Halachipedia - User contributions [en]

Kitniyot

2024-08-25T14:08:17Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

[[File:Rice.jpg|thumb|right|"FreeDigitalPhotos.net" ]]
Kitniyot are a category of foods which Ashkenazi Jews refrain from eating during [[Pesach]].<ref>*Background: The Gemara Pesachim (35a) writes that Chametz includes foods made with the five grains. See the [[Wheat and Grain Products]] page about the precise definition of the five grains. Th Gemara e says that orez and dochen (Tosfot [[Brachot]] 37a translates rice and millet) are not chametz, since when used to produce bread they don't ferment. The Rambam (Chametz UMatzah 5:1) rules that there's no issue of chametz with grains other than the five grains, such as rice, millet, or beans. Furthermore, says the Rambam, even if one were to mix those grains with hot water and make dough that rises, it is permitted since that's considered rotting and not positive fermentation.
*The Tur 453:1 writes that the minhag of his location was not to eat kitniyot on [[Pesach]]. The Rabbenu Yerucham (cited by the Beit Yosef 453:1), Rabbenu Yechiel (cited by Beit Yosef 453:1), and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 453:1 agree.
*The Smak (cited by the Beit Yosef 453:1) explains that the minhag not to eat kitniyot on [[Pesach]] is concerned that perhaps a person will be confused between a bread or cooked dish made from kitniyot and one made from the five grains. Additionally, kitniyot flour sometimes has flour of the five grains mixed in. The Darkei Moshe 453:1, codified in the Rama 453:1, writes that the Ashkenazic minhag is to not to eat kitniyot on [[Pesach]] and one shouldn't deviate from the minhag.</ref>

== Definition ==
# The Ashkenazic minhag is to avoid eating Kitniyot on [[Pesach]]. However, even Ashkenazim hold that one does not have to burn or sell one's Kitniyot.<ref>The Shulchan Aruch 453:1 writes that it is permitted to eat a cooked dish made out of Kitniyot. The Rama 453:1 writes that the minhag Ashkenaz was to forbid and one shouldn't change this minhag. This is quoted by ashkenazic poskim including Darchei Moshe 453:2, Levush 453:1, Chayei Adam 127:1, Aruch Hashulchan 453:4, Elya Rabba 453:3, Prisha 453:3, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, Daat Torah page 119. See also Yechave Daat 1:9 and 5:32 as well as Kaf Hachaim 453:11. Aruch Hashulchan 453:4 says that being lenient in this minhag is testimony that one does not fear Hashem or fear sin, and does not understand the ways of torah.
* This minhag is found in several rishonim with several different reasons.
* Firstly, there are some rishonim who thought that there was insufficient reason to follow this minhag of not eating kitniyot. Rabbenu Yerucham 5:3 and Tur 453:1 think that this minhag is overly stringent and difficult to understand.
* Hagahot Maimoniyot (cited by Beit Yosef 453:1) writes that there's a minhag not to eat kitniyot such as beans and lentils because it is possible to make cooked dishes from them just like grains. Also, grains are sometimes mixed up with kitniyot. He adds that mustard is also included in the minhag since it is similar to a grain. Mordechai Masechet Pesachim 2:588 cites this as well in name of the Smak. The Agur (no. 845) records a minhag not to eat kitniyot, rice, and millet since grain was sometimes mixed in.</ref> One is permitted to keep Kitniyot in one's home on [[Pesach]].<ref> Rama 453:1 </ref>
# Although some sephardic poskim say that it is preferable not to eat kitniyot, the custom among Sephardim is to eat kitniyot on [[Pesach]].<ref> Rav Pealim 3:30, Yechave Daat 1:9 and 5:32. </ref>
# Sephardim should check the rice or any kitniyot to make sure that there's no chametz mixed before they cook them.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 453:1</ref>

==Which foods are Kitniyot?==
# The earlier Poskim mention that rice, buckwheat/kasha, millet, beans, lentils, peas, sesame seeds and mustard are included in the minhag <ref> Beis Yosef O.C. 453, Rema 453:1 & 464:1 and Mishna Brurah 453:4, 7 & 11 </ref>
# Among traditional Ashkenazi Jews, the custom during [[Passover]] is to refrain from not only products of the five grains but also kitniyot, such as other grains and legumes. Traditions of what is considered kitniyot vary from community to community but generally include maize (North American corn) <ref> Mishna Brurah 453:4 </ref>, as well as rice, peas, lentils, and beans. Many also include peanuts in this prohibition, and one source, the Chayei Adam, also includes potatoes in his list, although his opinion is not followed by any large or major groups.
# Some common foods that are Kitniyot include: Beans, Black eye peas, Buckwheat, Canola oil, Chickpeas, Coriander<ref>see, however, https://oukosher.org/passover/guidelines/food-items/kitniyot-list/</ref>, Corn, Fenugreek, Kasha, Lentils, Mustard, rapeseed oil<ref>Avnei Nezer OC 533 </ref>,Peanuts <ref>Iggeros Moshe (O.C. 3:63) assumes that peanuts are not kitnios but notes that some have a custom to be machmir. [http://www.kashrut.com/Passover/kitniot_list/ Kashrut.com] includes it as kitniyot. </ref>, Rice, Sesame seeds, String Beans, Sunflower seeds <ref> [http://www.kashrut.com/Passover/kitniot_list/ Kashrut.com] writes that the above mentioned foods are considered Kitniyot. For a full list of Kitniyot, see [http://www.kashrut.com/Passover/kitniot_list/ Kashrut.com].</ref>
# On the other hand, potatoes (see below), coffee, tea, garlic, nuts, radishes and olives are not treated as kitnios <ref> Sha’arei Teshuvah 453:1, Chayei Adam 127:7. Pri Megadim Eshel Avraham 464:1 writes that he doesn't understand why some people don't eat garlic on [[Pesach]] but nevertheless one should be stringent. </ref>
===Quinoa===
# Some say that quinoa is kitniyot, however, if there's a medical issue one may be lenient to use it on [[Pesach]].<ref> Rav Yisrael Belsky on [http://www.ou.org/community_services/video/67558 OU Pre-Pesach Webcast 5769] between minutes 23 and 24 and on [http://www.ou.org/torah/article/oukosher_pre-pesach_webcast_5771 OU Pre-Pesach Webcast 5771] between minutes 101:30 and 103:30. Rav Moshe Feinstein did not advocate abandoning the custom, but he opposed the tendency to expand the list of forbidden kitniyot (see Igrot Moshe, Orah Hayyim 3. 63). [https://yeshiva-university.zoom.us/rec/play/usAsduuh-283HoLAtASDAPZ9W9S0eq2s0igX-_pez0jkW3EFZFr1M7QRa7Qf9B_vOGt5lyO0vcW9I1-0?startTime=1585760529000&_x_zm_rtaid=CQsocm3ZRaq6pGgFL5OMGQ.1585880286593.75ff95374a21dbfc2f0c45524d508e2a&_x_zm_rhtaid=674 Rav Willig (March 31 2020, min 2)] thought that quinoa is kitniyot.</ref>

== Reason for prohibition ==
*From the Torah, only the five grains can become chametz and not legumes or rice.<ref>The Gemara (Pesachim 35a) states that one may only fulfill one's obligation of [[matza]] on [[Pesach]] with [[matza]] made from the five grains. The Gemara explains that since the Torah juxtaposes [[Matza]] and chametz, we learn that anything which could ferment and become chametz may be used for [[matza]], which is only the five grains and not rice or millet. See Pesachim 114b for a proof that the Amoraim ate rice on [[Pesach]]. The Rambam (Chametz UMatza 5:1) and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 453:1 codify this gemara. See Bet Yosef 453:1 for more background of this issue.
*It is interesting to note the opinion of some rishonim was that kitniyot were in fact actually chametz. Ritva Pesachim 35a s.v. hani quotes some who explain that rice and millet can become chametz on a rabbinic level. He says that in Spain the Jews were lenient based on the geonim, but some chasidim were stringent. Migdal Oz Chametz Umatzah 5:1 seems to understand the Raavad as holding that kitniyot are indeed chametz and personally followed that opinion.</ref>
*The Smak (Rabbi Yitzchak of Korbol) explains that products of kitniyot appear like chametz products and can be confused.<ref>Biur Hagra 453:3 writes that a source for the minhag of kitniyot is Tosfot Pesachim 40b s.v. Rava who understands that kitniyot aren't chametz but can be confused with chametz and for those who are unlearned should be avoided. Rosh 2:28 agrees with Tosfot.</ref> Also, it can be hard to distinguish between rice flour (kitniyot) and wheat flour (chametz). Therefore, to prevent confusion, all kitniyot were prohibited.
*The Beit Yosef (Rabbi Yosef Karo, 16th century, Israel) notes that since regular grains may become mixed together with kitniyot (apparently due to changes in crop cycles), one may inadvertently come to eat actual chametz.
*The origins of this practice are not clear, though two common theories are that these items are often made into products resembling chametz (e.g. cornbread), or that these items were normally stored in the same sacks as the five grains and people worried that they might become contaminated with chametz. It was also possible that crop rotations would result in the forbidden chametz grains growing in the same fields, and being mixed in with the kitniyot. Those authorities concerned with these three issues suggested that by avoiding eating kitniyot, people would be better able to avoid chametz. The Vilna Gaon (Hagaos HaGra, 453) indeed actually cites a novel source for this custom. The Gemorrah in Pesachim (40b) notes that Rava objected to the workers of the Raish Gelusa (the Exilarch) [[cooking]] a food called chasisi on [[Pesach]], since it was wont to be confused with chametz. The Tosefos explain that, according to the Aruch, chasisi are lentils, and thus, argues the Gra, establishes the basis for the concern of kitniyot.

== Halachot of kitniyot ==
# The minhag to not eat kitnios begins on Erev [[Pesach]] at the same time that one may not eat chametz <ref> Shevet HaLevi 3:31 citing Chok Yaakov 471:2, Rav Elyashiv quoted in Siddur [[Pesach]] Kihilchato 16:footnote 42 </ref>. Although one may not eat kitnios, one may own and derive benefit from kitnios. Therefore, on [[Pesach]] one may keep cans of sweet corn in their property or feed millet to their parrot. Additionally, children, people who are ill, and people whose diet is otherwise restricted and must eat kitnios, are excluded from the minhag and may do so after consulting with a Rav. This halacha is quite relevant to baby formulas and nutritional supplements (e.g. Ensure) which invariably contain kitnios, and are usually used by people who have few non-kitnios choices, if any. When such foods are used on [[Pesach]], they should be prepared in special non-[[Pesach]] and non-chametz utensils, which should not be washed with the [[Pesach]] dishes.<ref> http://www.kashrut.com/Passover/Kitniyot/</ref>
# Some say that new tablecloths which may have been ironed with clothing starch, which could be made from Kitniyot, should be laundered in hot water in order to remove the starch.<ref>Nitei Gavriel ([[Pesach]] 77:17)</ref>
===Children===
# Some are lenient to allow feeding Kitniyot to children below chinuch who need it. Check with one's rabbi before applying this.<ref>[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1410&st=&pgnum=175 Shem Aryeh EH 95] writes that there's no issue with feeding a child below chinuch something (latfiso byadayim) that is only a chumra and not even a rabbinic prohibition. He is writing about not eating dried fruits on Pesach which was a certain minhag. The [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14155&st=&pgnum=174 Sdei Chemed Chametz Umatzah 6:6] quotes it regarding Kitniyot. Siach Yitzchak responsa 210 agrees.</ref>
# Some allow milk formulas that have kitniyot in them, such as Similac, if it is necessary for their nutriment. One should have separate pots for heating up the milk.<ref>[https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?v=106099 Rav Shmuel Fuerst (min 11)]</ref>

===Pots used for Kitniyot===
# It is permitted even for Ashkenazim to eat Kosher for [[Pesach]] foods that were made in pots that were used for [[cooking]] kitniyot if it wasn't used within 24 hours. Some say that it is permitted even if it was used within 24 hours.<ref>Based on the Mishna Brurah 453:9 who says that kitniyot is nullified with a majority, the Yechave Daat 5:32 writes that vessels in which kitniyot was cooked are permitted for Ashkenazim even within 24 hours. Az Nedberu 8:20:4 and Banim Chavivim ([[Siman 17]], p. 415-9) agree. Erech Hashulchan 453:2 writes that there's no gezerah of eino ben yomo for a minhag and so it is permitted to cook for an Ashkenazi to cook in any kitniyot pot especially if you know it wasn't used within 24 hours. Az Nedberu 8:20:4 writes that an Ashkenazi shouldn't avoid [[lending]] his pots to a Sephardi on [[Pesach]].
[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/788095/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Hilchos_Bishul_Akum# Rabbi Hershel Schachter in a shiur on yutorah.org] (min 37-40) explains that something that is only forbidden because of a minhag, there's no rabbinic prohibition of not using a pot after 24 hours, therefore if one cooked kitniyot in a pot one may use it after 24 hours has passed. He repeated this position [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/898113/rabbi-hershel-schachter/inyonei-pesach-yom-tov-6-mitoch-electricity-funerals-bathing-chametz-mixtures-kitnios-mechirah-birkas-kohanim/ in another shiur (Inyanei Pesach 5778 Part 6 min 54)] based on the Shach.</ref> Some argue that one shouldn't use the pots that were used for kitniyot for someone who doesn't eat kitniyot.<ref> Dirshu 453:7 quoted Shevet Halevi and others who were strict that you shouldn’t use the same kelim for kitniyot and non-kitniyot. [http://beinenu.com/sites/default/files/alonim/51_27_76.pdf Beynenu] quotes that Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Ha'ish 59:4) held that b'shaat hadachak Ashkenazim can be lenient to eat the food cooked in an eino ben yomo kitniyot pot, such as if one is a guest at a Sephardi's home and they would be offended if you tried to explain it to them. See Halichot Shlomo 4 fnt. 102 who is strict.</ref>
# Ashkenazim who need to cook kitniyot for someone sick should set aside specific pots for that.<ref>[http://beinenu.com/sites/default/files/alonim/51_27_76.pdf Beynenu] quoting Rav Vosner in Mbet Levi 1:44 and Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut Shani Pesach 12:12</ref>
# Some say that it is initially permitted for an Ashkenazic Jew to eat at a Sephardic Jew's home on Pesach and just not eat the Kitniyot even if the other food was made in pots and served on plates used for kitniyot. Others say that unless it is a close relative or in-law and it can be easily avoided one should avoid it.<ref>See Yechave Daat 5:32. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/898113/rabbi-hershel-schachter/inyonei-pesach-yom-tov-6-mitoch-electricity-funerals-bathing-chametz-mixtures-kitnios-mechirah-birkas-kohanim/ Rav Hershel Schachter (Inyanei Pesach 5778 Part 6 min 56)] stated that based on the Netsiv that there's ein mevatlin isur lechatchila to buy a product that incorporates bitul it would also be forbidden to choose to eat at someone's house who eats kitniyot. However, if it is a close relative or in-laws it is permitted since it isn't nice not to go, but if it is easily avoided it should be.</ref>

===Nullification of Kitniyot===
# Kitnios is batel b’rov, which means that if someone accidentally put kitnios into their [[Pesach]] food, the food is b’dieved permitted assuming the food contains more non-kitnios than kitnios.<ref> Rema 453:1 as per Mishna Brurah 453:9, Pri Chadash 453:1, Elya Rabbah 453:4, Shulchan Aruch Harav 453:5, Chayei Adam 127:1, Az Nedberu 8:20:4. </ref> This means that although the food may have a pronounced taste of kitnios, the food is permitted (unless there are recognizable pieces of kitnios which haven’t been removed). Therefore, if a beverage is sweetened with aspartame made of kitnios shenishtaneh, even those people who hold that aspartame is forbidden (as explained above) may drink the beverage because the aspartame is batel b’rov in the other ingredients. Similarly, we have seen that there is a disagreement as to whether fenugreek is kitnios. Nonetheless, even those who follow the strict approach may consume maple syrup which is flavored with fenugreek (as it often is) because it is batel b’rov. Thus, although we’ve seen a number of disagreements as to whether certain foods are or aren’t kitnios, those disagreements are limited to one who wants to consume the actual item (or a hashgachah certifying someone else who is intentionally putting the ingredient into a food), but these disagreements rarely affect consumers.<ref> http://www.kashrut.com/Passover/Kitniyot/</ref>
# Some poskim are lenient to allow Ashkenazim to eat processed foods with a minority of Kitniyot ingredients which aren't recognizable.<ref>[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1024&st=&pgnum=55 Rav Yitzchak Elchanan in Bear Yitzchak 11] writes that a mixture of Kitniyot ingredients which was made before Pesach is permitted for Ashkenazim. He explains that this is permitted for both reasons for which Kitnityot were forbidden: 1) Chametz grains sometimes get mixed up in the kitniyot. If you checked them before Pesach there is still a concern since they wouldn't be batel after Pesach starts (chozer vneyor). However, if the mixture is a liquid one then once it is nullified before Pesach it doesn't reawaken. 2) In terms of Kitniyot products being confused with Chametz products, it isn't an issue since a major effort was made to check that the kitniyot didn't have chametz in them. It is similar to the opinion of Rashi Gemara Sukkah 15a regarding the gezerah of roofing a sukkah with beams.</ref>
# A minority of Ashkenazi poskim permit Ashkenazim to eat foods with kitniyot oil in it.<ref>Bear Yitzchak 11, [https://ph.yhb.org.il/category/%D7%A4%D7%A1%D7%97/09-%D7%9E%D7%A0%D7%94%D7%92-%D7%90%D7%99%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%A8-%D7%A7%D7%98%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%95%D7%AA/ Penini Halacha (Pesach 9:6)] citing Rav Kook, [https://www.etzion.org.il/he/halakha/orach-chaim/holidays/laws-pesach-kitniyot Har Etzion] citing the practice of the Rabbanut</ref>
===Sephardim===
# Some poskim say that if a Sephardi wants to eat kitniyot but his custom earlier was not to then he should perform a [[hatarat nedarim]].<ref>Chazon Ovadia Pesach p. 84, Haggadah of Rav Elyashiv page 12 </ref>

===Cooking Kitniyot===
# If the last day of Pesach is Friday and one set up an eruv tavshilin it is permitted for an Ashkenazi to cook kitniyot on that Friday for Shabbat since they will be able to eat it on Shabbat.<ref>Rav Poalim OC 3:30 is strict but he is arguing with the Birkei Yosef and Yabia Omer 10:55 confirms the Birkei Yosef’s opinion.</ref>
# Some hold that it is permitted for someone who doesn’t eat kitniyot to cook for someone who does eat kitniyot on Yom Tov, while others argue.<ref>Rav Poalim OC 3:30 writes that it is forbidden for someone who doesn’t eat kitniyot to cook on Yom Tov for someone who does eat kitniyot. The same could be applied to someone who ate meat and won’t be able to eat dairy until the end of the day that they may not cook dairy. His proof is that the Mahariv writes that someone who took a neder not to eat on Yom Tov may not eat or even cook. It is similar to someone who didn’t make an eruv on Yom Tov can’t cook for others. That itself is questionable as the Divrei Malkiel points out. However, does that the Mahariv apply here? The Birkei Yosef thought it didn’t. He explained that only when a person takes a neder that makes it completely forbidden that it isn’t Ochel Nefesh to cook on Yom Tov, however, for someone that one food is forbidden but for others it is permitted that is considered Ochel Nefesh. However, the Rav Poalim argues that the Magen Avraham provides another reason for the Mahariv. He writes that Hoil is only a reason that permits something on a biblical level and not a rabbinic level. If so, then the same can be applied to a case of one person cooking kitniyot if they themselves can’t eat it. Yabia Omer OC 10:55 argues that this is certainly permitted when discussing cooking on Yom Tov for Shabbat if you have an eruv tavshilin. He explains that the Birkei Yosef is correct and there’s no issue with Hoil once there is eruv tavshilin.
* Kaf Hachaim 453:16 quotes this Rav Poalim and suggests being strict. He says that the same would be true in terms of muktzeh that it is a questionable if it is permitted.</ref>
==Gibroks==
# According to the Gemara it is permitted to eat matzah or matzah meal that was mixed or even cooked with water. Once it was baked properly it isn't going to become chametz.<ref>Gemara 39b</reF> Chasidim have a minhag not to eat any matzah that was wetted with water, out of a concern that the matzah wasn't baked completely and there's some bits of unbaked flour left on it which could become chametz if mixed with water.<ref>Gilyonei Hashas Pesachim 40b (cited by fnt. to Maharam Chalavah) notes a source for this minhag in the Rif and Geonim's explanation of the Gemara Pesachim 40b. Maharam Chalavah 40b s.v. rava in fact says that one shouldn't make matzah meal baked foods, but then he seems to only forbid children making matzah meal foods and not adults who won't get confused with actual flour.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Pesach]]
[[Category:Holidays]]
{{Pesach}}

Which foods, medications, cosmetics, and toiletries are Chametz?

