a famous responsum (Or Le'sion, vol. 2, Siman 31), addresses the situation of a child who ate a very small amount of the food on his plate, and after the meal, his mother wants to return the untouched portion to the container to be stored for the next day's meal. One of the conditions to allow Borer – separating – on Shabbat is that the separating must be done for immediate use, such as if one separates food from an undesirable substance so it can be served at a meal that is about to take place. In the situation described, however, the mother removes the untouched food from the undesirable food in preparation for the next day's meal, and the question thus becomes whether this is permissible on Shabbat. Do we consider this a case of Borer, since the untouched food is being separated from the other food on the plate? Or, can we distinguish between the classic case of Borer, where two substances are actually mixed together, and this situation, where the foods are situated on the same plate, but are not mixed together? Hacham Bension rules that this would, indeed, constitute Borer and be forbidden on Shabbat if it is not done for immediate use. He writes that although in the Shulhan Aruch's discussion of Borer it refers to a case of foods that are "Me'urabin" ("mixed"), it is clear, in Hacham Bension's view, that Borer is not limited to situations of foods that are actually mixed together. As long as the foods are close together, as they usually are if they are on the same plate, the laws of Borer apply, and one would not be allowed to take one food from the other for any purpose other than immediate use. Sephardic Chief Rabbi Shelomo Amar discusses this issue in his work Shema Shelomo (Orah Haim 10), and writes that if the foods are in separate compartments in the plate – like some children's plates have – then certainly one may remove food from one compartment. In such a case, the foods are clearly separate, and thus taking from one compartment would not constitute Borer. And even in an ordinary plate, Rav Amar writes, there is room to be lenient and allow separating the untouched food, in contrast to Hacham Bension's stringent ruling. Rav Amar notes that both the Rambam and Shulhan Aruch speak of Borer in the context of items that are mixed together, and the Be'ur Halacha (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933), in discussing the Rama's ruling (based on the Terumat Ha'deshen) concerning Borer as it applies to different kinds of fish, comments that this refers to fish that are mixed together. Hence, there is a basis to argue that Borer does not apply to different foods that are placed near one another on a plate but not actually mixed with one another. Indeed, Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001), in his work Menuhat Ahaba (vol. 2), rules that Borer applies only when two foods are mixed together. As for the practical Halacha, then, those who are lenient in this regard certainly have on whom to rely. However, in light of the stringent ruling of Hacham Bension, and as the issue at stake involves a potential Torah prohibition, it is preferable to be stringent and not separate foods on a plate even if they are not mixed together. Summary: If there are different foods on a plate that are not mixed together, it is preferable not to take one food from the plate unless this is needed for immediate use. However, those who are lenient in this regard have authorities on whom to rely. A common example is when a child ate one food on the plate but not another, and the parent wishes to take the untouched food and return it to the pot or container for the next meal.…
The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 319:1) delineates three conditions that must be met for Borer – separating mixed substances from one another – to be permissible on Shabbat: 1) One must separate the Ochel (edible food) from the Pesolet (inedible food), and not the other way around. 2) One must separate "Be'yad" – by hand, and not with a utensil. 3) One must separate "Mi'yad" – for immediate purposes, and not for a later time. The first condition, that the edible food must be separated from the inedible food, is based on the premise that the normal process eating entails taking food and placing it in one's mouth. Removing the Ochel from the Pesolet is thus considered eating, and not an act of separating, and is therefore permissible on Shabbat. Tosafot (Talmud commentaries by Medieval French and German scholars), however, in Masechet Shabbat (74), impose an important restriction on this Halacha. They claim that this condition applies only if there is more edible food than inedible food. In such a case, the normal way of separating would be to remove the inedible food, which would be far simpler given that it is the minority. In order to avoid