Burying Religious Articles: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
#Divrei Torah written in Brail need [[Geniza]]. <ref>Ginizei HaKodesh 11:7 in name of Rav Elyashiv </ref> | #Divrei Torah written in Brail need [[Geniza]]. <ref>Ginizei HaKodesh 11:7 in name of Rav Elyashiv </ref> | ||
#Divrei Torah written in microscopic font, some say they do need [[Geniza]], but some are lenient if there’s no name of Hashem. <ref>Ginizei HaKodesh 11:7 in name of Rav Elyashiv says that microscopic font doesn’t need [[Geniza]], while Rabbi Karlitz holds they do need [[Geniza]]. </ref> | #Divrei Torah written in microscopic font, some say they do need [[Geniza]], but some are lenient if there’s no name of Hashem. <ref>Ginizei HaKodesh 11:7 in name of Rav Elyashiv says that microscopic font doesn’t need [[Geniza]], while Rabbi Karlitz holds they do need [[Geniza]]. </ref> | ||
#One shouldn’t write Divrei Chol in Ktav Ashurit (block-print font of Hebrew as is written in the Torah). <ref>Rama Y”D 284:2 writes in name of the Sh”t HaRambam 7 (quoted in the Bet Yosef YD 284) that it’s disgraceful to write Divrei Chol in the Ktav Ashurit since it’s the lettering that the Torah was given in. Even though the Tashbetz 1:2 permits writing Divrei Chol in Ktav Ashurit, most poskim hold like the Rambam including the Orchot Chaim (Talmid Torah 1:9), Sh”t Radvaz (quoted by Pitchei Teshuva 283:3), Sh”t Chovot Yair 109, Sh”t Rav Poalim 4:32, and Aruch HaShulchan 284:8. [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/786134/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Hilchos_Siddur_Kiddushin# Rav Hershel Schachter in a shiur on yutorah.org] (min 1-3) says that upon the insistance of his father-in-law his wedding invitations were written with Rashi script and not block letters because many block letters are similar to Ketav Ashurit | #One shouldn’t write Divrei Chol in Ktav Ashurit (block-print font of Hebrew as is written in the Torah). <ref>Rama Y”D 284:2 writes in name of the Sh”t HaRambam 7 (quoted in the Bet Yosef YD 284) that it’s disgraceful to write Divrei Chol in the Ktav Ashurit since it’s the lettering that the Torah was given in. Even though the Tashbetz 1:2 permits writing Divrei Chol in Ktav Ashurit, most poskim hold like the Rambam including the Orchot Chaim (Talmid Torah 1:9), Sh”t Radvaz (quoted by Pitchei Teshuva 283:3), Sh”t Chovot Yair 109, Sh”t Rav Poalim 4:32, and Aruch HaShulchan 284:8. [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/786134/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Hilchos_Siddur_Kiddushin# Rav Hershel Schachter in a shiur on yutorah.org] (min 1-3) says that upon the insistance of his father-in-law his wedding invitations were written with Rashi script and not block letters because many block letters are similar to Ketav Ashurit. There is also a minhag to extend the above practice and reserve Ketav Ashurit for Tanach.</ref> | ||
==Erasing Hashem's name== | ==Erasing Hashem's name== | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
#[[Erasing]] Hashem’s name is learned from the juxtaposition of VeAvadtem Et Shemam and Lo TaAsun Ken LaHashem. In general, it’s forbidden to erase even one letter of any of the 7 names of Hashem: Yud Hay Vav Hay, Adonai, Elohah, El, Elokim, Shaddai, Tzivaot. <ref>Shulchan Aruch Y”D 276:9 </ref> | #[[Erasing]] Hashem’s name is learned from the juxtaposition of VeAvadtem Et Shemam and Lo TaAsun Ken LaHashem. In general, it’s forbidden to erase even one letter of any of the 7 names of Hashem: Yud Hay Vav Hay, Adonai, Elohah, El, Elokim, Shaddai, Tzivaot. <ref>Shulchan Aruch Y”D 276:9 </ref> | ||
#Many authorities permit [[erasing]] Torah or names of Hashem in electronic form. <ref>Sh”t Yechave Daat 4:50, Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:173 are lenient because the electronic encryption is illegible but says that it’s preferable to be strict. </ref> | #Many authorities permit [[erasing]] Torah or names of Hashem in electronic form. <ref>Sh”t Yechave Daat 4:50, Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:173 are lenient because the electronic encryption is illegible but says that it’s preferable to be strict. </ref> | ||
#Even though some poskim wrote that one shouldn't write the word "Shalom" completely if it is on a paper or letter that is going to be thrown out, the minhag is be lenient.<ref>The Maharil (Yamim Noraim no. 3) quotes Maharash and Tashbetz who held that it is proper not to write the complete word Shalom in a letter since it is a name of Hashem and the letter is usually thrown out. Rather it should be written as 'שלו. Tosfot Sotah 10a s.v. elah is strict that Shalom shouldn't be erased. The Rama 276:13 codifies this minhag. However, the Rosh (responsa 3:15) held that it is permitted to erase the word “Shalom” and throw out a letter with the word Shalom on it. The Shach YD 276:16 writes that the minhag is to be lenient like the opinion of the Rosh. Mateh Efraim (Elef Lmateh 581:9) writes that the minhag is to be lenient since our Hebrew script or Rashi script aren't considered real writing.</ref> According to everyone, it is permitted to use Shalom in the context of a story or Bracha such as Shalom Ubracha as opposed to being used alone or Shalom Lecha.