2024-08-25T13:54:51Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

==Medication==
# Medicines in the form of tablets or liquid which are bitter may be taken on [[Pesach]], even if they contain chametz. Since it is possible that this isn't always the case, one should consult a Rabbi.<ref>Halachos of [[Pesach]] (Rabbi Eider, pg 22)</ref>
# However, coated tablets can be a potential issue of chametz and one should consult one's rabbi.<ref>Halachos of [[Pesach]] (Rabbi Eider, pg 23)</ref>
# Flavored liquid medicines such as cough medicine is a more serious issue and may contain chametz and a Rabbi should be consulted.<ref>Halachos of [[Pesach]] (Rabbi Eider, pg 24)</ref>
==Products containing alcohol==
# Products with ethyl alcohol or denatured alcohol are potentially chametz, however, isopropyl alcohol may be used on [[Pesach]].<ref>Halachos of [[Pesach]] (Rabbi Eider, pg 25)</ref>
# Solid products which contain alcohol such as creams, ointments, salves, and powders, may be used. An exception to this is perfumed powders and roll-on deodorants which may contain chametz.<ref>Halachos of [[Pesach]] (Rabbi Eider, pg 26). </ref> However, some Sephardim permit using [[cosmetics]].<ref>see Shu"t Yechave Daat 2:61. JSOR 2012 [[Pesach]] List (pg 14) writes that [[cosmetics]] such as: hair spray, soaps, shampoos, deodorant, powders (medicated, perfumed, baby, face, foot) are permitted for [[Pesach]].</ref> With regards to using creams and other products on [[Shabbat]] and [[Yom Tov]], see the [[Shabbat]] and [[Yom Tov]] pages.
# Liquid products such as perfume, cologne, toilet water, hair spray, hair tonic, pre-shave lotion, after-shave lotion, mouthwash, and spray deodorants are considered to be chametz unless the specific brand was approved for [[Pesach]] use.<ref>Halachos of [[Pesach]] (Rabbi Eider, pg 26). see however, Shu"t Ohr Letzion 3:8:6 who is lenient about mouthwash</ref>
# Nail polish, nail polish remover, hand lotion, hand creams, baby lotion, baby cream, shampoo, shoe polish, ink, paint, and air freshener may be used on [[Pesach]].<ref>Halachos of [[Pesach]] (Rabbi Eider, pg 26)</ref> Sephardim are lenient regarding shoe polish if it was bought before [[Pesach]].<ref>Chazon Ovadyah (vol 1, pg 119) </ref> With regards to using creams and other products on [[Shabbat]] and [[Yom Tov]], see the [[Shabbat]] and [[Yom Tov]] pages.

==Soap==
# Many poskim hold that year round soap may be used on [[Pesach]] except for cleaning dishes, for which one should use soap approved for [[Pesach]].<ref>Halachos of [[Pesach]] (Rabbi Eider, pg 27)</ref>
# It isn't necessary to get a new soap for Pesach.<ref>[https://yeshiva-university.zoom.us/rec/play/uMB7I-D--j83ToDAtgSDUaJ7W9Xueqis0nRK-6FfmUm0VSMBZ1qjYLIbZbHenouY882eTH8fEnI5K7DA?startTime=1585587811000&_x_zm_rtaid=5PWyeRatQdGWZ2q1UH7K6w.1585657713810.05dafc99f0c11cb46ffb1a63ddd87e47&_x_zm_rhtaid=904 Rav Willig (min 1)]</ref>

==Toothpaste==
# Strictly speaking, toothpaste doesn’t need to be Kosher LePesach. However, if it’s available one should have a kosher lepesach toothpaste. <Ref> Halachos of [[Pesach]] (Rabbi Eider, pg 27) quoting Rav Moshe and Rav Aharon Kotler. Rav Schachter on [http://www.ou.org/torah/article/oukosher_pre-pesach_webcast_5771 OU Pre-Pesach Webcast 5771] (mins 91-93) agrees. Shu"t Ohr Letzion 3:8:6 is lenient for toothpaste and mouthwash</ref>
# You do not need a new toothbrush or tube of toothpaste for Pesach.<ref>[https://yeshiva-university.zoom.us/rec/play/uMB7I-D--j83ToDAtgSDUaJ7W9Xueqis0nRK-6FfmUm0VSMBZ1qjYLIbZbHenouY882eTH8fEnI5K7DA?startTime=1585587811000&_x_zm_rtaid=5PWyeRatQdGWZ2q1UH7K6w.1585657713810.05dafc99f0c11cb46ffb1a63ddd87e47&_x_zm_rhtaid=904 Rav Willig (min 1)] says it is unnecessary to use a new tube of toothpaste or a new toothbrush and he doesn't do that.</ref>

==Paper or Plastic Utensils==
# There’s no non-kosher or Chametz material found on paper or plastic plates, cups, cutlery and doesn’t need a hechsher. However, parchment papers which are coated with non-stick agent it needs a hechsher. <Ref> Rav Yisrael Belsky on [http://www.ou.org/torah/article/oukosher_pre-pesach_webcast_5771 OU Pre-Pesach Webcast 5771] between minutes 107:30 and 110:30 </ref>
==Stocks of companies that own chametz==
# See [[Selling_Chametz#Stocks_of_companies_which_own_Chametz]].
==If one sent Chametz in mail before Pesach==
# If one sent Chametz in the [[mail]] to a friend before [[Pesach]], and it’ll still be in the [[mail]] at the beginning of [[Purim]], the sender should do [[Bitul Chametz]] for that Chametz as well. <Ref>Halichot Shlomo (vol 1, 4:24) </ref>
==Feeding Chametz to Animals==
# It is forbidden to feed chametz on Pesach to animals, even ones that belong to other people, since there is a benefit in having one's desires fulfilled, and by using the chametz one was able to fulfill his intention.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 448:6 based on Yerushalmi Pesachim 2:1, Mishna Brurah 448:28. Some say that this is a unique halacha for Chametz (Gra OC 448:6, Pitchei Teshuva YD 94:5 citing Mekor Chaim 448:10), while others apply this to all forbidden foods (Shaar Hatziyun 448:75 in explaining the Levush, Magen Avraham and Tashbetz 3:293, Taz YD 94:4 based on Isur Vheter, Maharshal, and Torat Chatat).</ref>

==Links==
* [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/54541 Yalkut Yosef Hilchot Pesach vol. 1 (Hebrew, 5775)]
* [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/922061/rabbi-larry-rothwachs/a-tough-pill-to-swallow-do-medications-and-cosmetics-require-pesach-certification/ Do Medications and Cosmetics Require Pesach Certification? by Rabbi Larry Rothwachs ]
* [https://www.star-k.org/articles/articles/seasonal/388/pesach-medication-the-halachos-lists/ Pesach Medication: The Halachos and Lists ] by the Star-K

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Pesach]]
[[Category:Holidays]]
{{Pesach}}

Chametz which a Jew owned on Pesach

2024-08-25T13:50:19Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

If the chometz was not properly disposed of (i.e. burned) and was still under the ownership of a Jew (i.e. was not sold to a gentile), then one would not be permitted to have any ha'nah/benefit from those items.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 448:3</ref> This is colloquially referred to as "''chometz sh'evar alav HaPesach''" (chometz that was kept over [[Pesach]]) and was decreed as a penalty for failure to properly rid oneself of the chometz.

==Basics==
# Although biblically speaking, any chametz which belonged to a Jew on [[Pesach]] is permitted to be eaten as soon as [[Pesach]] is over, there is a rabbinic prohibition that any chametz which belonged to a Jew on [[Pesach]] is forbidden both to be eaten as well as derive benefit from.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 448:3, Mishna Brurah 448:7 explains that the Rabbis prohibited eating or benefitting from chametz, which was was in the property of a Jew on [[Pesach]], even after [[Pesach]], because he violated Baal Yira'eh.</ref>
# [[Chametz of a non-Jew]] is permitted after [[Pesach]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 448:1</ref>
# Chametz of a Jew who "converted" to another religion is forbidden after [[Pesach]].<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 114:7</ref>
# If a firm or corporation is owned by Jews and non-Jews and the firm provides food, there is a concern of Chametz SheAver Alav HaPesach. <Ref> Rav Schachter on [http://www.ou.org/torah/article/oukosher_pre-pesach_webcast_5771 OU Pre-Pesach Webcast 5771] between minutes 100 and 101 </ref>
# Vending machines in public buildings possibly could be stocked by Jews (who didn’t sell their Chametz for [[Pesach]]) and one should be concerned about Chametz SheAver Alav HaPesach unless one could ascertain the owner and the one who stocks the machine. <Ref> Rav Schachter on [http://www.ou.org/torah/article/oukosher_pre-pesach_webcast_5771 OU Pre-Pesach Webcast 5771] between minutes 100:30 and 101:30 </ref>

==Post Pesach shopping==
# Because of the severity of this decree<ref>Many issuray d'rabbanon, such as chalav akum, [[bishul]] akum, pas akum etc. are permitted in benefit, as opposed to chometz sh'aver alav HaPesach where even ha'nah is prohibited</ref> one has to be somewhat restrained in where he does his post [[Pesach]] shopping. If one purchases all of his chometz products from a Jewish supermarket, then one need not be concerned as one may assume that all of the chometz was sold before [[Pesach]].<ref>This is assuming that the owner of this particular shop can be trusted to do what is halachicaly required</ref> The real issue is applicable to those who shop at major chain stores (i.e. Path mark, Shop Rite, Price Choppers, Waldbaums etc.)
# If the majority owner of these stores are Jewish,<ref>Minchas Yitzchok:8</ref> or even if they are minority owners but are managed by Jews who make the policies,<ref>Igros Moshe E.H. 1:7</ref> and they don't sell their chometz to a non-Jew, then one may not purchase any of the chometz that was in the store over [[Pesach]].
# The problem is that these stores are open throughout [[Pesach]], and no Rabbi will be able to convince them to cover up all their chometz sections and hold back sales for an entire week. This is highly impractical as well as financially detrimental to a store that has to service the entire population, including gentile customers. R' Moshe Feinstein zt"l,<ref>Igros Moshe O.C. 1:149, 2:91</ref> in addressing the question of whether or not one may buy chometz from Waldbaums<ref>At the time the teshuva was written, Waldbaum's was still owned by Julia Waldbaum, a Jewish woman</ref> after [[Pesach|Pesach,]] suggested the following: It should be arranged with the owners of these stores to sell all of their chometz to a non-Jew prior to [[Pesach]], even though they will be doing business with that very same chometz on Pesach. This results in a two fold advantage:
## All the chometz, that was in the store prior to [[Pesach]] is not prohibited because of ''chometz sh'evar alav HaPesach ''(as it is halachically not owned by a Jew)
## The owner of the store is not transgressing the issur of owning chometz on [[Pesach]] (''b'al yira'eh ubal y'motzai''), which he ordinarily would have been violating countless times with all of the hundreds of chometz products that he ordinarily sells.
==When store is owned by non-Jew==
# R' Moshe mentions that should the store owner sell any of this chometz over [[Pesach]] (which a chain store open over [[Pesach]] will invariably end up doing) he would be stealing from the non-Jew, since the chometz in his store belongs to the non-Jew who he sold it to. Although stealing from a non-Jew is not permitted, it would be worthy to do such a thing as this way the kosher customers may purchase any item that they desire immediately following [[Pesach]] as it was "goyish chometz" over [[Pesach]]. Additionally the Jewish store owner will be able to avoid transgressing the prohibition of owning chometz over [[Pesach]] many hundreds, if not thousands of times.
==Exemptions==
# While the Rabbis decreed that one may not use chometz that was Jewishly owned over [[Pesach]], the ''g'zaira'' does not apply to kitniyos. Therefore, all soda, cereals made with corn flour,<ref>Many of the “sugar” cereals such as Honeycombs, Fruity Pebbles etc. use mostly corn flour. However, since many times there is a mixture of wheat flour as well one should check each item before purchasing.</ref> and all other legumes are permitted to be purchased wherever one desires without any halachic concerns. Additionally, while certain items such as ketchup, mustard and pickles have vinegar in them, which is an ingredient that may be derived from grain, most of the vinegar in the United States<ref>As opposed to the vinegar used in products that were imported from European countries which mostly use vinegar that came from grains</ref> is derived from corn and one can assume that this product came from that majority.<ref>As heard from R' Yisroel Belsky Shlita</ref>

==Sources==
<References/>
[[Category:Pesach]]
[[Category:Holidays]]
{{Pesach}}

Medicine on Shabbat

2024-08-25T13:38:07Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

{{Good}}
[[File:Medicine.jpg|200px|right]]
The Rabbis issued a decree limiting the usage of [[medications]] on Shabbat. In the opinion and experience of the Rabbis, easy access to medicine could lead to the transgression of certain melachot ([[Shabbat]] labors). While issuing the decree, however, the Rabbis were lenient in certain cases of those suffering pain or distress.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt). In regard to the [[muktzah]] status of pills and other [[medications]] see Minchas [[Shabbos]] 88:footnote 77, Har Tzvi tal harim tochain 2, Shalmei Yehuda 10:15:footnote 46, Zera Yaakov 13:page 153, Nachlas Yisroel pages 633-650 in depth, Shulchan Shlomo 318:7:2:page 298, Ohr Yisroel 6:pages 17-20, Aruch Ha’shulchan 308:59, Bais Avi 3:52, Avnei Yushfei 5:62.</ref> (See the footnote for some background.)<ref>*Rashi ([[Shabbat]] 53b s.v. Gezerah) explains that the reason for the prohibition against taking medicine is because one might come to grind the ingredients for the medicine and violate the prohibition of [[Tochen]] ([[grinding]]). [[Maggid]] Mishna ([[Shabbat]] 2:10) draws a distinction between one who is sick but whose life is not in danger, and a person who is in pain. Tur and Shulchan Aruch 338:1 rule that a healthy person who is in pain may not do any activity of healing because of the rabbinic decree.</ref> These laws are true for the first day of [[Yom Tov]] and the two days of [[Rosh Hashana]] as well.<ref>The same halacha applies to the first day of [[Yom Tov]] (Refer to Magen Avraham 532:2, Chai Adom 23:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 98:33, Mishna Brurah 532:5, [[Yom Tov]] Shenei K’hilchoso 1:22, Nishmas Avraham 1:pages 275-276) and both days of [[Rosh Hashana]]h (Nishmas Avraham 1:600:1, see Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 31:28, [[Yom Tov]] Shenei K’hilchoso 1:22:footnote 76, Shevet Ha’kehusi 1:156 ) </ref>{{TOC|limit = 3}}

==Taking Medicine==
===If one has a minor condition (Meychush BeAlma)===

#If someone has a minor condition which hurts, such as a tooth ache, throat ache, head ache, cold, or cough, it is forbidden to take any medicine. However, someone who is in a lot of pain to the point that he's lying in bed, or he can't function normally due to his weakness (as is the case with a migraine), is permitted to take medicine.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 34:1,3 and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 91:1. The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) writes that although contemporary poskim debate whether nowadays we can be more lenient with taking medication on [[Shabbat]] because of the change in the technique of the production of medicines, the general consensus is to reject this argument. See Minchas [[Shabbat]] 91:9; Ketzos ha-Shulchan 134:7; Chelkas Yaakov 4:41; and Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:15. See also [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739326/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Medicine_on_Shabbat_Part_I Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on YUTorah.org]. The Yalkut Yosef 328:52 writes that a choleh shein bo skana (sick in bed) can take pills. He adds that in general, someone who is in a lot of pain but isn't choleh shein bo sakana may not take pills. He makes two exceptions: for someone who has a big headache and someone who has a big stomach ache.</ref>
#Some poskim allow a person who is accustomed to take pain killers for a head ache or tooth ache to take pain killers on [[Shabbat]] if otherwise he will be in pain.<ref>Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]] v. 4, pp. 408-9) writes that some say that one may take pain killers on [[Shabbat]] because they don't cure but only remove pain, and some disagree. He concludes that one should only be lenient if a person is accustomed to taking such pain killers and if one doesn't take them one will be in pain. On page 143 in discussing the same leniency he specifically mentions pills that contain paracetamol which is the active ingredient in Tylenol, a pain killer.</ref>

===If one has a sickness (Choleh Shein Bo Sakana)===

#If one has fever, feels weak all over, or feels bad enough to require bed rest, he can be classified as a “patient not dangerously ill” (Choleh Shein Bo Sakana) and he is permitted to take oral [[medications]].<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:121 permits taking an oral medication without any shinui (alteration from the normal procedure). Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]], vol 4, pg 129) and 39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 492) agree with the Mishna Brurah. [http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&pgnum=112 Mishkenot Yacov O.C. 117] seems to disagree.