the Torah prohibition against separating on Shabbat, therefore, Halacha requires separating the Ochel from the Pesolet, which is the abnormal manner of separating in such a case. If, however, there is more Pesolet than Ochel, then the normal method of separating would be to separate the edible food from the inedible substance. In order to avoid the prohibition of Borer, one would have to separate in the opposite manner, removing the Pesolet from the Ochel. According to Tosafot, then, before separating two substances that are mixed together, one must first determine which substance constitutes the majority and which constitutes the minority, as this will determine the Halachically permissible method of separation. The Be'ur Halacha (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) cites Halachic authorities who note than the Shulhan Aruch did not accept Tosafot's position, or even take it into account at all. According to the Shulhan Aruch, the respective proportions of the Ochel and Pesolet are of no Halachic consequence with regard to the laws of Borer, and in all situations, one must remove the edible food from the inedible food, and not the other way around. This is the ruling of Sephardic Chief Rabbi Shelomo Amar, in his work of responsa Shema Shelomo (Orah Haim 10:1), and this is, indeed, the accepted Halacha. Summary: If edible food is mixed with an inedible substance, one may remove the edible food from the inedible substance, but it is forbidden to remove the inedible substance from the edible food. This applies regardless of which of the two substances constitutes the majority in the mixture.…
The question recently arose regarding a certain synagogue that remodeled the interior of the building, and ordered special decorative Menorahs that adorned the wall both in the main sanctuary and in the study hall. These Menorahs are made from metal, use electric lights, and have seven branches, resembling the Menorah in the Bet Ha'mikdash. Some Rabbis questioned the propriety of having these Menorahs, as it is forbidden to make replicas of the furnishings of the Bet Ha'mikdash. Although this Menorah does not precisely resemble the Menorah in the Mikdash, as the branches do not have a receptacle for oil and wicks, and it runs on electricity, nevertheless, some argued that its resemblance to the Menorah in the Bet Ha'mikdash suffices to render it forbidden. This question was addressed already by Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in a responsum that appears in the posthumously published seventh volume of Yehaveh Da'at (142; listen to audio recording for citations of select passages from this responsum), and he cites numerous Poskim who explicitly allowed such Menorahs. One such Posek is Rav Reuven David Ha'kohen Borstein (the "Radach"), who writes that it is entirely permissible even "Le'chatehila" (from the outset) to make such a Menorah, because the branches are closed at the top without a receptacle for oil and wicks. As such, such Menorahs do not at all resemble the Menorah in the Bet Ha'mikdash, and it is therefore permissible to produce them and have them in the synagogue. Hacham Ovadia cites also Rav Moshe Stern of Debrecen (Hungary, 1914-1997), who adds that electric lights are not at all similar to oil lamps, and so it is certainly permissible to make an electric Menorah with seven branches. This was also the view of Rav Yitzhak Eizik Herzog (first Ashkenazic Chief Rabbi of the State of Israel, 1888-1959), and of Rav Bension Meir Hai Uziel (first Sephardic Chief Rabbi of the State of Israel, 1880-1953). Hacham Ovadia relates in this responsum that he was first asked this question in 5722 (1972) by a rabbi in Tel-Aviv, and he ruled that this was permissible. He refers in this context to his earlier responsum on the subject, which appears in the first volume of Yabia Omer (Y.D. 12). He acknowledges, however, that there were some Poskim over the ages who felt it appropriate to be stringent in this regard. One especially interesting anecdote is a story told by the son-in-law of Rabbi Akiva Eiger (1761-1837) about the time when a Menorah was made for Rabbi Akiva Eiger's synagogue with seven branches. Even though the Menorah was round, and thus did not at all resemble the Menorah in the Bet Ha'mikdash, Rabbi Akiva Eiger insisted that an eighth branch must be added. The Menorah was returned to the smith, who had a very difficult time finding a way to add an eighth branch, and ended up ruining the entire Menorah. Rabbi Akiva Eiger's son-in-law did not understand why Rabbi Akiva Eiger was so insistent that an eight branch be added, but he nevertheless expresses respect for his father-in-law's strict fealty to Halacha. It is told that the decorative Menorot in Congregation Shaare Zion have eight branches following the instructions of Rav Yaakov Kassin (1900-1994), who felt that a seven-branched Menorah should not be used. Likewise, we have eight branches at our new The Edmond J Safra Synagogue. Nevertheless, in light of Hacham Ovadia's clear ruling, there is certainly room to be lenient and allow a seven-branched Menorah if it was already made. Summary: Some Rabbis ruled that it is forbidden to make or have a decorative electric Menorah with seven branches, because it resembles the Menorah that stood in the Bet Ha'mikdash. The majority opinion, however, permits such Menorahs, and this was the position of Hacham Ovadia Yosef.…