<ref>Igrot Moshe OC 4:40:3 writes based on the Radvaz (cited by Pitchei Teshuva 276:28) that even though the halacha follows the Rosh nonetheless one should be strict not to write the complete word Shalom in a letter when it is written just Shalom or Shalom Imcha or the like since those imply Hashem whose name is Shalom should be with you. However, it is permitted to use Shalom in the context of a bracha as it isn't referring to Hashem such as Shalom Ubracha or Shalom Lcha or Shalom Vkol Hatov. </ref> | #Even though some poskim wrote that one shouldn't write the word "Shalom" completely if it is on a paper or letter that is going to be thrown out, the minhag is be lenient.<ref>The Maharil (Yamim Noraim no. 3) quotes Maharash and Tashbetz who held that it is proper not to write the complete word Shalom in a letter since it is a name of Hashem and the letter is usually thrown out. Rather it should be written as 'שלו. Tosfot Sotah 10a s.v. elah is strict that Shalom shouldn't be erased. The Rama 276:13 codifies this minhag. However, the Rosh (responsa 3:15) held that it is permitted to erase the word “Shalom” and throw out a letter with the word Shalom on it. The Shach YD 276:16 writes that the minhag is to be lenient like the opinion of the Rosh. Mateh Efraim (Elef Lmateh 581:9) writes that the minhag is to be lenient since our Hebrew script or Rashi script aren't considered real writing.</ref> According to everyone, it is permitted to use Shalom in the context of a story or Bracha such as Shalom Ubracha as opposed to being used alone or Shalom Lecha.<ref>Igrot Moshe OC 4:40:3 writes based on the Radvaz (cited by Pitchei Teshuva 276:28) that even though the halacha follows the Rosh nonetheless one should be strict not to write the complete word Shalom in a letter when it is written just Shalom or Shalom Imcha or the like since those imply Hashem, whose name is Shalom, should be with you. However, it is permitted to use Shalom in the context of a bracha as it isn't referring to Hashem such as Shalom Ubracha or Shalom Lcha or Shalom Vkol Hatov. </ref> | ||
#There is a dispute regarding printing a paper with Divrei Torah which was done for temporary use and without intent of making it Kadosh. <ref>Rav Asher Weiss (quoted by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739819/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Assorted_Sheimos_Issues) is lenient because of the expense. Ginzei Hakodesh (p. 249) quotes Rav Elyashiv and Rav Yitzchak Elchanan (Eyin Yitzchak OC 5) who are lenient based on the Yerushalmi Sotah.</ref> | #There is a dispute regarding printing a paper with Divrei Torah which was done for temporary use and without intent of making it Kadosh. <ref>Rav Asher Weiss (quoted by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739819/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Assorted_Sheimos_Issues) is lenient because of the expense. Ginzei Hakodesh (p. 249) quotes Rav Elyashiv and Rav Yitzchak Elchanan Spektor (Eyin Yitzchak OC 5) who are lenient based on the Yerushalmi Sotah.</ref> | ||
#Many poskim permit [[erasing]] the name of God written in languages other than Hebrew. <ref>Mishna Brurah 85:10 and Shach YD 179:10 both hold that it is permitted to erase the name of God in languages other than Hebrew.</ref> | #Many poskim permit [[erasing]] the name of God written in languages other than Hebrew. <ref>Mishna Brurah 85:10 and Shach YD 179:10 both hold that it is permitted to erase the name of God in languages other than Hebrew.</ref> | ||
#Even though technically it is permitted to cause God's name to be erased<ref>See Gemara Shabbat 120b</ref> nonetheless it is forbidden to let someone with a contagious disease wear a pair of Tefillin and will inevitably have to be burnt for medical purposes.<ref>Igrot Moshe OC 1:4</ref> | #Even though technically it is permitted to cause God's name to be erased<ref>See Gemara Shabbat 120b</ref> nonetheless it is forbidden to let someone with a contagious disease wear a pair of Tefillin and will inevitably have to be burnt for medical purposes.<ref>Igrot Moshe OC 1:4</ref> | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
==What must be Buried?== | ==What must be Buried?== | ||
# | #Texts with Torah written on them should be buried in [[shaimos]]. <ref>Ginzei Hakodesh 10:3:19 quoting Rav Elyashiv </ref> | ||
#A paper that says God in English may be thrown away and does not need to be buried. <ref>Mishna Brurah 85:10 </ref> The same is true of writing Hashem whether in English or in Hebrew. <ref>Iggerot Moshe YD 2:138, Ginzei Hakodesh 7: footnote 8 </ref> | #A paper that says God in English may be thrown away and does not need to be buried. <ref>Mishna Brurah 85:10 </ref> The same is true of writing Hashem whether in English or in Hebrew. <ref>Iggerot Moshe YD 2:138, Ginzei Hakodesh 7: footnote 8 </ref> | ||
#Marah Mekomot, which are a list of references, and even if some words are jotted down but it is only understood by the one who wrote it, doesn't have kedusha and can be thrown out.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:75</ref> | #Marah Mekomot, which are a list of references, and even if some words are jotted down but it is only understood by the one who wrote it, doesn't have kedusha and can be thrown out.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:75</ref> | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