*Halachos of [[Refuah on Shabbat]] (Rabbi Bodner, pg 55) and The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) write that most poskim agree with the Mishna Brurah. See, however, Sh"t Igrot Moshe 3:53, Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:15, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:108, 6:28.</ref>
#Since “requiring bed rest” and “weak all over” are subjective terms, it is up to each individual to determine his personal pain threshold. There is no requirement to be overly stringent when judging the degree of illness.<ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org]. See also Sh"t Tzitz Eliezer 14:50-7 and 17:13. </ref>
#Some poskim hold that it is forbidden to perform a biblically prohibited action on [[Shabbat]] (melacha deoritta) for someone who is in the category of "patient not dangerously ill", even if one does it in an abnormal manner (Shinui).<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 32:2</ref> Some, however, hold that it is permitted to do actions in an abnormal way (Shinui) for a "patient not dangerously ill."<ref>Eglei Tal ([[Tochen]] #18), [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/797263/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Shiur_#3_-_Shabbos_-_melacha_sh'eina_tzericha_l'gufa Rabbi Hershel Schachter in a shiur on yutorah.org (towards end of shiur)]</ref>

===If One is Critically Ill (Choleh Sheyesh Bo Sakana)===

#It is permitted and a mitzvah to violate Shabbat in order to save a Jewish life.<ref>Gemara Yoma 84a, Rambam (Shabbat 2:1), Tur and Shulchan Aruch 328:2. Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shulchan Shlomo 328:4:3) writes that if there's pikuach nefesh on Shabbat we're not pained about having to do melacha for pikuach nefesh. It is similar to milah on Shabbat which is permitted. </ref> Even if there is only a doubt if the patient is critically ill<ref>Shulchan Aruch 328:6, Mishna Brurah 328:17, 328:26</ref> or if there is a doubt if the procedure will save the patient's life,<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:37</ref> nonetheless, it is a mitzvah to violate Shabbat in order to try to save a Jewish life.<ref>When discussing the mitzvah to violate Shabbat to save someone's life, Rambam (Shabbat 2:3) powerfully writes "this teaches that the laws of the Torah are not meant to be vengeful, but are instead supposed to bring mercy, kindness and peace to the world". </ref>
#Someone who delays in saving a life out of a concern of violating Shabbat is sinning in a way that is tantamount to murder.<ref>Yerushalmi Yoma 8:5, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:2</ref> This is only true of a situation that needs to be dealt with immediately. In that case, it is forbidden to delay. But in a case of potential danger that is certainly not an immediate emergency, it is correct and necessary to ask questions to minimize the violation of Shabbat.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 328:2 quoting Risba</ref>
#A rabbi should be careful to teach his community that it is permitted and a mitzvah to violate Shabbat for life endangering concerns.<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:6</ref>
#A person should violate Shabbat in order to save a non-Jew or non-religious Jew.<ref>Tiferet 329:4 citing Yabia Omer OC 8:38. He adds that if it could be minimized with shnayim she'asauha they should try to do so. See Mishna Brurah 330:8.</ref>
#A person should violate Shabbat in order to save someone who tried to commit suicide.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 8:37:5, Chazon Ovadia Shabbat v. 1 p. 125 cited by Tiferet 328:5. Yabia Omer cites as support the Birkei Yosef 301:6, Maharam Yafa 13, Divrei Yisachar 169, Kli Chemda Ki Tzetsei, Maharam Rotenbuerg 39, Mishna Halachot 8:56, Maharil Diskin Kuntres Acharon 34, Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:4, Yeshuot Yisrael CM 21 to allow pikuach nefesh for someone who tried to commit suicide. On the other hand, Minchat Chinuch Kometz Mincha 230 and Vzot Lyehuda Kuntres Hashalom 11c seem to hold that pikuach nefesh doesn't apply to someone who tried to commit suicide.</ref>
#After calling for help, one may hang up the phone if there will be further needs (various instruction, medical history, etc). However, if the patient has already been transported to the hospital and is absolutely certain that no further information will be needed, then one may not end the call.<ref>Mishna Halachot 3:46, Shmirat Shabbat KiHilchata 32:42</ref>

=== Pikuach Nefesh (life-threatening situation) ===

# If there's a danger that will be life threatening after Shabbat, and he cannot or he doesn't know if he can save the person from the danger after Shabbat, it is permitted to violate Shabbat to prevent the danger. However, if he can prevent the danger after Shabbat, he must do so and not violate Shabbat.<ref>Igrot Moshe O.C. 3:69. Rav Moshe writes that if one knows on Friday, which also happens to be Yom Tov, that there will be a danger on Shabbat, it is forbidden to violate Yom Tov. One should violate Shabbat when the danger actually arises and not violate Yom Tov. However, he quotes Netsiv who permits violating Yom Tov to avoid violating Shabbat in this case. Rav Elyashiv (Haarot Yoma 84b s.v. ubikar) agrees with Rav Moshe. However, Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shulchan Shlomo 328:4:7, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 32 fnt. 105) agrees with Netsiv. This is relevant to someone who is on dialysis and needs treatment either on Yom Tov or Shabbat. Rav Shlomo Zalman says that it is preferable to violate Yom Tov on Friday even though he could wait until Shabbat.</ref>
# One should try to minimize the violation of Shabbat to the extent possible when treating someone whose life is in danger. However, if this entails causing pain to someone else, then one should not attempt to minimize the violation of Shabbat.
## For example, if a doctor needs light to treat a choleh sheyesh bo sakana, and there's a candle in another room, it is preferable to carry the candle from one room to the other instead of lighting a new candle. However, if taking the candle from the other room is going to cause a lot of pain to someone else (such as if there's someone else in the room with the candle who is sleeping and taking the candle will wake him up), then there's no obligation to minimize the violation of Shabbat.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 32:65), Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 2:44:11). Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani v. 4 p. 159-163) disagrees and thinks that there's an obligation upon every Jew to save his friend. If one person can save him, even though it is difficult or painful, he must still do so. If this will prevent the other person from having to violate Shabbat, he is certainly obligated to save him. However, if the neighbor doesn't know about pikuach nefesh situation, he is not obligated to do anything. </ref>
## If someone has an emergency and needs to go to the hospital, and he can either call an ambulance or ask his neighbor to drive him to the hospital: Is his neighbor obligated to drive him to the hospital in order to minimize the amount of driving on Shabbat that will take place? Rav Shlomo Zalman seems to hold that it is not necessary. However, Rav Nissim Karelitz argues that the neighbor is obligated to drive him, even though it will very inconvenient for him to be stuck at the hospital for the rest of the day.<ref>Chut Shani (v. 4 p. 161). His main point is that there's a mitzvah of lo taamod al dam reyecha upon each Jew. </ref>
## If a live wire fell in the street, one may call the electric company to fix it. There is no obligation to minimize the violation of Shabbat by sitting there all day and warning passersby to be careful and avoid the live wire<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 41:21). Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani v. 4 p. 161) agrees here since standing there all of Shabbat doesn't fix the problem. Since it is possible that someone will be endangered even with him standing there, it is permitted to call the electric company to fix it.</ref>
#If a person is informed of a relative who is very sick and it is pikuach nefesh for him to travel there on Shabbat to help save that relative, he may go. In that situation he may not call to someone there to check that the relative is still alive since doing so doesn't help the patient. Calling just to minimize desecration of Shabbat is not permitted.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 2:44:12)</ref>

===Infants===
{{Child as Choleh on Shabbat}}

===Preparing medicine from before Shabbat===

#One may crush a capsule or tablet of medicine so that it is mixed into a food or drink before [[Shabbat]]. Once it becomes disguised by the food, one can eat the food or drink on [[Shabbat]].<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739326/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Medicine_on_Shabbat_Part_I Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on YUTorah.org], Menuchat Ahava 1:21:75 cited by Tiferet 328:3 </ref> If one didn't do it before Shabbat, some allow mixing a liquid medicine into a drink on Shabbat.<ref>Tiferet 328:3 citing Shevet Halevi 3:37, 8:82:2. See also Menuchat Ahava 1:21:75</ref>

===Continuing to take a daily dosage===

#Although one who is not classified as “ill” may not begin taking medicine on [[Shabbat]], some poskim hold that one who requires daily medication for an ongoing condition may continue doing so on [[Shabbat]] as well,<ref>Chazon Ish (oral ruling, quoted in Imrei Yosher on Moed 97, Daat Chazon Ish 7:19, Dinim Vihanhagot Chazon Ish 15:1), Shulchan Shlomo 328:59, Beer Moshe 1:33:8, 4:31, Avnei Yushfei 1:90:3, Rivevos Ephraim 3:227, 4:97:54, 5:202, Oz Nedberu 1:31:5, 4:24. Refer to Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 34:footnote 76, chelek 3:34:footnote 76. 
Rav S. Kluger (Sefer ha-Chayim 328:10 and Shenos Chayim 1:152) go even further and permit continuing taking medicine on [[Shabbat]], even of the patient is not medically required to take the medicine on a daily basis. Minchas [[Shabbat]] 91:9; Tzitz Eliezer 8:15-15:15; Rav Y.S. Elyashiv (Koveitz Teshuvos, O.C. 1:40, and oral ruling, quoted in Refuas Yisrael, pg. 14) agree with Rav Kluger. </ref> while others disagree.<ref>Igros Moshe, O.C. 3:53. Refer also to Da’as Torah 328:37 who is stringent.</ref>
#Some say that one may only take an ongoing medication on [[Shabbat]] if skipping a day of medication would be detrimental to the patient's health or if the medication must be taken for a number of consecutive days such that it is impossible not to take it on [[Shabbat]].<ref>Rav S.Z. Auerbach (Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 77, in the new edition). Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach held that it was only permitted to take an ongoing medication on [[Shabbat]] if skipping a day in middle of continuous medication would cause the patient damage or if the medication must be done for a certain number of days which would automatically include [[Shabbat]]. Rav Hershel Schachter ([http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/798018/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Shiur_#11_-_Shabbos_-_Memachaik,_Memare'ach in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 44-48)]) explained that the gemara Avoda Zara 28a seems to clearly support the opinion of those who say that one may not take medication on [[Shabbat]] even if one began to take the medication before [[Shabbat]]. However, he also cited the opinion of the Brit Olam who held that if the only way to take a certain medication was to take it for a number of consecutive days which includes [[Shabbat]], it would be permitted to take the medication on [[Shabbat]]. </ref> Other poskim hold that it is forbidden to take an ongoing antibiotic even if one started before Shabbat and needs to take it every day.<ref>Igrot Moshe O.C. 3:53</ref>

==Non-medical treatment==
===Using a Band Aid===

#It is permitted to put a band aid on a wound.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 34:3,Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:14:6, Chazon Ovadiah Shabbat vol. 3, page 403, Piskei Teshuvot 328:46 </ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, one should not remove a band aid on [[Shabbat]] if there is hair in the area of the band aid. However, if it is painful, one may remove it.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 35:30 (in the new edition) writes that a band aid shouldn’t be removed on [[Shabbat]] in an area where there’s hair, because removing the band aid will certainly pull out hairs. However, the Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata writes that it’s permissible to use Benzine to remove the band aid so it won’t rip out any hairs (assuming that the cream was set aside before [[Shabbat]] and isn’t [[Muktzeh]]). Nonetheless, in the footnote he quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman as saying that if it’s painful, it may be removed because it’s a pesik reisha delo nicha leih (פסיק רישא דלא ניחא ליה), keleacher yad (כלאחר יד), and mekalkel (מקלקל). </ref> However, Sephardim are more lenient and may remove the band aid, as long as there is a need to remove.<ref>The Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]] 4 pg 179, kitzur S”A 328:101, 340:6) writes that if there’s a need, it’s permissible to remove a band aid from an area of hair on [[Shabbat]] because it’s a pesik reisha delo nicha leih (פסיק רישא דלא ניחא ליה) for a Derabbanan. In the footnote he writes that even though the Or Letzion (vol 2, pg 259) is strict, his father (Rav Ovadyah, in Haskama to Lev Avraham), Rav Yitzchak Elchanan (Bear Yitzchak Siman 15), and Rav Shlomo Zalman (from Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata) are lenient. </ref>
#Most authorities permit removing the Band-Aid from the protective tabs, while some are stringent. In order to satisfy all of the opinions, one should prepare Band-Aids for [[Shabbat]] by peeling off their protective tabs and re-sealing them before [[Shabbat]].<ref>Most poskim (oral ruling by Rav M. Feinstein, quoted in Kitzur Hilchos [[Shabbat]] 44, note 117); Rav S.Z. Auerbach in Shulchan Shelomo 328:45; Ohr l’Tziyon 2:36-15; Az Nidberu 7:34, 35; Rav C.P. Scheinberg, quoted in Children in Halachah, pg. 88; Rav N. Karelitz, quoted in Orchos [[Shabbat]] 11:35) permit removing the protective tabs from a Band-Aid, while others (Minchas Yitzchak 5:39-2; 9:41; Rav Y.S. Elyashiv, quoted in Machazeh Eliyahu 70) are stringent. To satisfy all opinions, one may prepare Band-Aids for [[Shabbat]] use by peeling off their protective tabs and re-sealing them before [[Shabbat]]; once they have been prepared in this fashion, they may be used on [[Shabbat]] (Tzitz Eliezer 16:6-5). Sh”t Bear Moshe 1:36 writes that it is obvious that it is permitted to remove the plastic tabs from the sides of a bandaid on [[Shabbat]] and it isn't [[Koreah]]. </ref>

===Cleaning a wound===

#It is permitted to clean and bandage a wound, or to pour hydrogen peroxide over it.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) based on Shulchan Aruch 328:23</ref> Note that doctors today do not recommend this.<ref>[https://www.webmd.com/first-aid/ss/slideshow-wound-care-dos-and-donts WebMD], [https://www.bannerhealth.com/healthcareblog/teach-me/its-time-to-get-hydrogen-peroxide-out-of-your-medicine-cabinet#:~:text=Hydrogen%20peroxide%20is%20not%20an,not%20worth%20the%20antiseptic%20effect.%E2%80%9D Bannerhealth.com]</ref> The recommended solution is to wash the wound with soap and water.

===Braces===

#Braces may be worn on [[Shabbat]] because there is no medicine for aligning teeth properly.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) writes that it is permissible to wear braces on [[Shabbat]], because the goal of the procedure cannot be achieved with medicine. Since one's teeth cannot be fixed with medicine, there's no concern that one will come to grinding herbs. </ref>

===Exercise===

#One may not exercise on Shabbat. If one needs to do physical therapy, they should consult their rabbi.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 328:42 writes that one may not exercise to the point of breaking a sweat on Shabbat, as this is considered refuah. Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 34:22 agrees.</ref>
#Someone who is healthy may not do physical therapy on Shabbat. However, someone who is a Choleh Shein Bo Sakana or someone who whom not doing physical therapy might lead to a worse problem, may do physical therapy on Shabbat. Breathing and speech therapy are permitted on Shabbat.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 34:23</ref>

==Specific conditions==
===Abscess===

#An abscess may be squeezed to relieve pressure from pus, even if some blood is secreted in the process. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)quoting Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:28 and Mishna Brurah 328:89 </ref>

===Acne===

#All medication for acne may not be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Angina===

#All medication for angina are permitted to be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Arthritis===

#Anti-inflammatory medication for mild arthritis may not be taken on Shabbat. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Asthma===

#All oral and breathing [[medications]] for mild asthma are permitted to be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Athlete’s foot===

#One may not use any medication for athlete’s foot on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Baby Cream===

#If a baby has a rash, it's permitted to dab on some baby rash cream and not rub it in. If the cream would become completely absorbed into the skin, and no trace would be left on the surface of the skin, it would be permitted to even rub it in.<ref>[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?ClipID3542 Rabbi Mansour] explained that according to Rav Ovadia it was permitted to use a medicine for a baby who is in pain because they are considered a choleh shein bo sakana (Rama 328). Dabbing on the cream without rubbing or smoothing it is permitted based on the Chazon Ish. Furthermore, it is permitted to rub in the cream completely and it isn't considered memare'ach (Yabia Omer 4:27 based on Magen Avraham).</ref>

===Back or Neck Brace===

#One may put on or remove a back or neck brace on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) based on ruling of Rav S.Z. Auerbach in Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 113. </ref>

===Bandage===

#It is permissible to put on an ace bandage on [[Shabbat]], as long as you don't tie anything permanent. <ref>Contemporary Questions in Halacha and Hashkafa pg. 144 writes that this is because it wasn't included in the initial gezeira of [[refuah]] since its benefits cannot be duplicated with pills or other standard medicines. </ref>

===Bee sting===

#If one has a bee or wasp sting, the stinger may be removed and the area may be washed with ice water, lemon juice or vinegar, etc. The area may not be soaked, however, in those liquids. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 478), [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], See Mishna Brurah 328:141,142 </ref>
#One may use liquid or spray insect repellent on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 14:35; Shalmei Yehudah, pg. 179, [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org]</ref>

===Birth control===

#It's permissible to take birth control pills on [[Shabbat]] (assuming she received halachic permission to take these pills). <ref>[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2228 Rabbi Mansour on DailyHalacha.com], Chacham Ovadia Yosef [http://www.halachayomit.co.il/EnglishDefault.asp?HalachaID=3319 Halacha Yomit], Orot Hatahara 16:52</ref>

===Bone Fracture===

#For a simple bone fracture, a non-Jew may be asked to do anything necessary, e.g., make a phone call, drive a car, take x-rays or put on a cast. [If a non-Jew is not available, some poskim permit a Jew to do these acts if they are done with a shinui, in an abnormal manner. <ref>This is the view of Shulchan Aruch ha-Rav 328:19 and Eglei Tal ([[Tochen]] 18). Some poskim (Rav S.Z. Auerbach, quoted in Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 33, note 18; Shevet ha-Levi 8:93) rule that one may rely on this view, especially when there is “danger to a limb.” Note, however, that Mishna Brurah, Aruch ha-Shulchan and most poskim do not agree with this leniency. </ref>] If there is even a small chance of internal bleeding, e.g., the thigh or pelvis bone was fractured, or if the elbow was shattered, all [[Shabbat]] restrictions are lifted. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Bow Legged Baby===

#It is forbidden to straighten the legs of a bow-legged baby on Shabbat, since doing so is considered an act of healing.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/893696/rabbi-hershel-schachter/berachos-64-35a-36a-kol-haneheneh-making-a-living-vs-learning-kevius-for-maaser-pas-habaah-bekisnin-medications/ Rav Schachter (Brachot Shiur 64 min 107)]</ref>

===Cellulites===

#Since cellulitis may be life-threatening, immediate medical attention is required. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

=== Chapped Hands ===
#For dried (or chapped) hands, it is prohibited to rub them with either oil, ointment (Vaseline) or lotion.<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481) </ref> One who regularly uses a liquid lotion or oil on his hands (whether they are chapped or not) may do so on [[Shabbat]], too, even if his hands are chapped.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A 327:1</ref>

===Chapped Lips===

#For dried or cracked lips, one may not apply chap stick or any other medication, liquid or otherwise. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Cold===

#For a cold, one may not take [[medications]] or vitamins<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], Rav S.Z. Auerbach (Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 52) write that there is room for leniency in kavod ha-beriyos situations, e.g., a constantly dripping nose which is disturbing to people who are around him.</ref> unless one is experiencing discomfort in one's whole body or is bedridden. However, one may eat chicken soup or tea with honey to relieve oneself.<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Contact Lenses===
#Some poskim permit putting soft contact lenses in contact solution.<ref>[[Asicha_Hilchos_Shabbos_Part_2| Rav Mordechai Willig (Asicha Shabbos 2 p. 3)]]</ref> Others permit putting them in saline solution but not the disinfectant solution. Hard contacts are like dishes which can be cleaned.<Ref>Orchot Shabbat 13:11, [https://torah.org/torah-portion/weekly-halacha-5761-chayeisara/ Rabbi Doniel Neustadt]</ref>
#Sephardim hold that it is permitted to soak contact lenses in their solution on Shabbat. <ref>[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=3188 Rabbi Eli Mansour] </ref>

===Cough===

#Cough–medication may not be taken.<ref>Shmirat Shabbat KiHilchata 34:1,3). </ref> If the cough may be an indication of pneumonia or asthma, medication is permitted.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Conception Pills===

#Some poskim permit taking pills for conception.<ref>Chacham Ovadia Yosef, Rav Moshe Stern, and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach cited on [http://www.halachayomit.co.il/EnglishDefault.asp?HalachaID=3319 Halacha Yomit], Orot Hatahara 16:52 </ref>

===Deodorant===

#It is permitted to use a spray deodorant on Shabbat. Some say that one shouldn't use an antiperspirant deodorant on Shabbat since it is medicinal.<ref>Rabbi Heinemann quoted by the [https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/kashrus-kurrents-2019/6238/medicine-on-shabbos-questions-and-answers-from-rav-moshe-heinemann-shlita/ Star-K]</ref>

===Diabetes===

#All necessary [[medications]] for diabetes may be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Diarrhea===

#For diarrhea one may not take medication unless one is in severe pain or weak all over. Any food or drink is permitted. A hot water bottle is permitted when one experiences strong pains.<ref>Mishna Brurah 326:19, The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

=== Dislocated Limb ===

# Many poskim hold that it is permitted to push a dislocated limb back into place on Shabbat.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:47 establishes that it is permitted to push a dislocated limb back into place on Shabbat. Magen Avraham 328:51 disagrees because the Gemara Shabbat 148a only permitted pushing a limb back into place if a bone cracked, not if it just dislocated. Shulchan Aruch Harav 328:52 agrees. Mishna Brurah 328:145 quotes Atzi Shitim who disagrees with Magen Avraham and defends Shulchan Aruch. He adds that even Magen Avraham allows a non-Jew to push the dislocated limb back into place. Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 33:17 follows Shulchan Aruch and Atzi Shitim.</ref>

===Ear Infection===

#For an ear infection, all [[medications]] are permitted. Cotton balls may be inserted. <ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], It is prohibited to tear cotton balling on [[Shabbat]]; Minchas Yitzchak 4:45; Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 35:20. </ref> Even if the infection is no longer present, prescribed medicine begun on a weekday must be continued until finished in order to avoid a relapse. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Eye Inflammation===