The Shulhan Aruch, in Siman 677 (listen to audio recording for precise citation), discusses the status of oil that is left over in the Menorah after the Hanukah candles have gone out. He writes that oil which was placed for the minimum half-hour of lighting is considered designated for Misva use and is therefore forbidden for other purposes. Meaning, if a person placed in the oil cups precisely one half-hour's worth of oil, and the candles were extinguished before a half-hour passed, the leftover oil is forbidden for personal use, and one must burn that oil, since it had been designated for the Misva of Hanukah candles. He may not even save it for the next year's Hanukah candle lighting, as we are concerned that he may mistakenly use it before then for personal purposes. Generally speaking, however, we place much more than a half-hour's worth of oil; we usually fill the cups with enough oil to burn for several hours, and not just for the half-hour that is required according to the strict Halacha. The leftover oil, therefore, is permissible for personal use, since only the oil designated for the first half-hour is endowed with the special status of oil set aside for the Misva. The Shulhan Aruch adds that a person may stipulate before pouring the oil into the cups that he does not want it to become forbidden for personal use. Such a stipulation is effective in allowing one to use the leftover oil, even if it had been especially designated for the first half-hour. Likewise, the Shulhan Aruch writes that if one places a plate underneath the candles to catch the overflow oil, he should stipulate beforehand that the oil should not become forbidden. Otherwise, the oil could become forbidden, if it had been designated for the Misva of the first half-hour of the candles' burning. If a person purchased a bottle of olive oil for lighting the Hanukah candles, but he does not use all of it during Hanukah, he may use the leftover oil for personal purposes, such as for seasoning salads. Only oil that had actually been used for the Misva becomes forbidden, and therefore the leftover oil in the bottle is entirely permissible for use. The glass cups in which one lights the Hanukah candles are entirely permissible for any kind of use; they do not become forbidden by being used for the Hanukah candles. It is customary to save the wicks that were used for the Hanukah candles and burn them together with the Hametz on Ereb Pesah. Since they were used with one Misva, we want to "recycle" them with another Misva. For the same reason, it is customary to save the Lulab and Arabot from Sukkot and burn them with the Hametz on Ereb Pesah. Once an object has been used for a Misva, we want to use it again for another Misva. Summary: Oil that is left over in the Menorah after Hanukah may be used, except in the rare case where a person had placed exactly a half-hour's worth of oil and some of it is left over. One may also use oil that is left over in the bottle after Hanukah, even if the bottle was bought especially for the candle lighting, and the glass oil cups are likewise permissible for personal use. The wicks, however, should preferably be saved and burned with the Hametz on Ereb Pesah.…
The holiday of Hanukah begins on the 25th of Kislev and continues for eight days. As the Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (21) relates, on the 25th of Kislev the Hashmonaim defeated the Greek oppressors and rededicated the Bet Ha'mikdash. As part of this process they kindled the Menora with the only jug of pure oil they found, and the candles of the Menora miraculously burned for eight days. The Bet Yosef (commentary to the Tur by Maran, author of the Shulhan Aruch) raised the question (in Orah Haim, 670) of why we celebrate this miracle for eight days. The Gemara clearly states that the jug contained enough oil to sustain the candles for one day. If so, then the first day's burning was not miraculous at all, and the miracle was in fact only seven days. Why, then, do we celebrate Hanukah for eight days? The Bet Yosef suggests three answers. First, he writes that the Kohanim anticipated that it would take eight days for new pure oil to arrive, so already on the first day they divided