#A shtender when it is in use for the shul it may not be used for a mundane purpose, however, if there was a stipulation that they could be used for a mundane purpose they are permitted to be used for that purpose but can't be used for a degrading use. Once it is worn out, they can be thrown out.<ref>Ginzei Hakodesh 13:2</ref>. | #A shtender when it is in use for the shul it may not be used for a mundane purpose, however, if there was a stipulation that they could be used for a mundane purpose they are permitted to be used for that purpose but can't be used for a degrading use. Once it is worn out, they can be thrown out.<ref>Ginzei Hakodesh 13:2</ref>. | ||
#A sefer Torah that is worn out must be buried, which is genizah. It should be put in a earthenware vessel in the ground buried together with a Talmid Chacham.<ref>Gemara Megillah 26b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 154:3</ref> | #A sefer Torah that is worn out must be buried, which is genizah. It should be put in a earthenware vessel in the ground buried together with a Talmid Chacham.<ref>Gemara Megillah 26b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 154:3</ref> | ||
#An Aron Kodesh that is worn out should be buried.<ref>Rava in Gemara Megillah 26b states that an Aron Kodesh is a tashmishei kedusha can't be converted into a chair for a sefer Torah. This is codified in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 154:6 and Y.D. 282:13. Ginzei Hakodesh 5:8 writes that an Aron Kodesh that is worn out needs to be buried like every tashmishei kedusha. See Chatom Sofer 6:10 who explains that originally it was considered a tashmishei kedusha when the covering of the sefer torah was too short and didn't fully cover the klaf. </ref> It shouldn't be used to bury a person in it.<ref>The Chatom Sofer 6:10 writes that it is forbidden for a person to be buried in an Aron Kodesh since that is considered a mundane use of a tashmishei kedusha. He explains that even though the Gemara Megillah 26a permits burying a person with clothes that were used to wrap a sefer torah that is because a Jew after he dies has kedusha. Yet, burying a person with clothes is a valid use of kedusha for a cloth that used to wrap a sefer torah, but having an aron kodesh hold a person isn't being used for kedusha if the person is buried inside it since he is buried with clothing. Alternatively, it doesn't really enhance the burial to have the person buried in a coffin (see Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 362:1). Kaf Hachaim 154:39 quotes the Pitchei Teshuva who argues that the distinction of the Chatom Sofer isn't compelling. He adds that it is certainly forbidden to use an aron kodesh to transport a corpse if it isn't going to be used to bury him. </ref> | #An Aron Kodesh that is worn out should be buried.<ref>Rava in Gemara Megillah 26b states that an Aron Kodesh is a tashmishei kedusha and can't be converted into a chair for a sefer Torah. This is codified in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 154:6 and Y.D. 282:13. Ginzei Hakodesh 5:8 writes that an Aron Kodesh that is worn out needs to be buried like every tashmishei kedusha. See Chatom Sofer 6:10 who explains that originally it was considered a tashmishei kedusha when the covering of the sefer torah was too short and didn't fully cover the klaf. </ref> It shouldn't be used to bury a person in it.<ref>The Chatom Sofer 6:10 writes that it is forbidden for a person to be buried in an Aron Kodesh since that is considered a mundane use of a tashmishei kedusha. He explains that even though the Gemara Megillah 26a permits burying a person with clothes that were used to wrap a sefer torah that is because a Jew after he dies has kedusha. Yet, burying a person with clothes is a valid use of kedusha for a cloth that used to wrap a sefer torah, but having an aron kodesh hold a person isn't being used for kedusha if the person is buried inside it since he is buried with clothing. Alternatively, it doesn't really enhance the burial to have the person buried in a coffin (see Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 362:1). Kaf Hachaim 154:39 quotes the Pitchei Teshuva who argues that the distinction of the Chatom Sofer isn't compelling. He adds that it is certainly forbidden to use an aron kodesh to transport a corpse if it isn't going to be used to bury him. </ref> | ||
# A parochet is something used for a secondary degree of kedusha, that is, it adorns the | #A parochet is something used for a secondary degree of kedusha, that is, it adorns the Aron which houses the Torah, therefore it doesn't require genizah. As long as it is in use it can't be used for mundane purposes.<ref>Ginzei Hakodesh 5:14 clarifies that today when the parochet isn't used for covering the bimah, when a sefer Torah is brought to the bimah it isn't considereed a tashmish of kedusha, rather it is a tashmish d'tashmish d'kedusha which doesn't require geniza. He adds that it has kedusha of the shul which, while it is being used, can't be used for mundane purposes.</ref> | ||
==Things to be careful for== | ==Things to be careful for== | ||