#For an eye inflammation, eye drops (or ointment) may be inserted in the eye. If the eye is not inflamed but merely irritated, no medication is permitted. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) based on S”A O.C. 328:20. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:9 states that if someone's eyes are inflamed or it has pus or blood coming out, or tears pouring out, one can violate Shabbat. Mishna Brurah 328:22 quotes the Gemara which explains that even though for a regular Sakanat Ever we shouldn't violate Shabbat, since the health of a person's eyes are linked to his entire health he can violate Shabbat.</ref> Some permit putting in eye drops even if they are irritated.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Shabbat v. 3 p. 233 cited by Tiferet 328:31</ref>
#If the patient feels a stabbing pain in the eye, major pains, or has a sudden sharp drop in vision, he can violate Shabbat to be healed.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 3 p. 234 and Chut Shani 4:89:16 cited by Tiferet 328:31. Chazon Ovadia explains that even though the doctors say that today there's no concern that a loss of a person's vision will lead to a premature death, we can continue to follow the health concern of the gemara.</ref>

===Fever===

#For a fever, all oral [[medications]] may be taken. A mercury thermometer may be used. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A O.C. 306:7 </ref> If a person is suffering from high-grade fever, a non-Jew may be asked to do whatever the patient needs in order to feel better.<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:46, 47 </ref> If the cause of the fever is unknown, a doctor should be consulted.
#A regular fever can be treated with oral medication (it's treated as a Choleh Shein Bo Sakana who can have medicine). If the fever is abnormal, such as if it is 104 F or more, it isn't reduced by medicine and its cause is unknown, a person can violate Shabbat because it is a Safek Choleh Sheyesh Bo Sakana. For a child or elderly person, even if the fever isn't so high, one can violate Shabbat to heal them.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 3 p. 244-6 cited by Tiferet 328:26</ref>

===Headache===

#For a headache, medication should not be taken. If the headache is severe enough that one feels weak all over or is forced to be bedridden, medication may be taken. One who is unsure if he has reached that stage of illness may be lenient and take pain- relieving medication.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)See Ketzos ha-Shulchan 138, pg. 100; Minchas Yitzchak 3:35; Be’er Moshe 1:33; 2:32. </ref>

===Heartburn===

#For heartburn, foods which will have a soothing effect may be eaten. Some poskim permit taking anti-acid medication while others are stringent. If the medicine is prescribed by a doctor, one may be lenient.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)See Ketzos ha-Shulchan 138, pg. 98; Tzitz Eliezer 8:15 (15-21); Az Nidberu 1:31; Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34:4 </ref>

===Hemorrhoids===

#For a mild case of hemorrhoids, medication may not be taken. For a severe case, it is permitted to sit in a “sitz bath” (with water that heated before [[Shabbat]]), or use medicated pads or suppositories.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Herniated Disc===

#For a herniated disc (back and leg pain), ice packs or hot packs are permitted. Physical therapy exercises, e.g. stretching, are permitted. If the pain is severe to the degree that the entire body is in pain, painkillers or other [[medications]] are permitted as well.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Indigestion===

#One may take a leisurely walk in order to help digestion. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 477) </ref>
#One may drink prune juice in order to act as a laxative. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481) </ref>

===Infection===

#For an infection all [[medications]] are permitted. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Lactose===

#For lactose intolerance, some poskim rule that one may not take enzyme supplement tablets. But it is permitted to add enzyme drops to liquid dairy foods before [[Shabbat]] and drink the dairy on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt). See Refuas Yisrael, pg. 245. </ref> Others are lenient.<ref>Rav Yisroel Belsky (Shu"t Shulchan HaLevi 10:2) ruled that lactase pills may be taken because they are not viewed as medicines. Chazal only forbade medicines because a person who is ill is physically distressed and might impetuously grind the ingredients on Shabbos. Lactase pills are not used to treat an illness. They simply provide the body with the missing enzymes that are necessary for the digestion of the milk sugars.</ref>

===Migraine===

#For a migraine headache, any oral [[medications]] may be taken. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Mouthwash===

#It is permitted to use mouthwash on [[Shabbat]].<ref>See Beer Moshe 1:34:7page 78 is lenient as is Rivevot Ephraim 2:115:23:page 192, 3:536:6, 4:97:5, 6:195, Nishmas [[Shabbos]] 5:318, Cheshev Ha’efod 2:59 </ref> See the [[Brushing Teeth on Shabbat]] page for more on this topic.

===Nosebleed===

#For a nosebleed, bleeding may be stopped with a tissue or a napkin. If none is available, a cloth napkin may be used. <ref>Mishna Brurah 328:146 </ref>

===Raynaud’s Syndrome===

#One who is ill or in need of using chemical hand warmers on [[Shabbat]], such as in the case of Raynaud's syndrome, or a soldier on guard duty who must remain alert, may do so on [[Shabbat]].<ref>[http://www.yeshiva.co/ask/?id=4876 Yeshiva.org] based on Rav Dov Lior in his book Dvar Chevron Siman 236 pg. 125 </ref> See [[Getting_Dressed_on_Shabbat#Hand_Warmers_on_Shabbat]] for the fuller discussion.

===Psychotic Break===

#A psychotic break is a [[#If_One_is_Critically_Ill_.28Choleh_Sheyesh_Bo_Sakana.29| Choleh Sheyesh Bo Sakana]]. <ref>Harefuah C'halacha 7:1;3 </ref>

===Retinal Tear===

#If the retina of the eye becomes torn or detached, one should go to the hospital or one's doctor immediately.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 3 p. 234 cited by Tiferet 328:31</ref>

===Retainer===

#One may insert and remove a retainer on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34:29 </ref>

===Scab===

#It is permitted to remove a scab, as long as blood is not drawn from the wound. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A O.C. 328:22 and Mishna Brurah 90. </ref>

===Sleep disorder===

#There are conflicting views among contemporary poskim about taking sleeping pills or No-Doze pills.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 33:16), and [http://www.halachayomit.co.il/EnglishDefault.asp?HalachaID=3320 Chacham Ovadia Yosef are lenient] See Minchas Yitzchak 3:21, Tzitz Eliezer 9:17, Be’er Moshe 1:33 and Shalmei Yehudah, pg. 176, for the various views. </ref> One who is weak all over or bedridden may take them.
#Cotton balls may be used as ear plugs. It is permitted to use pliable ear plugs, which are made from a wax-like material that spreads to fill the cavity of the ear. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) quoting Rav S.Z. Auerbach (Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 14:45); Shraga ha-Meir 5:23. Rav Y.S. Elyashiv, however, recommends not using pliable ear plugs on [[Shabbat]]; see Ashrei ha-Ish 17:117; 33:7 </ref>

===Sore throat===

#For a sore throat medication may not be taken. Gargling is prohibited.<ref>S”A 328:32</ref> Drinking tea or any other hot drink, or sucking a candy, is permitted even if the intention is for medicinal purposes. <ref>S”A 328:37 </ref>

===Splinter===

#A splinter under the skin may be extracted with the fingers, or with tweezers or a needle. If, unavoidably, a little blood is secreted in the process, it is of no consequence. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)quoting Mishna Brurah 328:88 and Sha’ar ha-Tziyun 63. 39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 478) writes one may remove a splinter even if it may bleed, but one may not remove if it will certainly bleed unless it is very painful. </ref>

===Sprain===

#For a sprain, if the patient is not experiencing severe pain, nothing should be done. If the patient is experiencing severe pain, medication may be taken and a massage may be given. A makeshift splint may be applied, provided that no [[Shabbat]] Labors are transgressed.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Stitches===

#A non-Jew is allowed to stitch any wound, even if the stitching is done only for cosmetic reasons.<ref>Minchat Shelomo 2:34-33 and Nishmas Avraham, vol. 4, O.C. 340. See also Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 33, note 26, and 35, note 65-66.</ref> Some say even a Jew can add extra stitches for cosmetic reasons.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 33 fnt. 26</ref> A Jew may place a butterfly bandage or steri-strips to close a simple laceration or cut. Surgical skin closure glue may also be used.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt). See [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html].</ref>

===Stopping bleeding===

#Pressure may be applied to a cut to stop bleeding. Sucking or [[squeezing]] out blood is prohibited. <ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], Mishna Brurah 328:147 </ref>
#It is permitted to remove a thorn slowly so that it won’t cause blood to come out. If it is impossible to remove without blood coming out, it is nonetheless permitted to relieve pain.<ref>Machasit Hashekel 328:32 is lenient if it is impossible to avoid since it is only derabbanan and for tzaar it is permitted. Kaf Hachaim 308:96 agrees. However, Shulchan Aruch Harav 308:38, Gedulat Elisha 308:53, and Ben Ish Chai Miketz Shana Sheniya n. 12 are strict if it is a pesik reisha. Tehilah LDovid 328:47 asks why would it be forbidden if it is a pesik reisha since it is only a derabbanan of chavala and for tzaar it is permitted. He rejects the implication otherwise from Tosfot Sanhedrin 85a s.v. vrabbi shimon. Biur Halacha 308:11 s.v. hakotz explained the Magen Avraham like the Shulchan Aruch Harav and cites the Chemed Moshe who is lenient like the Machasit Hashekel. Rav Nevinsal in Byitzchak Yikareh 308:11 that he thinks the opinion of the Chemed Moshe is reasonable. See Leviat Chen who agrees.</ref>

===Strep throat===

#For a strep throat all oral [[medications]] may be taken. Even if the infection is no longer present, the prescribed medicine begun on a weekday must be continued until finished. A culture may be taken by a non-Jew.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Sunburn===

#For a ordinary sunburn [[medications]] are not permitted.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Sweating===

#It is permitted to sprinkle baby powder on those parts of the body which are perspiring. <ref>Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34:12 </ref>

===Swelling===

#It is permitted to press a knife, etc. against the skin to prevent or minimize swelling.<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:144 </ref>
#It is permitted to wash or soak the swollen area in water.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 8:15 (15-12) </ref> It is permitted to place a compress,<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)writes in order to avoid [[sechitah]] and/or libun, only paper towels or napkins should be used and care should be taken not to squeeze them.</ref> ice (placed in plastic bag) or any frozen item over a swollen area.<ref>Be’er Moshe 1:33-18, Contemporary Questions in Halacha and Hashkafa pg. 144, [http://www.learntorah.com/lt-shiur-details.aspx?id=4985 Rabbi Meyer Yedid]. Rabbi Yedid says that this is because the [[refuah]] cannot be replicated through medicines, and therefore wasn't included in the rabbinic enactment against [[refuah]]. See also Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 35:35 </ref> Some forbid applying an ice pack if it is clearly being done for medicinal reasons.<ref>Rabbi Heinemann cited by the [https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/kashrus-kurrents-2019/6238/medicine-on-shabbos-questions-and-answers-from-rav-moshe-heinemann-shlita/ Star-K]. See Shulchan Shlomo 328:37 and Halachos of Refuah on Shabbos p. 29.</ref>

===Toothache===

#A minor (cavity) toothache may not be treated with painkillers, but one is permitted to drink whiskey, etc., provided that it is swallowed immediately.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A O.C. 328:32. See also Mishna Brurah 328:102 </ref> A severe toothache (to the point where one feels weak all over) or gum infection may be treated with oral medication. If the tooth needs to be extracted, a non-Jew may be asked to do so.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on Rama, O.C. 328:3. See Tzitz Eliezer 9:17 (2-11)</ref>

===Wound===

#Cuts and abrasions may be washed or soaked in water. It is not permitted, however, to soak absorbent cotton or paper in such a solution and then wash the wound with it. The wound may be covered with a non-medicated Band-Aid.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

==Medicine after Candle Lighting before [[Kiddush]]==

#One is permitted to drink water while taking a pill on [[Shabbos]] after candle lighting before [[Kiddush]].<ref>Refer to Minchas Yitzchok 8:18, Shevet Ha’kehusi 1:109, Nishmas [[Shabbos]] 2:9. </ref>

==Carrying a Pill==

#One who needs to carry a pill on [[Shabbos]] in a place which does not have an eiruv should ask his Rav before doing so.<ref>Refer to Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:7, Tzitz Eliezer 13:34. </ref>

==Cutting Pills on Shabbos==

#One is permitted to cut a tablet in half on [[Shabbos]], and there is no concern of "mechatech" (cutting) on [[Shabbos]].<ref>Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 33:4, Shulchan Shlomo 314:13:3, Avnei Yushfei 4:58 quoting the opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita. Refer to there footnote 30 for the reason. </ref>

==Purchasing the Medicine==

#In situations where one is considered “ill” and is permitted to take medicine on [[Shabbat]], it is also permitted to ask a non-Jew to drive to a drugstore, buy medicine and bring it to him.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

== Vaccination ==

# It is permitted to vaccinate a healthy person on shabbat in a case where there is a risk that they will get sick and be endangered. If the doctor's opinion is that the vaccine is urgent, then it is even permissible to violate Torah-level prohibitions, such as writing for registration purposes or driving in a car to buy the dose.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata, 32:62.</ref>

==Medical Plaster==

#It is forbidden to cut or tear medical plaster on shabbat.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata, 35:24</ref>

==Ripping the Packaging of a Medicine==

#According to the opinion of some poskim, on [[Shabbos]], one should rip the wrapping around a medication by destroying it and making it useless.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 1:340:5:page 245. </ref>

==Specific medicines==
===Foods and drinks===

#Even someone with a minor ailment may eat food which healthy people eat even if one’s intention is for improving one’s health. For example, someone who has a head ache may eat honey, a lemon, or suck on candy. Someone who has a hoarse throat may swallow a raw egg.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 34:4 based on Shulchan Aruch 328:37, Aruch Hashulchan 328:48. Refer to Mishna Brurah 328:117-118. See Ketzos Ha’shulchan 134:16:pages 31-32 in depth on what constitutes a healthy person's food. </ref>
#Foods and drinks are permitted even when they are consumed for medicinal purposes. For example, one may have tea for a sore throat on [[Shabbat]].<ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], 39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 477) </ref>

===Tylenol or Aspirin===

#Many poskim are of the opinion that Tylenol® and aspirin should not be taken, even though healthy people may take them as well.<ref>Minchas Yitzchok 3:35:2, Be’er Moshe 1:33:5, 2:32, 6:39, Shraga Hameir 2:40, Refuas Yisroel page 16:footnote 42. Refer to Divrei Chachumim pages 137-138:389 who quotes a lenient opinion. </ref> However, if one is in great pain, then taking them is permitted.<ref>Minchas Yitzchok 3:35:2, Be’er Moshe 1:33:5, Refuas Yisroel page 16:footnote 42, Chazon Ovadia v. 4 p. 141 cited by Tiferet 328:1 </ref>
#Some are lenient to take ibuprofen if a person regularly takes them and if they don't take it they'll be in pain.<ref>Yalkut Yosef v. 4 p. 143 cited by Tiferet 328:2</ref>

===Vitamins===

#If the purpose of the vitamin is to serve as a food supplement it is permitted to take such a vitamin on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>
#If the purpose of the vitamin is to strengthen a weak body or to relieve certain symptoms, in the opinion of many poskim, one may not take those vitamins on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) references Igros Moshe, O.C. 3:54, Minchas Shelomo 2:37 and Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 86, quoting Rav S.Z. Auerbach. See, however, Tzitz Eliezer 14:50, who takes a more lenient approach concerning vitamins on [[Shabbat]]. </ref>
#Some say that a multi-vitamin that one takes everyday is permitted since it is a food and not a [[refuah]].<ref>Opinion of Harav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l quoted in Divrei Chachumim page 137:footnote 389, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 34:footnote 85. In regard to regular vitamins see Divrei Chachumim pages 137-138, Igros Moshe O.C. 3:54, Nishmas Avraham 1:328:pages 212-213, Shulchan Shlomo 328:58, Tzitz Eliezer 14:50, Oz Nedberu 6:72, Be’er Moshe 1:33, Shalmei Yehuda 10:footnote 51. </ref>

==Elective Surgery==

#One should make sure to schedule an elective surgery within the first three days of the week, but not on or after Wednesday. However, after the fact, and if one did the surgery at such a time, and there is a situation of Pikuach Nefesh, it is totally permissible to violate [[Shabbat]] like any other sick person in danger. <ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 32:33 based on the idea of Baal HaMoer quoted in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 248:4. [https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=131251 Rav Shmuel Fuerst] said that he heard Rav Moshe Feinstein rule the same way. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (chap 32 note 99) quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman who says that if an expert doctor who is needed for this surgery is only available on Wednesday through Friday, then it's permissible to schedule the surgery then. For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]].</ref> Sephardim can be lenient to schedule such a surgery on Wednesday but not past Thursday.<ref>Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]], vol 1, pg 60) </ref>

==Inducing labor==

#It is permissible for a pregnant woman who is past her term to receive a hormone infusion to induce labor if the doctor feels that there is danger to the life of the mother or the fetus.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (chap 32, note 98 (note 100, in new one)).For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]]. </ref>

==Caesarean Section==

#If the doctor says that a woman needs to have a caesarean section, and she is able to choose when to schedule the surgery, she should schedule it for the first three days of the week and not Wednesday through Friday.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 36:4 based on the principle of the Baal HaMoer. For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]]. </ref>