the small jug of oil into eight parts, and lit the candles with one part each day. The miracle was thus that each day, one-eighth of the jug of oil sustained the candles for an entire day, a period that normally required an entire jug. Hence, the miracle in fact spanned the entire eight-day period. Secondly, the Bet Yosef suggests that when the Kohanim entered the Mikdash each morning, they noticed that the jug remained full – even though they had used all its oil for kindling the Menora the night before. This occurred each morning for eight days, and thus the miracle was indeed an eight-day event. Finally, the Bet Yosef writes that perhaps the lamps of the Menora remained filled with oil each morning, and the miracle was thus that the oil in the lamps burned without being depleted. This, too, would account for the eight-day celebration. The holiday of Hanukah was enacted by the Sages, and thus does not have the status of a Torah obligation. For this reason, we do not add a ninth day to this holiday in the Diaspora, the way we add a day to other holidays. This extra day is observed only in conjunction with holidays established by the Torah, as opposed to the Rabbinically-ordained festivals of Hanukah and Purim. The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 670:1; listen to audio recording for precise citation) writes that it is forbidden to fast or eulogize on Hanukah. Working, he writes, is permissible, though there is a custom for women to desist from working while the Hanukah candles burn (or at least during the first half-hour after they are lit). The Magen Abraham (Rabbi Abraham Gombiner, Poland, 1637-1683) explains that this custom commemorates the story of Yehudit, a Jewish woman who heroically killed a Greek general. (Some sources indicate that the story of Yehudit did not occur during the Jews' battle against the Greeks, but rather earlier, during the period of Greek oppression. Either way, her heroism is certainly worthy of commemoration on Hanukah.) By contrast, the Maharil (Rabbi Yaakov Halevi Moelin, Germany, 1355-1427) held that both men and women should refrain from work while the candles burn. The Bet Yosef explained that this practice serves to demonstrate that the candles were lit to publicize the miracle, and not for personal use. By abstaining from work while the candles burn, we show that we did not kindle them to provide light for our normal activities, but rather to commemorate the great miracle of Hanukah. Additionally, this custom helps ensure that a person spends some time reflecting on the Hanukah miracle. It is thus proper after lighting the Hanukah candles not to immediately return to one's normal affairs, but to instead sit and spend time celebrating the miracle. The Kaf Ha'haim (Rabbi Yaakov Moshe Sofer, Baghdad-Israel, 1870-1939) comments (670:10) that there are women who vow during times of danger to refrain from working while the Hanukah candles burn. Many women, he writes, have earned salvation by taking such a vow. It is thus a valuable and worthwhile custom to refrain from work while the Hanukah candles are lit, at least for some of the days of Hanukah. The Shulhan Aruch rules that there is no obligation to eat festive meals on Hanukah, since this holiday celebrates a spiritual, rather than physical, victory. The Greeks sought not to destroy the Jewish people, but rather to destroy the Jewish religion. This is as opposed to the Purim story, when Haman sought to annihilate us as a people. The physical salvation of Purim is thus celebrated through festive eating and drinking, while Hanukah is observed as a mainly spiritual victory, rather than a physical triumph. Nevertheless, some authorities write that it is admirable to have festive celebrations on Hanukah, to commemorate the completion of the Mishkan's construction in the wilderness, which took place on Hanukah. The Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles, Poland, 1525-1572) writes that if these meals contain words of Torah and songs of praise to God, then they certainly have the status of a "Misva meal." Of course, on Rosh Hodesh Tebet (which falls on Hanukah) one should have a special meal, just as on every Rosh Hodesh. This obviously applies to Shabbat Hanukah, as well. The Ben Ish Hai (Rabbi Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) records a custom to light a special candle on Rosh Hodesh Tebet in memory of the famous Tanna, Rabbi Meir Ba'al Ha'nes. There is a custom to eat cheese and other dairy products on Hanukah, since Yehudit (in the incident mentioned above) fed the general dairy products which eventually led to him going to sleep, whereupon she succeeded in assassinating him.…
플레이어 FM에 오신것을 환영합니다!
플레이어 FM은 웹에서 고품질 팟캐스트를 검색하여 지금 바로 즐길 수 있도록 합니다. 최고의 팟캐스트 앱이며 Android, iPhone 및 웹에서도 작동합니다. 장치 간 구독 동기화를 위해 가입하세요.