==A Doctor on Call==

#A doctor who is on call and there is a sick patient under his or her care, some say that the doctor should stay in the hospital or nearby so that the doctor will not have to travel on [[Shabbat]]<ref>Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:131 and Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 30:26 </ref>, while others are lenient if it will ruin the doctor and his family’s oneg [[Shabbat]]. <ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (chap 40 note 71) in name of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach explaining that since there is a mitzvah of oneg [[Shabbat]] one is not obligated to leave one’s home on Friday in order to avoid violation of [[Shabbat]]. For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]]. </ref>
#According to many poskim, a hatzolah member or doctor who was called into the hospital for an emergency can't drive home afterwards.<ref>Even though Igrot Moshe OC 4:80 was lenient, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Minchat Shlomo 1:8 was strict. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Chazon Ovadia (Shabbat v. 3 p. 253) is strict. Tzitz Eliezer 21:59 writes that someone who relies on Rav Moshe has what to rely upon. Shevet Halevi 6:26 and 8:87 fundamentally holds like Rav Moshe, though in practice he writes that the hatzolah should get a non-Jew to drive back.
* Igrot Moshe explains that there are two types of cases where a person goes beyond techum for pikuach nefesh to save Jews. Some are cases where he knew in advance that it would likely take a long time and he would have to be there for the rest of Shabbat and others that he knew were short. The case where he went knowing that he would probably be there for the rest of Shabbat he is only granted 2000 amot but may not go beyond 2000 amot to return home. In the case where he went to save for a short emergency he may return home. The reason for this is ''hiteru sofam mishum techilatam'' (Heb. התירו סופן משום תחלתן; transl. they allowed in the end because of the beginning), meaning, that if they weren't allowed to return they wouldn't go in the first place. He proves that this allowance includes even biblical violations of Shabbat. His proofs are Tosfot Eruvin 44b, Rashba Beitzah 11b, and Rambam (Hilchot Shabbat 2:23 and 27:17). Therefore, he permitted a hatzolah member who drove for an emergency call to even drive back to his home so that they're not discouraged from going another time for an emergency.</ref> However, most poskim including those who do not allow the hatzolah member or doctor to drive home, allow him to ask a non-Jew to drive him home. Nonetheless, this leniency does not allow him to travel home even if he's driven by a non-Jew if he went beyond his techum.<ref>Chatom Sofer (CM 194), Minchat Shlomo 1:8, Shevet Halevi 6:24, Chazon Ovadia (v. 3 p. 253). Chatom Sofer's reason is that he can use a non-Jewish driver is because if he isn't allowed then he might not go another time. Rav Shlomo Zalman questions this but writes that once the Chatom Sofer already ruled that way he isn't going to argue.</ref> Only those who are lenient for him to drive home allow him to return from beyond techum.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 4:80) allows the hatzolah member or doctor to return from beyond the techum because the call was a short call which he thought would finish before the end of Shabbat. Since if he wouldn't be allowed to return home he might not go another time, he is allowed to return from beyond techum. However, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Minchat Shlomo 1:8) argues that he may not return from beyond techum. Chazal only permitted someone went for war and the non-Jews won to return to his original techum, however, a doctor who left his techum to save someone only has 2000 amot where he is but can't return.</ref>
## According to the lenient view who allows a hatzolah member to drive home, the same could be applied to a doctor who is on call and goes into the hospital for an emergency that he can drive home. However, this does not apply to a doctor who needs to go in for rounds or scheduled hours. Since he must go in for his job, according to absolutely everyone he may not drive home.<Ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/851379/rabbi-yaakov-b-neuburger/hilchot-amira-l-akum-and-pikuach-nefesh-on-shabbos-2nd-shiur/ Rabbi Yaakov Neuberger (Pikuach Nefesh #2 min 53-55)] explains that if a doctor has rounds that obligates him to come into the hospital on Shabbat for patients that he may not drive home according to Rav Moshe. Since he is going to come in either way at some point on Shabbat he may not drive home. He is coming in for his job and his patients. However, if he is going in because of an emergency call, even if he is on call, he may drive home according to Rav Moshe. Since whether he goes in depends on a judgement call he may drive home. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1064716/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig/doctors-and-hatzalah-members-driving-back-home-on-shabbos/ Rav Willig] agrees. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Sht Harav Haroshei v. 2 ch. 42 n. 11 p. 595) also writes that a doctor on call ideally he should go back with a non-Jew but if he can't he could even drive himself back home. He is based on Igrot Moshe. Divrei Binayahu 23:37 applies Rav Moshe to a doctor on call as well.</ref> Others argue that even the lenient view wouldn't allow a doctor on call to return home.<Ref>Rav Schachter (B'ikvei Hatzon p. 52) writes that just like the Chatom Sofer (CM 194) writes that the principle of hiteru sofam mishum techilatam doesn't apply to someone going for ayvah since ultimately he is going for himself and would go anyway, the same applies to a doctor on call. The reason he's going into the hospital is for himself to keep his job. Therefore, he may not return home even according to Rav Moshe since he would have gone for the emergency either way.</ref>
## Some write that according to the lenient view who allows a hatzolah member to drive home, that is only if he left on Shabbat for the emergency, but if it began before Shabbat it is forbidden.<ref>Rav Schachter (B’ikvei Hatzon p. 52) based on Magen Avraham 518:6</ref> Others disagree.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1064716/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig/doctors-and-hatzalah-members-driving-back-home-on-shabbos/ Rav Mordechai Willig]</ref>
## Some write that even according to the lenient view this only applies to going to save a Jew but not for a non-Jew. Even though it is permitted to violate Shabbat to save a non-Jew he may not violate Shabbat to return home.<ref>Chatom Sofer (CM 194) explains that ayvah only permits violating Shabbat but not returning home. The only reason he is allowed to return home is because otherwise he wouldn’t go next time. But to save a non-Jew he would go anyway next time since otherwise he would endangered because of ayvah. Rav Schachter (B’ikvei Hatzon p. 52) applies this to Rav Moshe’s leniency of a doctor driving home from an emergency.</ref>
#If someone leaves to leave the techum for an emergency such as for a woman giving birth or a hatzolah member, he doesn’t need to remove any extra clothing he’s wearing even though he’s bringing those clothing beyond the techum. Some say that he should make those clothing ownerless before Shabbos if he knew that it would happen.<ref>Torat Yoledet (p. 40 and Umasfim Utikun siman 2) writes that he doesn’t need to take off his extra clothing like his jacket or tie as the earlier poskim didn’t mention this. He quotes Rav Elyashiv who says that the clothing which are necessary are considered nullified to the person’s body. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchata ch. 42 fnt. 136 and Minchat Shlomo 1:15) explains that the clothing’s techum follows his techum when he leaves for an emergency. Minchat Yitzchak 9:37 and Techumei Shabbat (Miluyim 29 p700) also permit for other reasons. Torat Hayoledet 2:4 quotes Rav Chaim Kanievsky as holding that he should make his clothing ownerless before Shabbat and then they won’t have a techum. Teshuvot Vahanagot 5:89 agrees. Techumei Shabbat quotes Rav Pinchas Sheinberg who argues with this suggestion because his intent is to reacquire it after Shabbat. </ref>
# If the hatzolah member evaluates that probably the ambulance will be necessary for another call later that Shabbat he can drive it back according to everyone.<Ref>Rav Moshe (Igrot Moshe 4:80) writes that it is permitted to drive back the ambulance if it is common that they're need it later that Shabbat. Shevet Halevi 6:26 also allows it and explains that it is considered pikuach nefesh where the need is common. It is considered like choleh lifanenu.</ref>

==Public Safety==

#It is permitted to violate any rabbinic prohibition to prevent something dangerous to the public.<ref>Gemara Shabbat 42a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:18, Mishna Brurah 408:77</ref>

==Shomer Shabbos Residency==
Is it permissible to join a non-shomer Shabbos residency?
===Discussion===
One factor to consider is that halacha forbids getting into a situation where it will be necessary to violate Shabbat for pikuach nefesh. This stricture applies even before Shabbos.<ref>Baal Hamoer’s reading to Shabbat 19a</ref> The counter-principle to consider that it is possible that only this doctor will merit to cure a certain patient.<ref>Ran Nedarim 41b s.v. ela</ref> A practical consideration is that taking a Shomer Shabbos residency might mean sacrificing a better education to be an expert in that field of medicine.
====Rav Hershel Schachter====
Rav Hershel Schachter<ref>[https://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2007/rsch_shabbos1.html torahweb.org]</ref> holds that if it can’t be arranged to get a shomer Shabbos residency a person should find another profession.<ref>
* [http://themedhc.org/2016/08/22/shomer-shabbos-medical-training-by-akiva-bergman/ Dr. Akiva Bergman] wrote a nice article on the topic clearly showing the numerous issues with the non-shomer Shabbat residency. 1) One has to opt out of a situation in which one will violating Shabbat for pikuach nefesh including treating non-Jewish patients which is only permitted in self-protection (ayvah). 2) Even planning a trip more than three days before Shabbat is a problem since the residency will certainly involve the violation of Shabbat. 3) Even in terms of protecting a Jew that too doesn't serve as a reason to allow pikuach nefesh ab initio according to the Rama. 4) Furthermore, no resident can be sure that he will certainly have a Jew among his patients. His conclusion is that a non-shomer Shabbat residency is seriously problematic.</ref> Rabbi Chaim Jachter<Ref>[https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/shabbat-and-pikuach-nefesh-part-iii-by-rabbi-howard-jachter koltorah.org]</ref> quotes that Rav Schachter gave two reasons. First, a person can’t set himself up to violate Shabbat even in advance of Shabbat since the treatment of many or most patients is not a mitzvah.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/796071/rabbi-howard-apfel/shomer-shabbos-residencies-pt-2-and-trading-call-with-non-observant-jews/ Rabbi Howard Apfel (Shomer Shabbos Residencies Part 2, min 20-30)] clarified Rav Schachter's opinion is that since doing a non-shomer Shabbos residency will result in a definite violation of Shabbat for pikuach nefesh that is not permitted even for a mitzvah according to the Biur Halacha 248:4 s.v. uposek. </ref> Additionally, he holds that there is a concern that if one becomes used to doing a forbidden activity when it is permitted, he will continue these activities even when it is forbidden.

====Rav Dovid Cohen and Rav Moshe Feinstein====
Rav Dovid Cohen<ref>Quoted by Rabbi Raymond and Dr. Sammy Sultan in RJJ Periodical no. LVIII</ref> holds that initially a person should find a shomer Shabbos residency but if it can’t then he can manage with a non-shomer Shabbos residency. Similarly, Rav Moshe Tendler quotes Rav Moshe Feinstein<ref>Quoted by Rabbi Raymond and Dr. Sammy Sultan in RJJ Periodical no. LVIII from Practical Medical Halacha, Rabbi M. D. Tendler and Dr. F. Rosner, p.150, 1998. Complete text available [http://daneisenberg.com/sstshuvahtendler.pdf here]. </ref> as holding that it is permissible to go to a non-Shomer Shabbos residency with better training as long as one keeps Shabbos even in a less favorable environment. If the superior training comes at the expense of breaking Shabbat in a forbidden way, even if it is only a rabbinic ordinance, he must forgo the better training.
===Summary===
Bottom line, there is a dispute among the contemporary poskim whether a medical student must find a shomer-Shabbos residency or find another profession, or it is permitted to take a non-shomer Shabbos residency. Even according to the lenient view, no transgression of Shabbat is permitted in the name of training to be a doctor. It is just permitted to take the training in a less Shabbos friendly environment and cope with the questions as they arise and only do what is permitted on Shabbat.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/796071/rabbi-howard-apfel/shomer-shabbos-residencies-pt-2-and-trading-call-with-non-observant-jews/ Rabbi Howard Afpel]</ref>
==Related Pages==

#[[Tochen]] ([[grinding]])
#[[Brushing Teeth on Shabbat]]

==Credits==
Halachipedia is very thankful to Rabbi Doniel Neustadt who gave Halachipedia permission to use his valuable article on this topic to improve the Halachipedia page.
==Sources==
<references />
[[Category:Shabbat]]
{{Shabbat Table}}

Template:Child as Choleh on Shabbat

2024-08-25T12:30:51Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

#If a child needs a vaporizer to alleviate discomfort (from bronchitis etc.), one may ask a non-Jew to plug it in on [[Shabbos]] to ease his pain. While some prohibit adding cold water to a cold water vaporizer,<ref>Minchas Yitzchok 7:28, Be'er Moshe 6:51</ref> others are lenient if you pour it through the spout.<ref>Sefer Hilchos Shabbos 8: footnote 64, B'shem R' Moshe Feinstien ZT”L</ref> If it is a hot water vaporizer, one may take previously boiled water from an urn and refill it.<ref>Shalmai Yehudah pg. 44</ref>
# Healthy infants and babies until the age of three (and according to some poskim even older children till the age of six or nine) are halachically classified as “patients not dangerously ill.”<Ref> Chazon Ish, O.C. 59:3, Rav S.Z. Auerbach in Nishmas Avraham 328:54, and Rav Y.S. Elyashiv in Eis Laledes, pg. 57, quote the age of 2-3. Tzitz Eliezer 8:15-12 quotes ages of 6. Minchas Yitzchak 1:78 quotes age of 9. </ref> (In the final analysis, it all depends on the strength and maturity of the child.) <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref> Therefore, they are permitted to take all forms of medicine, provided, of course, that no Biblical prohibitions are transgressed. <ref> Rama, O.C. 328:17. Note, however, that not all of a baby’s needs are exempt from the prohibition against medication; see, for instance, Mishna Brurah 328:131. See Tehillah l’David 328:24 and Minchas Yitzchak 4:124 who deal with this difficulty </ref>
#In a case where the child is under three months and appears to be ill, if his temperature is not that high, but merely a notch over 100 degrees, one can still desecrate the [[Shabbos]] (call a doctor, drive if a non-Jew cannot be found etc.), as temperature for a newborn can be indicative of something more serious.<ref>Igros Moshe O.C. 1:129</ref> If time is not of the essence, one should initially look to engage a non-Jew in any prohibited activity. <ref>Rabbi Heshy Kahn (What's Doing, Greater Connecticut, 3/3/11)</ref>

Medicine on Shabbat

2024-08-25T01:33:18Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

{{Good}}
[[File:Medicine.jpg|200px|right]]
The Rabbis issued a decree limiting the usage of [[medications]] on Shabbat. In the opinion and experience of the Rabbis, easy access to medicine could lead to the transgression of certain melachot ([[Shabbat]] labors). While issuing the decree, however, the Rabbis were lenient in certain cases of those suffering pain or distress.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt). In regard to the [[muktzah]] status of pills and other [[medications]] see Minchas [[Shabbos]] 88:footnote 77, Har Tzvi tal harim tochain 2, Shalmei Yehuda 10:15:footnote 46, Zera Yaakov 13:page 153, Nachlas Yisroel pages 633-650 in depth, Shulchan Shlomo 318:7:2:page 298, Ohr Yisroel 6:pages 17-20, Aruch Ha’shulchan 308:59, Bais Avi 3:52, Avnei Yushfei 5:62.</ref> (See the footnote for some background.)<ref>*Rashi ([[Shabbat]] 53b s.v. Gezerah) explains that the reason for the prohibition against taking medicine is because one might come to grind the ingredients for the medicine and violate the prohibition of [[Tochen]] ([[grinding]]). [[Maggid]] Mishna ([[Shabbat]] 2:10) draws a distinction between one who is sick but whose life is not in danger, and a person who is in pain. Tur and Shulchan Aruch 338:1 rule that a healthy person who is in pain may not do any activity of healing because of the rabbinic decree.</ref> These laws are true for the first day of [[Yom Tov]] and the two days of [[Rosh Hashana]] as well.<ref>The same halacha applies to the first day of [[Yom Tov]] (Refer to Magen Avraham 532:2, Chai Adom 23:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 98:33, Mishna Brurah 532:5, [[Yom Tov]] Shenei K’hilchoso 1:22, Nishmas Avraham 1:pages 275-276) and both days of [[Rosh Hashana]]h (Nishmas Avraham 1:600:1, see Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 31:28, [[Yom Tov]] Shenei K’hilchoso 1:22:footnote 76, Shevet Ha’kehusi 1:156 ) </ref>{{TOC|limit = 3}}

==Taking Medicine==
===If one has a minor condition (Meychush BeAlma)===

#If someone has a minor condition which hurts, such as a tooth ache, throat ache, head ache, cold, or cough, it is forbidden to take any medicine. However, someone who is in a lot of pain to the point that he's lying in bed, or he can't function normally due to his weakness (as is the case with a migraine), is permitted to take medicine.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 34:1,3 and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 91:1. The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) writes that although contemporary poskim debate whether nowadays we can be more lenient with taking medication on [[Shabbat]] because of the change in the technique of the production of medicines, the general consensus is to reject this argument. See Minchas [[Shabbat]] 91:9; Ketzos ha-Shulchan 134:7; Chelkas Yaakov 4:41; and Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:15. See also [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739326/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Medicine_on_Shabbat_Part_I Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on YUTorah.org]. The Yalkut Yosef 328:52 writes that a choleh shein bo skana (sick in bed) can take pills. He adds that in general, someone who is in a lot of pain but isn't choleh shein bo sakana may not take pills. He makes two exceptions: for someone who has a big headache and someone who has a big stomach ache.</ref>
#Some poskim allow a person who is accustomed to take pain killers for a head ache or tooth ache to take pain killers on [[Shabbat]] if otherwise he will be in pain.<ref>Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]] v. 4, pp. 408-9) writes that some say that one may take pain killers on [[Shabbat]] because they don't cure but only remove pain, and some disagree. He concludes that one should only be lenient if a person is accustomed to taking such pain killers and if one doesn't take them one will be in pain. On page 143 in discussing the same leniency he specifically mentions pills that contain paracetamol which is the active ingredient in Tylenol, a pain killer.</ref>

===If one has a sickness (Choleh Shein Bo Sakana)===

#If one has fever, feels weak all over, or feels bad enough to require bed rest, he can be classified as a “patient not dangerously ill” (Choleh Shein Bo Sakana) and he is permitted to take oral [[medications]].<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:121 permits taking an oral medication without any shinui (alteration from the normal procedure). Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]], vol 4, pg 129) and 39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 492) agree with the Mishna Brurah. [http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&pgnum=112 Mishkenot Yacov O.C. 117] seems to disagree.

*Halachos of [[Refuah on Shabbat]] (Rabbi Bodner, pg 55) and The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) write that most poskim agree with the Mishna Brurah. See, however, Sh"t Igrot Moshe 3:53, Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:15, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:108, 6:28.</ref>
#Since “requiring bed rest” and “weak all over” are subjective terms, it is up to each individual to determine his personal pain threshold. There is no requirement to be overly stringent when judging the degree of illness.<ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org]. See also Sh"t Tzitz Eliezer 14:50-7 and 17:13. </ref>
#Some poskim hold that it is forbidden to perform a biblically prohibited action on [[Shabbat]] (melacha deoritta) for someone who is in the category of "patient not dangerously ill", even if one does it in an abnormal manner (Shinui).<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 32:2</ref> Some, however, hold that it is permitted to do actions in an abnormal way (Shinui) for a "patient not dangerously ill."<ref>Eglei Tal ([[Tochen]] #18), [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/797263/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Shiur_#3_-_Shabbos_-_melacha_sh'eina_tzericha_l'gufa Rabbi Hershel Schachter in a shiur on yutorah.org (towards end of shiur)]</ref>

===If One is Critically Ill (Choleh Sheyesh Bo Sakana)===

#It is permitted and a mitzvah to violate Shabbat in order to save a Jewish life.<ref>Gemara Yoma 84a, Rambam (Shabbat 2:1), Tur and Shulchan Aruch 328:2. Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shulchan Shlomo 328:4:3) writes that if there's pikuach nefesh on Shabbat we're not pained about having to do melacha for pikuach nefesh. It is similar to milah on Shabbat which is permitted. </ref> Even if there is only a doubt if the patient is critically ill<ref>Shulchan Aruch 328:6, Mishna Brurah 328:17, 328:26</ref> or if there is a doubt if the procedure will save the patient's life,<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:37</ref> nonetheless, it is a mitzvah to violate Shabbat in order to try to save a Jewish life.<ref>When discussing the mitzvah to violate Shabbat to save someone's life, Rambam (Shabbat 2:3) powerfully writes "this teaches that the laws of the Torah are not meant to be vengeful, but are instead supposed to bring mercy, kindness and peace to the world". </ref>
#Someone who delays in saving a life out of a concern of violating Shabbat is sinning in a way that is tantamount to murder.<ref>Yerushalmi Yoma 8:5, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:2</ref> This is only true of a situation that needs to be dealt with immediately. In that case, it is forbidden to delay. But in a case of potential danger that is certainly not an immediate emergency, it is correct and necessary to ask questions to minimize the violation of Shabbat.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 328:2 quoting Risba</ref>
#A rabbi should be careful to teach his community that it is permitted and a mitzvah to violate Shabbat for life endangering concerns.<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:6</ref>
#A person should violate Shabbat in order to save a non-Jew or non-religious Jew.<ref>Tiferet 329:4 citing Yabia Omer OC 8:38. He adds that if it could be minimized with shnayim she'asauha they should try to do so. See Mishna Brurah 330:8.</ref>
#A person should violate Shabbat in order to save someone who tried to commit suicide.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 8:37:5, Chazon Ovadia Shabbat v. 1 p. 125 cited by Tiferet 328:5. Yabia Omer cites as support the Birkei Yosef 301:6, Maharam Yafa 13, Divrei Yisachar 169, Kli Chemda Ki Tzetsei, Maharam Rotenbuerg 39, Mishna Halachot 8:56, Maharil Diskin Kuntres Acharon 34, Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:4, Yeshuot Yisrael CM 21 to allow pikuach nefesh for someone who tried to commit suicide. On the other hand, Minchat Chinuch Kometz Mincha 230 and Vzot Lyehuda Kuntres Hashalom 11c seem to hold that pikuach nefesh doesn't apply to someone who tried to commit suicide.</ref>
#After calling for help, one may hang up the phone if there will be further needs (various instruction, medical history, etc). However, if the patient has already been transported to the hospital and is absolutely certain that no further information will be needed, then one may not end the call.<ref>Mishna Halachot 3:46, Shmirat Shabbat KiHilchata 32:42</ref>

=== Pikuach Nefesh ===

# If there's a danger that is life threatening after Shabbat and he cannot or he doesn't know if he can save the person from the danger at that time, it is permitted on Shabbat to violate Shabbat to prevent the danger. However, if he can prevent the danger after Shabbat he must do so and not violate Shabbat.<ref>Igrot Moshe O.C. 3:69. Rav Moshe writes that also if it is known on Friday that there will be a danger on Shabbat and Friday is Yom Tov it is forbidden to violate Yom Tov. When the situation arises on Shabbat he should violate Shabbat and not violate Yom Tov. However, he quotes Netsiv who permits violating Yom Tov to avoid violating Shabbat in this case. Rav Elyashiv (Haarot Yoma 84b s.v. ubikar) agrees with Rav Moshe. However, Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shulchan Shlomo 328:4:7, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 32 fnt. 105) agrees with Netsiv. This is relevant to someone who is on dialysis and needs treatment either on Yom Tov or Shabbat. Rav Shlomo Zalman says that it is preferable to violate Yom Tov on Friday even though he could wait until Shabbat.</ref>
# If there's a pikuach nefesh (life-threatening situation) it isn't an obligation for others to experience pain to minimize the violation of Shabbat that the one who is in pikauch nefesh would have to do.
## For example, if a doctor needs light to treat a choleh sheyesh bo sakana and there's a candle in another room, it is preferable to carry the candle from one room to the other instead of lighting a new candle. However, if taking the candle from the other room is going to cause a lot of pain to someone else, such as if there's someone else in the room with the candle who is sleeping and taking the candle will wake him up. There's no obligation for that person to experience pain in order to minimize the melacha that the doctor or choleh sheyesh bo sakana need to do for pikuach nefesh.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 32:65), Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 2:44:11). Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani v. 4 p. 159-163) argues that it is an obligation upon every Jew to save his friend. If one person can save him even though it is difficult or painful he still must do so. If this will prevent the other person having to violate Shabbat, certainly he is obligated to save him in such a case. However, if the neighbor doesn't know about pikuach nefesh situation he is not obligated to do anything. </ref>
## If someone has an emergency and needs to go to the hospital and he can either call an ambulance or ask his neighbor to drive him to the hospital. Is his neighbor obligated to drive him to the hospital to minimize the amount of driving on Shabbat that will be done? Rav Shlomo Zalman seems to hold that it is not necessary. However, Rav Nissim Karelitz argues that it is an obligation of that neighbor even though it will very inconvenient to be stuck at the hospital for the rest of the day.<ref>Chut Shani (v. 4 p. 161). His main point is that there's a mitzvah of lo taamod al dam reyecha upon each Jew. </ref>
## If a live wire fell in the street there's no obligation to stand there all day to warn people from becoming injured by it. Instead, he may call the electric company to fix it.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 41:21). Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani v. 4 p. 161) agrees here since standing there all of Shabbat doesn't fix the problem. Since it is possible that someone will be endangered even with him standing there it is permitted to call the electric company to fix it.</ref>
#If a person is informed of a relative who is very sick and it is pikuach nefesh for him to travel there on Shabbat to help save that relative, he may go. In that situation he may not call to someone there to check that the relative is still alive since doing so doesn't help the patient. Calling just to minimize desecration of Shabbat is not permitted.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 2:44:12)</ref>

===Infants===
{{Child as Choleh on Shabbat}}

===Preparing medicine from before Shabbat===

#One may crush a capsule or tablet of medicine so that it is mixed into a food or drink before [[Shabbat]]. Once it becomes disguised by the food, one can eat the food or drink on [[Shabbat]].<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739326/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Medicine_on_Shabbat_Part_I Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on YUTorah.org], Menuchat Ahava 1:21:75 cited by Tiferet 328:3 </ref> If one didn't do it before Shabbat, some allow mixing a liquid medicine into a drink on Shabbat.<ref>Tiferet 328:3 citing Shevet Halevi 3:37, 8:82:2. See also Menuchat Ahava 1:21:75</ref>

===Continuing to take a daily dosage===

#Although one who is not classified as “ill” may not begin taking medicine on [[Shabbat]], some poskim hold that one who requires daily medication for an ongoing condition may continue doing so on [[Shabbat]] as well,<ref>Chazon Ish (oral ruling, quoted in Imrei Yosher on Moed 97, Daat Chazon Ish 7:19, Dinim Vihanhagot Chazon Ish 15:1), Shulchan Shlomo 328:59, Beer Moshe 1:33:8, 4:31, Avnei Yushfei 1:90:3, Rivevos Ephraim 3:227, 4:97:54, 5:202, Oz Nedberu 1:31:5, 4:24. Refer to Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 34:footnote 76, chelek 3:34:footnote 76. 
Rav S. Kluger (Sefer ha-Chayim 328:10 and Shenos Chayim 1:152) go even further and permit continuing taking medicine on [[Shabbat]], even of the patient is not medically required to take the medicine on a daily basis. Minchas [[Shabbat]] 91:9; Tzitz Eliezer 8:15-15:15; Rav Y.S. Elyashiv (Koveitz Teshuvos, O.C. 1:40, and oral ruling, quoted in Refuas Yisrael, pg. 14) agree with Rav Kluger. </ref> while others disagree.<ref>Igros Moshe, O.C. 3:53. Refer also to Da’as Torah 328:37 who is stringent.</ref>
#Some say that one may only take an ongoing medication on [[Shabbat]] if skipping a day of medication would be detrimental to the patient's health or if the medication must be taken for a number of consecutive days such that it is impossible not to take it on [[Shabbat]].<ref>Rav S.Z. Auerbach (Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 77, in the new edition). Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach held that it was only permitted to take an ongoing medication on [[Shabbat]] if skipping a day in middle of continuous medication would cause the patient damage or if the medication must be done for a certain number of days which would automatically include [[Shabbat]]. Rav Hershel Schachter ([http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/798018/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Shiur_#11_-_Shabbos_-_Memachaik,_Memare'ach in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 44-48)]) explained that the gemara Avoda Zara 28a seems to clearly support the opinion of those who say that one may not take medication on [[Shabbat]] even if one began to take the medication before [[Shabbat]]. However, he also cited the opinion of the Brit Olam who held that if the only way to take a certain medication was to take it for a number of consecutive days which includes [[Shabbat]], it would be permitted to take the medication on [[Shabbat]]. </ref> Other poskim hold that it is forbidden to take an ongoing antibiotic even if one started before Shabbat and needs to take it every day.<ref>Igrot Moshe O.C. 3:53</ref>

==Non-medical treatment==
===Using a Band Aid===

#It is permitted to put a band aid on a wound.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 34:3,Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:14:6, Chazon Ovadiah Shabbat vol. 3, page 403, Piskei Teshuvot 328:46 </ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, one should not remove a band aid on [[Shabbat]] if there is hair in the area of the band aid. However, if it is painful, one may remove it.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 35:30 (in the new edition) writes that a band aid shouldn’t be removed on [[Shabbat]] in an area where there’s hair, because removing the band aid will certainly pull out hairs. However, the Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata writes that it’s permissible to use Benzine to remove the band aid so it won’t rip out any hairs (assuming that the cream was set aside before [[Shabbat]] and isn’t [[Muktzeh]]). Nonetheless, in the footnote he quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman as saying that if it’s painful, it may be removed because it’s a pesik reisha delo nicha leih (פסיק רישא דלא ניחא ליה), keleacher yad (כלאחר יד), and mekalkel (מקלקל). </ref> However, Sephardim are more lenient and may remove the band aid, as long as there is a need to remove.<ref>The Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]] 4 pg 179, kitzur S”A 328:101, 340:6) writes that if there’s a need, it’s permissible to remove a band aid from an area of hair on [[Shabbat]] because it’s a pesik reisha delo nicha leih (פסיק רישא דלא ניחא ליה) for a Derabbanan. In the footnote he writes that even though the Or Letzion (vol 2, pg 259) is strict, his father (Rav Ovadyah, in Haskama to Lev Avraham), Rav Yitzchak Elchanan (Bear Yitzchak Siman 15), and Rav Shlomo Zalman (from Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata) are lenient. </ref>
#Most authorities permit removing the Band-Aid from the protective tabs, while some are stringent and so to satisfy all opinions one should prepare Band-Aids for [[Shabbat]] by peeling off their protective tabs and re-sealing them before [[Shabbat]].<ref>Most poskim (oral ruling by Rav M. Feinstein, quoted in Kitzur Hilchos [[Shabbat]] 44, note 117); Rav S.Z. Auerbach in Shulchan Shelomo 328:45; Ohr l’Tziyon 2:36-15; Az Nidberu 7:34, 35; Rav C.P. Scheinberg, quoted in Children in Halachah, pg. 88; Rav N. Karelitz, quoted in Orchos [[Shabbat]] 11:35) permit removing the protective tabs from a Band-Aid, while others (Minchas Yitzchak 5:39-2; 9:41; Rav Y.S. Elyashiv, quoted in Machazeh Eliyahu 70) are stringent. To satisfy all opinions, one may prepare Band-Aids for [[Shabbat]] use by peeling off their protective tabs and re-sealing them before [[Shabbat]]; once they have been prepared in this fashion, they may be used on [[Shabbat]] (Tzitz Eliezer 16:6-5). Sh”t Bear Moshe 1:36 writes that it is obvious that it is permitted to remove the plastic tabs from the sides of a bandaid on [[Shabbat]] and it isn't [[Koreah]]. </ref>

===Cleaning a wound===

#It is permitted to clean and bandage a wound or to pour hydrogen peroxide over it.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) based on Shulchan Aruch 328:23</ref> Note that doctors today do not recommend this.<ref>[https://www.webmd.com/first-aid/ss/slideshow-wound-care-dos-and-donts WebMD], [https://www.bannerhealth.com/healthcareblog/teach-me/its-time-to-get-hydrogen-peroxide-out-of-your-medicine-cabinet#:~:text=Hydrogen%20peroxide%20is%20not%20an,not%20worth%20the%20antiseptic%20effect.%E2%80%9D Bannerhealth.com]</ref> The recommended solution is to wash the wound with soap and water.

===Braces===

#Braces may be worn on [[Shabbat]] because there is no medicine for aligning teeth properly.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)writes that it is permissible to wear braces on [[Shabbat]] because the goal of the treatment or procedure can only be achieved without the use of medicine. </ref>

===Exercise===

#One may not exercise on Shabbat. If one needs to do physical therapy, they should consult their rabbi.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 328:42 writes that one may not do exercise to break a sweat on Shabbat as it is considered refuah. Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 34:22 agrees.</ref>
#Someone health may not do physical therapy on Shabbat. However, someone who is a Choleh Shein Bo Sakana or someone who whom not doing physical therapy might lead to a worse problem may do physical therapy on Shabbat. Breathing and speech therapy are permitted on Shabbat.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 34:23</ref>

==Specific conditions==
===Abscess===

#An abscess may be squeezed to relieve pressure from pus, even if some blood is secreted in the process. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)quoting Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:28 and Mishna Brurah 328:89 </ref>

===Acne===

#All medication for acne may not be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Angina===

#All medication for angina are permitted to be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Arthritis===

#Anti-inflammatory medication for mild arthritis are forbidden. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Asthma===

#All oral and breathing [[medications]] for mild asthma are permitted to be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Athlete’s foot===

#One may not use any medication for athlete’s foot on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Baby Cream===

#If a baby has a rash it is permitted to dab on some baby rash cream and not rub it in. If the cream would become completely absorbed into the skin and no trace would be left on the surface of the skin it would be permitted even to rub it in.<ref>[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?ClipID3542 Rabbi Mansour] explained that according to Rav Ovadia it was permitted to use a medicine for a baby who is in pain because they are considered a choleh shein bo sakana (Rama 328). Dabbing on the cream without rubbing or smoothing it is permitted based on the Chazon Ish. Furthermore, it is permitted to rub in the cream completely and it isn't considered memare'ach (Yabia Omer 4:27 based on Magen Avraham).</ref>

===Back or Neck Brace===

#One may put on or remove a back or neck brace on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) based on ruling of Rav S.Z. Auerbach in Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 113. </ref>

===Bandage===

#It is permissible to put on an ace bandage on [[Shabbat]] as long as you don't tie anything permanent. <ref>Contemporary Questions in Halacha and Hashkafa pg. 144 writes that this is because it wasn't included in the initial gezeira of [[refuah]] since its benefits cannot be duplicated with pills or other standard medicines. </ref>

===Bee sting===

#If one has a bee or wasp sting the stinger may be removed and the area may be washed with ice water, lemon juice or vinegar, etc. The area may not be soaked, however, in those liquids. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 478), [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], See Mishna Brurah 328:141,142 </ref>
#One may use liquid or spray insect repellent on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 14:35; Shalmei Yehudah, pg. 179, [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org]</ref>

===Birth control===

#It's permissible to take birth control pills on [[Shabbat]] (assuming she received halachic permission to take these pills). <ref>[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2228 Rabbi Mansour on DailyHalacha.com], Chacham Ovadia Yosef [http://www.halachayomit.co.il/EnglishDefault.asp?HalachaID=3319 Halacha Yomit], Orot Hatahara 16:52</ref>

===Bone Fracture===

#For a simple bone fracture a non-Jew may be asked to do anything necessary, e.g., make a phone call, drive a car, take x-rays or put on a cast. [If a non-Jew is not available, some poskim permit a Jew to do these acts if they are done with a shinui, in an abnormal manner. <ref>This is the view of Shulchan Aruch ha-Rav 328:19 and Eglei Tal ([[Tochen]] 18). Some poskim (Rav S.Z. Auerbach, quoted in Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 33, note 18; Shevet ha-Levi 8:93) rule that one may rely on this view, especially when there is “danger to a limb.” Note, however, that Mishna Brurah, Aruch ha-Shulchan and most poskim do not agree with this leniency. </ref>] If there is even a small chance of internal bleeding, e.g., the thigh or pelvis bone was fractured, or if the elbow was shattered, all [[Shabbat]] restrictions are lifted. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Bow Legged Baby===

#It is forbidden to straighten the legs of a bow-legged baby on Shabbat since doing so is considered an act of healing.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/893696/rabbi-hershel-schachter/berachos-64-35a-36a-kol-haneheneh-making-a-living-vs-learning-kevius-for-maaser-pas-habaah-bekisnin-medications/ Rav Schachter (Brachot Shiur 64 min 107)]</ref>

===Cellulites===

#Since cellulitis may be life-threatening immediate medical attention is required. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

=== Chapped Hands ===
#For dried (or chapped) hands it is prohibited to rub them with either oil, ointment (Vaseline) or lotion. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481) </ref>One who regularly uses a pourable, liquid lotion or oil on his hands (whether they are chapped or not) may do so on [[Shabbat]], too, even if his hands are chapped.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A 327:1</ref>

===Chapped Lips===

#For dried or cracked lips one may not apply chap stick or any other medication, liquid or otherwise. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Cold===

#For a cold one may not take [[medications]] or vitamins. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], Rav S.Z. Auerbach (Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 52) write that there is room for leniency in kavod ha-beriyos situations, e.g., a constantly dripping nose which is disturbing to people who are around him.</ref> unless one is experiencing discomfort in his whole body or is bedridden. However, one may eat chicken soup or tea with honey to obtain relief.<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Contact Lenses===
#Some poskim permit putting soft contact lenses in contact solution.<ref>[[Asicha_Hilchos_Shabbos_Part_2| Rav Mordechai Willig (Asicha Shabbos 2 p. 3)]]</ref> Others permit putting them in saline solution but not the disinfectant solution. Hard contacts are like dishes which can be cleaned.<Ref>Orchot Shabbat 13:11, [https://torah.org/torah-portion/weekly-halacha-5761-chayeisara/ Rabbi Doniel Neustadt]</ref>
#Sephardim hold that it is permitted to soak contact lenses in their solution on Shabbat. <ref>[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=3188 Rabbi Eli Mansour] </ref>

===Cough===

#Cough–medication may not be taken.<ref>Shmirat Shabbat KiHilchata 34:1,3). </ref> If the cough may be an indication of pneumonia or asthma, medication is permitted.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Conception Pills===

#Some poskim permit taking pills for conception.<ref>Chacham Ovadia Yosef, Rav Moshe Stern, and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach cited on [http://www.halachayomit.co.il/EnglishDefault.asp?HalachaID=3319 Halacha Yomit], Orot Hatahara 16:52 </ref>

===Deodorant===

#It is permitted to use a spray deodorant on Shabbat. Some say that one shouldn't use an antiperspirant deodorant on Shabbat since it is medicinal.<ref>Rabbi Heinemann quoted by the [https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/kashrus-kurrents-2019/6238/medicine-on-shabbos-questions-and-answers-from-rav-moshe-heinemann-shlita/ Star-K]</ref>

===Diabetes===

#All necessary [[medications]] for diabetes may be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Diarrhea===

#For diarrhea one may not take medication unless one is in severe pain or weak all over. Any food or drink is permitted. A hot water bottle is permitted when one experiences strong pains.<ref>Mishna Brurah 326:19, The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

=== Dislocated Limb ===

# Many poskim hold that it is permitted to push a dislocated limb back into place on Shabbat.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:47 establishes that it is permitted to push a dislocated limb back into place on Shabbat. Magen Avraham 328:51 disagrees because the Gemara Shabbat 148a only permitted pushing a limb back into place if a bone cracked but just if it is dislocated. Shulchan Aruch Harav 328:52 agrees. Mishna Brurah 328:145 quotes Atzi Shitim who disagrees with Magen Avraham and defends Shulchan Aruch. He adds that even Magen Avraham agrees to allow a non-Jew to push the dislocated limb back into place. Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 33:17 follows Shulchan Aruch and Atzi Shitim.</ref>

===Ear Infection===

#For an ear infection all [[medications]] are permitted. Cotton balls may be inserted. <ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], It is prohibited to tear cotton balling on [[Shabbat]]; Minchas Yitzchak 4:45; Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 35:20. </ref> Even if the infection is no longer present, prescribed medicine begun on a weekday must be continued until finished in order to avoid a relapse. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Eye Inflammation===

#For an eye inflammation eye drops (or ointment) may be instilled in the eye. If the eye is not inflamed but merely irritated, no medication is permitted. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) based on S”A O.C. 328:20. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:9 states that if someone's eyes are inflamed or it has pus or blood coming out, or tears pouring out, one can violate Shabbat. Mishna Brurah 328:22 quotes the Gemara which explains that even though for a regular Sakanat Ever we shouldn't violate Shabbat since the health of a person's eyes are linked to his entire health he can violate Shabbat.</ref> Some permit putting in eye drops even if they are irritated.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Shabbat v. 3 p. 233 cited by Tiferet 328:31</ref>
#If the patient feels a stabbing pain in the eye, major pains, or has a sharp drop in vision suddenly he can violate Shabbat to be healed.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 3 p. 234 and Chut Shani 4:89:16 cited by Tiferet 328:31. Chazon Ovadia explains that even though the doctors say that today there's no concern that a loss of a person's vision will lead to a premature death we can continue to follow the health concern of the gemara.</ref>

===Fever===

#For a fever any oral [[medications]] may be taken. A mercury thermometer may be used. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A O.C. 306:7 </ref> If a person is suffering from high-grade fever, a non-Jew may be asked to do whatever the patient needs in order to feel better. <ref>Mishna Brurah 328:46, 47 </ref> If the cause of the fever is unknown, a doctor should be consulted.
#A regular fever can be treated with oral medication should be treated as a Choleh Shein Bo Sakana who can have medicine. If the fever is abnormal such as if it is 104 degrees Fahrenheit or more, it isn't reduced by medicine and its cause is unknown, a person can violate Shabbat because it is a Safek Choleh Sheyesh Bo Sakana. For a child or elderly person even if the fever isn't so high one can violate Shabbat to heal them.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 3 p. 244-6 cited by Tiferet 328:26</ref>

===Headache===

#For a headache medication should not be taken. If the headache is severe enough so that one feels weak all over or is forced to go to bed, medication may be taken. One who is unsure if he has reached that stage of illness may be lenient and take pain- relieving medication.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)See Ketzos ha-Shulchan 138, pg. 100; Minchas Yitzchak 3:35; Be’er Moshe 1:33; 2:32. </ref>

===Heartburn===

#For heartburn foods which will have a soothing effect may be eaten. Some poskim permit taking anti-acid medication while others are stringent. If the medicine is prescribed by a doctor, one may be lenient.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)See Ketzos ha-Shulchan 138, pg. 98; Tzitz Eliezer 8:15 (15-21); Az Nidberu 1:31; Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34:4 </ref>

===Hemorrhoids===

#For a mild case of hemorrhoids medication may not be taken. For a severe case, it is permitted to sit in a “sitz bath” (with water that heated before [[Shabbat]]), or use medicated pads or suppositories.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Herniated Disc===

#For a herniated disc (back and leg pain) ice packs or hot packs are permitted. Physical therapy exercises, e.g. stretching, are permitted. If the pain is severe to the degree that the entire body is in pain, painkillers or other [[medications]] are permitted as well.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Indigestion===

#One may take a leisurely walk in order to help digestion. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 477) </ref>
#One may drink prune juice in order to act as a laxative. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481) </ref>

===Infection===

#For an infection all [[medications]] are permitted. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Lactose===

#For lactose intolerance, some poskim rule that one may not take enzyme supplement tablets. But it is permitted to add enzyme drops to liquid dairy foods before [[Shabbat]] and drink the dairy on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt). See Refuas Yisrael, pg. 245. </ref> Others are lenient.<ref>Rav Yisroel Belsky (Shu"t Shulchan HaLevi 10:2) ruled that lactase pills may be taken because they are not viewed as medicines. Chazal only forbade medicines because a person who is ill is physically distressed and might impetuously grind the ingredients on Shabbos. Lactase pills are not used to treat an illness. They simply provide the body with the missing enzymes that are necessary for the digestion of the milk sugars.</ref>

===Migraine===

#For a migraine headache any oral [[medications]] may be taken. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Mouthwash===

#It is permitted to use mouthwash on [[Shabbat]].<ref>See Beer Moshe 1:34:7page 78 is lenient as is Rivevot Ephraim 2:115:23:page 192, 3:536:6, 4:97:5, 6:195, Nishmas [[Shabbos]] 5:318, Cheshev Ha’efod 2:59 </ref> See the [[Brushing Teeth on Shabbat]] page for more on this topic.

===Nosebleed===

#For a nosebleed bleeding may be stopped with a tissue or a napkin. If none is available, a cloth napkin may be used. <ref>Mishna Brurah 328:146 </ref>

===Raynaud’s Syndrome===

#One who is ill or in need of using chemical hand warmers on [[Shabbat]], such as in the case of Raynaud's syndrome, or a soldier on guard duty who must remain alert may do so on [[Shabbat]].<ref>[http://www.yeshiva.co/ask/?id=4876 Yeshiva.org] based on Rav Dov Lior in his book Dvar Chevron Siman 236 pg. 125 </ref> See [[Getting_Dressed_on_Shabbat#Hand_Warmers_on_Shabbat]] for the fuller discussion.

===Psychotic Break===

#A psychotic break is a [[#If_One_is_Critically_Ill_.28Choleh_Sheyesh_Bo_Sakana.29| Choleh Sheyesh Bo Sakana]]. <ref>Harefuah C'halacha 7:1;3 </ref>

===Retinal Tear===

#If the retina of the eye becomes torn or detached one should go to the hospital or one's doctor immediately.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 3 p. 234 cited by Tiferet 328:31</ref>

===Retainer===

#One may insert and remove a retainer on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34:29 </ref>

===Scab===

#It is permitted to remove a scab as long as blood is not drawn from the wound. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A O.C. 328:22 and Mishna Brurah 90. </ref>

===Sleep disorder===

#There are conflicting views among contemporary poskim about taking sleeping pills or No-Doze pills.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 33:16), and [http://www.halachayomit.co.il/EnglishDefault.asp?HalachaID=3320 Chacham Ovadia Yosef are lenient] See Minchas Yitzchak 3:21, Tzitz Eliezer 9:17, Be’er Moshe 1:33 and Shalmei Yehudah, pg. 176, for the various views. </ref> One who is weak all over or bedridden may take them.
#Cotton balls may be used as ear plugs. It is permitted to use pliable ear plugs, which are made from a wax-like material that spreads to fill the cavity of the ear. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) quoting Rav S.Z. Auerbach (Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 14:45); Shraga ha-Meir 5:23. Rav Y.S. Elyashiv, however, recommends not using pliable ear plugs on [[Shabbat]]; see Ashrei ha-Ish 17:117; 33:7 </ref>

===Sore throat===

#For a sore throat medication may not be taken. Gargling is prohibited.<ref>S”A 328:32</ref> Drinking tea or any other hot drink, or sucking a candy, is permitted even if the intention is for medicinal purposes. <ref>S”A 328:37 </ref>

===Splinter===

#A splinter under the skin may be extracted with the fingers, or with tweezers or a needle. If, unavoidably, a little blood is secreted in the process, it is of no consequence. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)quoting Mishna Brurah 328:88 and Sha’ar ha-Tziyun 63. 39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 478) writes one may remove a splinter even if it may bleed, but one may not remove if it will certainly bleed unless it is very painful. </ref>

===Sprain===

#For a sprain, if the patient is not experiencing severe pain, nothing should be done. If the patient is experiencing severe pain, medication may be taken and a massage may be given. A makeshift splint may be applied, provided that no [[Shabbat]] Labors are transgressed.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Stitches===

#A non-Jew is allowed to stitch any wound, even if the stitching is done only for cosmetic reasons.<ref>Minchat Shelomo 2:34-33 and Nishmas Avraham, vol. 4, O.C. 340. See also Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 33, note 26, and 35, note 65-66.</ref> Some say even a Jew can add extra stitches for cosmetic reasons.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 33 fnt. 26</ref> A Jew may place a butterfly bandage or steri-strips to close a simple laceration or cut. Surgical skin closure glue may also be used.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt). See [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html].</ref>

===Stopping bleeding===

#Pressure may be applied to a cut to stop bleeding. Sucking or [[squeezing]] out blood is prohibited. <ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], Mishna Brurah 328:147 </ref>
#It is permitted to remove a thorn slowly so that it won’t cause blood to come out. If it is impossible to remove without blood coming out it is nonetheless permitted to relieve pain.<ref>Machasit Hashekel 328:32 is lenient if it is impossible to avoid since it is only derabbanan and for tzaar it is permitted. Kaf Hachaim 308:96 agrees. However, Shulchan Aruch Harav 308:38, Gedulat Elisha 308:53, and Ben Ish Chai Miketz Shana Sheniya n. 12 are strict if it is a pesik reisha. Tehilah LDovid 328:47 asks why would it be forbidden if it is a pesik reisha since it is only a derabbanan of chavala and for tzaar it is permitted. He rejects the implication otherwise from Tosfot Sanhedrin 85a s.v. vrabbi shimon. Biur Halacha 308:11 s.v. hakotz explained the Magen Avraham like the Shulchan Aruch Harav and cites the Chemed Moshe who is lenient like the Machasit Hashekel. Rav Nevinsal in Byitzchak Yikareh 308:11 that he thinks the opinion of the Chemed Moshe is reasonable. See Leviat Chen who agrees.</ref>

===Strep throat===

#For a strep throat all oral [[medications]] may be taken. Even if the infection is no longer present, the prescribed medicine begun on a weekday must be continued until finished. A culture may be taken by a non-Jew.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Sunburn===

#For a ordinary sunburn [[medications]] are not permitted.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Sweating===

#It is permitted to sprinkle baby powder on those parts of the body which are perspiring. <ref>Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34:12 </ref>

===Swelling===

#It is permitted to press a knife, etc. against the skin to prevent or minimize swelling.<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:144 </ref>
#It is permitted to wash or soak the swollen area in water.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 8:15 (15-12) </ref> It is permitted to place a compress,<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)writes in order to avoid [[sechitah]] and/or libun, only paper towels or napkins should be used and care should be taken not to squeeze them.</ref> ice (placed in plastic bag) or any frozen item over a swollen area.<ref>Be’er Moshe 1:33-18, Contemporary Questions in Halacha and Hashkafa pg. 144, [http://www.learntorah.com/lt-shiur-details.aspx?id=4985 Rabbi Meyer Yedid]. Rabbi Yedid says that this is because the [[refuah]] cannot be replicated through medicines and therefore wasn't included in the rabbinic enactment against [[refuah]]. See also Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 35:35 </ref> Some forbid applying an ice pack if it is clearly being done for medicinal reasons.<ref>Rabbi Heinemann cited by the [https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/kashrus-kurrents-2019/6238/medicine-on-shabbos-questions-and-answers-from-rav-moshe-heinemann-shlita/ Star-K]. See Shulchan Shlomo 328:37 and Halachos of Refuah on Shabbos p. 29.</ref>

===Toothache===

#A minor (cavity) toothache may not be treated with painkillers, but one is permitted to drink whiskey, etc., provided that it is swallowed immediately.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A O.C. 328:32. See also Mishna Brurah 328:102 </ref> A severe toothache (to the point where one feels weak all over) or gum infection may be treated with oral medication. If the tooth needs to be extracted, a non-Jew may be asked to do so.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on Rama, O.C. 328:3. See Tzitz Eliezer 9:17 (2-11)</ref>

===Wound===

#Cuts and abrasions may be washed or soaked in water. It is not permitted, however, to soak absorbent cotton or paper in such a solution and then wash the wound with it. The wound may be covered with a non-medicated Band-Aid.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

==Medicine after Candle Lighting before [[Kiddush]]==

#One is permitted to drink water while taking a pill on [[Shabbos]] after candle lighting before [[Kiddush]].<ref>Refer to Minchas Yitzchok 8:18, Shevet Ha’kehusi 1:109, Nishmas [[Shabbos]] 2:9. </ref>

==Carrying a Pill==

#One who needs to carry a pill on [[Shabbos]] in a place which does not have an eiruv should ask his Rav before doing so.<ref>Refer to Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:7, Tzitz Eliezer 13:34. </ref>

==Cutting Pills on Shabbos==

#One is permitted to cut a tablet in half on [[Shabbos]], and there is no concern of "mechatech" (cutting) on [[Shabbos]].<ref>Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 33:4, Shulchan Shlomo 314:13:3, Avnei Yushfei 4:58 quoting the opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita. Refer to there footnote 30 for the reason. </ref>

==Purchasing the Medicine==

#In situations where one is considered “ill” and is permitted to take medicine on [[Shabbat]], it is also permitted to ask a non-Jew to drive to a drugstore, buy medicine and bring it to him.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

== Vaccination ==

# It is permitted to vaccinate a healthy person on shabbat in a case where there is a risk that they will get sick and be endangered. If the doctor's opinion is that the vaccine is urgent then it is even permissible to violate Torah-level prohibitions, such as writing for registration purposes or driving in a car to buy the dose.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata, 32:62.</ref>

==Medical Plaster==

#It is forbidden to cut or tear medical plaster on shabbat.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata, 35:24</ref>

==Ripping the Packaging of a Medicine==

#According to the opinion of some poskim, on [[Shabbos]] one should rip the wrapping around a medication by destroying it and making it useless.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 1:340:5:page 245. </ref>

==Specific medicines==
===Foods and drinks===

#Even someone with a minor ailment may eat food which healthy people eat even if one’s intention is for improving one’s health. For example, someone who has a head ache may eat honey, a lemon, or suck on candy. Someone who has a hoarse throat may swallow a raw egg.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 34:4 based on Shulchan Aruch 328:37, Aruch Hashulchan 328:48. Refer to Mishna Brurah 328:117-118. See Ketzos Ha’shulchan 134:16:pages 31-32 in depth on what constitutes a health persons food. </ref>
#Foods and drinks are permitted even when they are consumed for medicinal purposes. For example, one may have tea for a sore throat on [[Shabbat]].<ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], 39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 477) </ref>

===Tylenol or Aspirin===

#Many poskim are of the opinion that Tylenol® and aspirin should not be taken even though healthy people may take them as well.<ref>Minchas Yitzchok 3:35:2, Be’er Moshe 1:33:5, 2:32, 6:39, Shraga Hameir 2:40, Refuas Yisroel page 16:footnote 42. Refer to Divrei Chachumim pages 137-138:389 who quotes a lenient opinion. </ref> However, if one is in great pain then taking them is permitted.<ref>Minchas Yitzchok 3:35:2, Be’er Moshe 1:33:5, Refuas Yisroel page 16:footnote 42, Chazon Ovadia v. 4 p. 141 cited by Tiferet 328:1 </ref>
#Some are lenient to take ibuprofen if a person regularly takes them and if they don't take it they'll be in pain.<ref>Yalkut Yosef v. 4 p. 143 cited by Tiferet 328:2</ref>

===Vitamins===

#If the purpose of the vitamin is to serve as a food supplement it is permitted to take such a vitamin on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>
#If the purpose of the vitamin is to strengthen a weak body or to relieve certain symptoms, in the opinion of many poskim, one may not take those vitamins on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) references Igros Moshe, O.C. 3:54, Minchas Shelomo 2:37 and Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 86, quoting Rav S.Z. Auerbach. See, however, Tzitz Eliezer 14:50, who takes a more lenient approach concerning vitamins on [[Shabbat]]. </ref>
#Some say that a multi-vitamin that one takes everyday is permitted since it is a food and not a [[refuah]].<ref>Opinion of Harav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l quoted in Divrei Chachumim page 137:footnote 389, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 34:footnote 85. In regard to regular vitamins see Divrei Chachumim pages 137-138, Igros Moshe O.C. 3:54, Nishmas Avraham 1:328:pages 212-213, Shulchan Shlomo 328:58, Tzitz Eliezer 14:50, Oz Nedberu 6:72, Be’er Moshe 1:33, Shalmei Yehuda 10:footnote 51. </ref>

==Elective Surgery==

#One should make sure to schedule a non emergency surgery in the first three days of the week but not on or after Wednesday. However, after the fact and if one did the surgery at such a time and there is a situation of Pikuach Nefesh it is totally permissible to violate [[Shabbat]] like any other sick person in danger. <ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 32:33 based on the idea of Baal HaMoer quoted in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 248:4. [https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=131251 Rav Shmuel Fuerst] said that he heard Rav Moshe Feinstein rule the same way. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (chap 32 note 99) quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman who says that if an expert doctor who is needed for this surgery is only available on Wednesday through Friday it is permissible to schedule the surgery then. For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]].</ref> Sephardim could be lenient to schedule such a surgery on Wednesday but not past Thursday.<ref>Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]], vol 1, pg 60) </ref>

==Inducing labor==

#It is permissible for a pregnant woman who is past her term to receive a hormone infusion to induce labor if the doctor feels that there danger to the life of the mother or fetus.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (chap 32, note 98 (note 100, in new one)).For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]]. </ref>

==Caesarian Section==

#If according to the doctor a women has to have a caesarian section and she can choose to schedule the surgery, she should schedule for the first three days of the week and not Wednesday through Friday.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 36:4 based on the principle of the Baal HaMoer. For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]]. </ref>

==A Doctor on Call==

#A doctor who is on call and there is a sick patient under his or her care, some say that the doctor should stay in the hospital or nearby so that the doctor will not have to travel on [[Shabbat]]<ref>Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:131 and Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 30:26 </ref>, while others are lenient if it will ruin the doctor and his family’s oneg [[Shabbat]]. <ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (chap 40 note 71) in name of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach explaining that since there is a mitzvah of oneg [[Shabbat]] one is not obligated to leave one’s home on Friday in order to avoid violation of [[Shabbat]]. For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]]. </ref>
#According to many poskim, a hatzolah member or doctor who was called into the hospital for an emergency can't drive home afterwards.<ref>Even though Igrot Moshe OC 4:80 was lenient, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Minchat Shlomo 1:8 was strict. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Chazon Ovadia (Shabbat v. 3 p. 253) is strict. Tzitz Eliezer 21:59 writes that someone who relies on Rav Moshe has what to rely upon. Shevet Halevi 6:26 and 8:87 fundamentally holds like Rav Moshe, though in practice he writes that the hatzolah should get a non-Jew to drive back.
* Igrot Moshe explains that there are two types of cases where a person goes beyond techum for pikuach nefesh to save Jews. Some are cases where he knew in advance that it would likely take a long time and he would have to be there for the rest of Shabbat and others that he knew were short. The case where he went knowing that he would probably be there for the rest of Shabbat he is only granted 2000 amot but may not go beyond 2000 amot to return home. In the case where he went to save for a short emergency he may return home. The reason for this is ''hiteru sofam mishum techilatam'' (Heb. התירו סופן משום תחלתן; transl. they allowed in the end because of the beginning), meaning, that if they weren't allowed to return they wouldn't go in the first place. He proves that this allowance includes even biblical violations of Shabbat. His proofs are Tosfot Eruvin 44b, Rashba Beitzah 11b, and Rambam (Hilchot Shabbat 2:23 and 27:17). Therefore, he permitted a hatzolah member who drove for an emergency call to even drive back to his home so that they're not discouraged from going another time for an emergency.</ref> However, most poskim including those who do not allow the hatzolah member or doctor to drive home, allow him to ask a non-Jew to drive him home. Nonetheless, this leniency does not allow him to travel home even if he's driven by a non-Jew if he went beyond his techum.<ref>Chatom Sofer (CM 194), Minchat Shlomo 1:8, Shevet Halevi 6:24, Chazon Ovadia (v. 3 p. 253). Chatom Sofer's reason is that he can use a non-Jewish driver is because if he isn't allowed then he might not go another time. Rav Shlomo Zalman questions this but writes that once the Chatom Sofer already ruled that way he isn't going to argue.</ref> Only those who are lenient for him to drive home allow him to return from beyond techum.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 4:80) allows the hatzolah member or doctor to return from beyond the techum because the call was a short call which he thought would finish before the end of Shabbat. Since if he wouldn't be allowed to return home he might not go another time, he is allowed to return from beyond techum. However, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Minchat Shlomo 1:8) argues that he may not return from beyond techum. Chazal only permitted someone went for war and the non-Jews won to return to his original techum, however, a doctor who left his techum to save someone only has 2000 amot where he is but can't return.</ref>
## According to the lenient view who allows a hatzolah member to drive home, the same could be applied to a doctor who is on call and goes into the hospital for an emergency that he can drive home. However, this does not apply to a doctor who needs to go in for rounds or scheduled hours. Since he must go in for his job, according to absolutely everyone he may not drive home.<Ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/851379/rabbi-yaakov-b-neuburger/hilchot-amira-l-akum-and-pikuach-nefesh-on-shabbos-2nd-shiur/ Rabbi Yaakov Neuberger (Pikuach Nefesh #2 min 53-55)] explains that if a doctor has rounds that obligates him to come into the hospital on Shabbat for patients that he may not drive home according to Rav Moshe. Since he is going to come in either way at some point on Shabbat he may not drive home. He is coming in for his job and his patients. However, if he is going in because of an emergency call, even if he is on call, he may drive home according to Rav Moshe. Since whether he goes in depends on a judgement call he may drive home. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1064716/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig/doctors-and-hatzalah-members-driving-back-home-on-shabbos/ Rav Willig] agrees. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Sht Harav Haroshei v. 2 ch. 42 n. 11 p. 595) also writes that a doctor on call ideally he should go back with a non-Jew but if he can't he could even drive himself back home. He is based on Igrot Moshe. Divrei Binayahu 23:37 applies Rav Moshe to a doctor on call as well.</ref> Others argue that even the lenient view wouldn't allow a doctor on call to return home.<Ref>Rav Schachter (B'ikvei Hatzon p. 52) writes that just like the Chatom Sofer (CM 194) writes that the principle of hiteru sofam mishum techilatam doesn't apply to someone going for ayvah since ultimately he is going for himself and would go anyway, the same applies to a doctor on call. The reason he's going into the hospital is for himself to keep his job. Therefore, he may not return home even according to Rav Moshe since he would have gone for the emergency either way.</ref>
## Some write that according to the lenient view who allows a hatzolah member to drive home, that is only if he left on Shabbat for the emergency, but if it began before Shabbat it is forbidden.<ref>Rav Schachter (B’ikvei Hatzon p. 52) based on Magen Avraham 518:6</ref> Others disagree.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1064716/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig/doctors-and-hatzalah-members-driving-back-home-on-shabbos/ Rav Mordechai Willig]</ref>
## Some write that even according to the lenient view this only applies to going to save a Jew but not for a non-Jew. Even though it is permitted to violate Shabbat to save a non-Jew he may not violate Shabbat to return home.<ref>Chatom Sofer (CM 194) explains that ayvah only permits violating Shabbat but not returning home. The only reason he is allowed to return home is because otherwise he wouldn’t go next time. But to save a non-Jew he would go anyway next time since otherwise he would endangered because of ayvah. Rav Schachter (B’ikvei Hatzon p. 52) applies this to Rav Moshe’s leniency of a doctor driving home from an emergency.</ref>
#If someone leaves to leave the techum for an emergency such as for a woman giving birth or a hatzolah member, he doesn’t need to remove any extra clothing he’s wearing even though he’s bringing those clothing beyond the techum. Some say that he should make those clothing ownerless before Shabbos if he knew that it would happen.<ref>Torat Yoledet (p. 40 and Umasfim Utikun siman 2) writes that he doesn’t need to take off his extra clothing like his jacket or tie as the earlier poskim didn’t mention this. He quotes Rav Elyashiv who says that the clothing which are necessary are considered nullified to the person’s body. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchata ch. 42 fnt. 136 and Minchat Shlomo 1:15) explains that the clothing’s techum follows his techum when he leaves for an emergency. Minchat Yitzchak 9:37 and Techumei Shabbat (Miluyim 29 p700) also permit for other reasons. Torat Hayoledet 2:4 quotes Rav Chaim Kanievsky as holding that he should make his clothing ownerless before Shabbat and then they won’t have a techum. Teshuvot Vahanagot 5:89 agrees. Techumei Shabbat quotes Rav Pinchas Sheinberg who argues with this suggestion because his intent is to reacquire it after Shabbat. </ref>
# If the hatzolah member evaluates that probably the ambulance will be necessary for another call later that Shabbat he can drive it back according to everyone.<Ref>Rav Moshe (Igrot Moshe 4:80) writes that it is permitted to drive back the ambulance if it is common that they're need it later that Shabbat. Shevet Halevi 6:26 also allows it and explains that it is considered pikuach nefesh where the need is common. It is considered like choleh lifanenu.</ref>

==Public Safety==

#It is permitted to violate any rabbinic prohibition to prevent something dangerous to the public.<ref>Gemara Shabbat 42a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:18, Mishna Brurah 408:77</ref>

==Shomer Shabbos Residency==
Is it permissible to join a non-shomer Shabbos residency?
===Discussion===
One factor to consider is that halacha forbids getting into a situation where it will be necessary to violate Shabbat for pikuach nefesh. This stricture applies even before Shabbos.<ref>Baal Hamoer’s reading to Shabbat 19a</ref> The counter-principle to consider that it is possible that only this doctor will merit to cure a certain patient.<ref>Ran Nedarim 41b s.v. ela</ref> A practical consideration is that taking a Shomer Shabbos residency might mean sacrificing a better education to be an expert in that field of medicine.
====Rav Hershel Schachter====
Rav Hershel Schachter<ref>[https://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2007/rsch_shabbos1.html torahweb.org]</ref> holds that if it can’t be arranged to get a shomer Shabbos residency a person should find another profession.<ref>
* [http://themedhc.org/2016/08/22/shomer-shabbos-medical-training-by-akiva-bergman/ Dr. Akiva Bergman] wrote a nice article on the topic clearly showing the numerous issues with the non-shomer Shabbat residency. 1) One has to opt out of a situation in which one will violating Shabbat for pikuach nefesh including treating non-Jewish patients which is only permitted in self-protection (ayvah). 2) Even planning a trip more than three days before Shabbat is a problem since the residency will certainly involve the violation of Shabbat. 3) Even in terms of protecting a Jew that too doesn't serve as a reason to allow pikuach nefesh ab initio according to the Rama. 4) Furthermore, no resident can be sure that he will certainly have a Jew among his patients. His conclusion is that a non-shomer Shabbat residency is seriously problematic.</ref> Rabbi Chaim Jachter<Ref>[https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/shabbat-and-pikuach-nefesh-part-iii-by-rabbi-howard-jachter koltorah.org]</ref> quotes that Rav Schachter gave two reasons. First, a person can’t set himself up to violate Shabbat even in advance of Shabbat since the treatment of many or most patients is not a mitzvah.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/796071/rabbi-howard-apfel/shomer-shabbos-residencies-pt-2-and-trading-call-with-non-observant-jews/ Rabbi Howard Apfel (Shomer Shabbos Residencies Part 2, min 20-30)] clarified Rav Schachter's opinion is that since doing a non-shomer Shabbos residency will result in a definite violation of Shabbat for pikuach nefesh that is not permitted even for a mitzvah according to the Biur Halacha 248:4 s.v. uposek. </ref> Additionally, he holds that there is a concern that if one becomes used to doing a forbidden activity when it is permitted, he will continue these activities even when it is forbidden.

====Rav Dovid Cohen and Rav Moshe Feinstein====
Rav Dovid Cohen<ref>Quoted by Rabbi Raymond and Dr. Sammy Sultan in RJJ Periodical no. LVIII</ref> holds that initially a person should find a shomer Shabbos residency but if it can’t then he can manage with a non-shomer Shabbos residency. Similarly, Rav Moshe Tendler quotes Rav Moshe Feinstein<ref>Quoted by Rabbi Raymond and Dr. Sammy Sultan in RJJ Periodical no. LVIII from Practical Medical Halacha, Rabbi M. D. Tendler and Dr. F. Rosner, p.150, 1998. Complete text available [http://daneisenberg.com/sstshuvahtendler.pdf here]. </ref> as holding that it is permissible to go to a non-Shomer Shabbos residency with better training as long as one keeps Shabbos even in a less favorable environment. If the superior training comes at the expense of breaking Shabbat in a forbidden way, even if it is only a rabbinic ordinance, he must forgo the better training.
===Summary===
Bottom line, there is a dispute among the contemporary poskim whether a medical student must find a shomer-Shabbos residency or find another profession, or it is permitted to take a non-shomer Shabbos residency. Even according to the lenient view, no transgression of Shabbat is permitted in the name of training to be a doctor. It is just permitted to take the training in a less Shabbos friendly environment and cope with the questions as they arise and only do what is permitted on Shabbat.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/796071/rabbi-howard-apfel/shomer-shabbos-residencies-pt-2-and-trading-call-with-non-observant-jews/ Rabbi Howard Afpel]</ref>
==Related Pages==

#[[Tochen]] ([[grinding]])
#[[Brushing Teeth on Shabbat]]

==Credits==
Halachipedia is very thankful to Rabbi Doniel Neustadt who gave Halachipedia permission to use his valuable article on this topic to improve the Halachipedia page.
==Sources==
<references />
[[Category:Shabbat]]
{{Shabbat Table}}

Medicine on Shabbat

2024-08-25T01:26:05Z

Bchernigoff: edited grammar

{{Good}}
[[File:Medicine.jpg|200px|right]]
The Rabbis issued a decree limiting the usage of [[medications]] on Shabbat. In the opinion and experience of the Rabbis, easy access to medicine could lead to the transgression of certain melachot ([[Shabbat]] labors). While issuing the decree, however, the Rabbis were lenient in certain cases of those suffering pain or distress.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt). In regard to the [[muktzah]] status of pills and other [[medications]] see Minchas [[Shabbos]] 88:footnote 77, Har Tzvi tal harim tochain 2, Shalmei Yehuda 10:15:footnote 46, Zera Yaakov 13:page 153, Nachlas Yisroel pages 633-650 in depth, Shulchan Shlomo 318:7:2:page 298, Ohr Yisroel 6:pages 17-20, Aruch Ha’shulchan 308:59, Bais Avi 3:52, Avnei Yushfei 5:62.</ref> (See the footnote for some background.)<ref>*Rashi ([[Shabbat]] 53b s.v. Gezerah) explains that the reason for the prohibition against taking medicine is because one might come to grind the ingredients for the medicine and violate the prohibition of [[Tochen]] ([[grinding]]). [[Maggid]] Mishna ([[Shabbat]] 2:10) draws a distinction between one who is sick but whose life is not in danger, and a person who is in pain. Tur and Shulchan Aruch 338:1 rule that a healthy person who is in pain may not do any activity of healing because of the rabbinic decree.</ref> These laws are true for the first day of [[Yom Tov]] and the two days of [[Rosh Hashana]] as well.<ref>The same halacha applies to the first day of [[Yom Tov]] (Refer to Magen Avraham 532:2, Chai Adom 23:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 98:33, Mishna Brurah 532:5, [[Yom Tov]] Shenei K’hilchoso 1:22, Nishmas Avraham 1:pages 275-276) and both days of [[Rosh Hashana]]h (Nishmas Avraham 1:600:1, see Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 31:28, [[Yom Tov]] Shenei K’hilchoso 1:22:footnote 76, Shevet Ha’kehusi 1:156 ) </ref>{{TOC|limit = 3}}

==Taking Medicine==
===If one has a minor condition (Meychush BeAlma)===

#If someone has a minor condition which hurts, such as a tooth ache, throat ache, head ache, cold, or cough, it is forbidden to take any medicine. However, someone who is in a lot of pain to the point that he's lying in bed, or he can't function normally due to his weakness (as is the case with a migraine), is permitted to take medicine.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 34:1,3 and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 91:1. The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) writes that although contemporary poskim debate whether nowadays we can be more lenient with taking medication on [[Shabbat]] because of the change in the technique of the production of medicines, the general consensus is to reject this argument. See Minchas [[Shabbat]] 91:9; Ketzos ha-Shulchan 134:7; Chelkas Yaakov 4:41; and Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:15. See also [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739326/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Medicine_on_Shabbat_Part_I Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on YUTorah.org]. The Yalkut Yosef 328:52 writes that a choleh shein bo skana (sick in bed) can take pills. He adds that in general, someone who is in a lot of pain but isn't choleh shein bo sakana may not take pills. He makes two exceptions: for someone who has a big headache and someone who has a big stomach ache.</ref>
#Some poskim allow a person who is accustomed to take pain killers for a head ache or tooth ache to take pain killers on [[Shabbat]] if otherwise he will be in pain.<ref>Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]] v. 4, pp. 408-9) writes that some say that one may take pain killers on [[Shabbat]] because they don't cure but only remove pain, and some disagree. He concludes that one should only be lenient if a person is accustomed to taking such pain killers and if one doesn't take them one will be in pain. On page 143 in discussing the same leniency he specifically mentions pills that contain paracetamol which is the active ingredient in Tylenol, a pain killer.</ref>

===If one has a sickness (Choleh Shein Bo Sakana)===

#If one has fever, feels weak all over, or feels bad enough to require bed rest, he can be classified as a “patient not dangerously ill” (Choleh Shein Bo Sakana) and he is permitted to take oral [[medications]].<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:121 permits taking an oral medication without any shinui (alteration from the normal procedure). Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]], vol 4, pg 129) and 39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 492) agree with the Mishna Brurah. [http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&pgnum=112 Mishkenot Yacov O.C. 117] seems to disagree.

*Halachos of [[Refuah on Shabbat]] (Rabbi Bodner, pg 55) and The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) write that most poskim agree with the Mishna Brurah. See, however, Sh"t Igrot Moshe 3:53, Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:15, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:108, 6:28.</ref>
#Since “requiring bed rest” and “weak all over” are subjective terms, it is up to each individual to determine his personal pain threshold. There is no requirement to be overly stringent when judging the degree of illness.<ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org]. See also Sh"t Tzitz Eliezer 14:50-7 and 17:13. </ref>
#Some poskim hold that it is forbidden to perform a biblically prohibited action on [[Shabbat]] (melacha deoritta) for someone who is in the category of "patient not dangerously ill", even if one does it in an abnormal manner (Shinui).<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 32:2</ref> Some, however, hold that it is permitted to do actions in an abnormal way (Shinui) for a "patient not dangerously ill."<ref>Eglei Tal ([[Tochen]] #18), [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/797263/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Shiur_#3_-_Shabbos_-_melacha_sh'eina_tzericha_l'gufa Rabbi Hershel Schachter in a shiur on yutorah.org (towards end of shiur)]</ref>

===If One is Critically Ill (Choleh Sheyesh Bo Sakana)===

#It is permitted and a mitzvah to violate Shabbat in order to save a Jewish life.<ref>Gemara Yoma 84a, Rambam (Shabbat 2:1), Tur and Shulchan Aruch 328:2. Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shulchan Shlomo 328:4:3) writes that if there's pikuach nefesh on Shabbat we're not pained about having to do melacha for pikuach nefesh. It is similar to milah on Shabbat which is permitted. </ref> Even if there is only a doubt if the patient is critically ill<ref>Shulchan Aruch 328:6, Mishna Brurah 328:17, 328:26</ref> or if there is a doubt if the procedure will save the patient's life,<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:37</ref> nonetheless, it is a mitzvah to violate Shabbat in order to try to save a Jewish life.<ref>When discussing the mitzvah to violate Shabbat to save someone's life, Rambam (Shabbat 2:3) powerfully writes "this teaches that the laws of the Torah are not meant to be vengeful, but are instead supposed to bring mercy, kindness and peace to the world". </ref>
#Someone who delays in saving a life out of a concern of violating Shabbat is sinning in a way that is tantamount to murder.<ref>Yerushalmi Yoma 8:5, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:2</ref> This is only true of a situation that needs to be dealt with immediately. In that case, it is forbidden to delay. But in a case of potential danger that is certainly not an immediate emergency, it is correct and necessary to ask questions to minimize the violation of Shabbat.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 328:2 quoting Risba</ref>
#A rabbi should be careful to teach his community that it is permitted and a mitzvah to violate Shabbat for life endangering concerns.<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:6</ref>
#A person should violate Shabbat in order to save a non-Jew or non-religious Jew.<ref>Tiferet 329:4 citing Yabia Omer OC 8:38. He adds that if it could be minimized with shnayim she'asauha they should try to do so. See Mishna Brurah 330:8.</ref>
#A person should violate Shabbat in order to save someone who tried to commit suicide.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 8:37:5, Chazon Ovadia Shabbat v. 1 p. 125 cited by Tiferet 328:5. Yabia Omer cites as support the Birkei Yosef 301:6, Maharam Yafa 13, Divrei Yisachar 169, Kli Chemda Ki Tzetsei, Maharam Rotenbuerg 39, Mishna Halachot 8:56, Maharil Diskin Kuntres Acharon 34, Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:4, Yeshuot Yisrael CM 21 to allow pikuach nefesh for someone who tried to commit suicide. On the other hand, Minchat Chinuch Kometz Mincha 230 and Vzot Lyehuda Kuntres Hashalom 11c seem to hold that pikuach nefesh doesn't apply to someone who tried to commit suicide.</ref>
#After calling for help, one may hang up the phone if there will be further needs (various instruction, medical history, etc). However, if the patient has already been transported to the hospital and is absolutely certain that no further information will be needed, then one may not end the call.<ref>Mishna Halachot 3:46, Shmirat Shabbat KiHilchata 32:42</ref>

=== Pikuach Nefesh ===

# If there's a danger that is life threatening after Shabbat and he cannot or he doesn't know if he can save the person from the danger at that time, it is permitted on Shabbat to violate Shabbat to prevent the danger. However, if he can prevent the danger after Shabbat he must do so and not violate Shabbat.<ref>Igrot Moshe O.C. 3:69. Rav Moshe writes that also if it is known on Friday that there will be a danger on Shabbat and Friday is Yom Tov it is forbidden to violate Yom Tov. When the situation arises on Shabbat he should violate Shabbat and not violate Yom Tov. However, he quotes Netsiv who permits violating Yom Tov to avoid violating Shabbat in this case. Rav Elyashiv (Haarot Yoma 84b s.v. ubikar) agrees with Rav Moshe. However, Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shulchan Shlomo 328:4:7, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 32 fnt. 105) agrees with Netsiv. This is relevant to someone who is on dialysis and needs treatment either on Yom Tov or Shabbat. Rav Shlomo Zalman says that it is preferable to violate Yom Tov on Friday even though he could wait until Shabbat.</ref>
# If there's a pikuach nefesh (life-threatening situation) it isn't an obligation for others to experience pain to minimize the violation of Shabbat that the one who is in pikauch nefesh would have to do.
## For example, if a doctor needs light to treat a choleh sheyesh bo sakana and there's a candle in another room, it is preferable to carry the candle from one room to the other instead of lighting a new candle. However, if taking the candle from the other room is going to cause a lot of pain to someone else, such as if there's someone else in the room with the candle who is sleeping and taking the candle will wake him up. There's no obligation for that person to experience pain in order to minimize the melacha that the doctor or choleh sheyesh bo sakana need to do for pikuach nefesh.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 32:65), Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 2:44:11). Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani v. 4 p. 159-163) argues that it is an obligation upon every Jew to save his friend. If one person can save him even though it is difficult or painful he still must do so. If this will prevent the other person having to violate Shabbat, certainly he is obligated to save him in such a case. However, if the neighbor doesn't know about pikuach nefesh situation he is not obligated to do anything. </ref>
## If someone has an emergency and needs to go to the hospital and he can either call an ambulance or ask his neighbor to drive him to the hospital. Is his neighbor obligated to drive him to the hospital to minimize the amount of driving on Shabbat that will be done? Rav Shlomo Zalman seems to hold that it is not necessary. However, Rav Nissim Karelitz argues that it is an obligation of that neighbor even though it will very inconvenient to be stuck at the hospital for the rest of the day.<ref>Chut Shani (v. 4 p. 161). His main point is that there's a mitzvah of lo taamod al dam reyecha upon each Jew. </ref>
## If a live wire fell in the street there's no obligation to stand there all day to warn people from becoming injured by it. Instead, he may call the electric company to fix it.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 41:21). Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani v. 4 p. 161) agrees here since standing there all of Shabbat doesn't fix the problem. Since it is possible that someone will be endangered even with him standing there it is permitted to call the electric company to fix it.</ref>
#If a person is informed of a relative who is very sick and it is pikuach nefesh for him to travel there on Shabbat to help save that relative, he may go. In that situation he may not call to someone there to check that the relative is still alive since doing so doesn't help the patient. Calling just to minimize desecration of Shabbat is not permitted.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 2:44:12)</ref>

===Infants===
{{Child as Choleh on Shabbat}}

===Preparing medicine from before Shabbat===

#One may crush a capsule or tablet of medicine so that it is mixed into a food or drink before [[Shabbat]]. Once it becomes disguised by the food, one can eat the food or drink on [[Shabbat]].<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739326/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Medicine_on_Shabbat_Part_I Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on YUTorah.org], Menuchat Ahava 1:21:75 cited by Tiferet 328:3 </ref> If one didn't do it before Shabbat, some allow mixing a liquid medicine into a drink on Shabbat.<ref>Tiferet 328:3 citing Shevet Halevi 3:37, 8:82:2. See also Menuchat Ahava 1:21:75</ref>

===Continuing to take a daily dosage===

#Although one who is not classified as “ill” may not begin taking medicine on [[Shabbat]], some poskim hold that one who requires daily medication for an ongoing condition may continue doing so on [[Shabbat]] as well,<ref>Chazon Ish (oral ruling, quoted in Imrei Yosher on Moed 97, Daat Chazon Ish 7:19, Dinim Vihanhagot Chazon Ish 15:1), Shulchan Shlomo 328:59, Beer Moshe 1:33:8, 4:31, Avnei Yushfei 1:90:3, Rivevos Ephraim 3:227, 4:97:54, 5:202, Oz Nedberu 1:31:5, 4:24. Refer to Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 34:footnote 76, chelek 3:34:footnote 76. 
Rav S. Kluger (Sefer ha-Chayim 328:10 and Shenos Chayim 1:152) go even further and permit continuing taking medicine on [[Shabbat]], even of the patient is not medically required to take the medicine on a daily basis. Minchas [[Shabbat]] 91:9; Tzitz Eliezer 8:15-15:15; Rav Y.S. Elyashiv (Koveitz Teshuvos, O.C. 1:40, and oral ruling, quoted in Refuas Yisrael, pg. 14) agree with Rav Kluger. </ref> while others disagree.<ref>Igros Moshe, O.C. 3:53. Refer also to Da’as Torah 328:37 who is stringent.</ref>
#Some say that one may only take an ongoing medication on [[Shabbat]] if skipping a day of medication would be detrimental to the patient's health or if the medication must be taken for a number of consecutive days such that it is impossible not to take it on [[Shabbat]].<ref>Rav S.Z. Auerbach (Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 77, in the new edition). Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach held that it was only permitted to take an ongoing medication on [[Shabbat]] if skipping a day in middle of continuous medication would cause the patient damage or if the medication must be done for a certain number of days which would automatically include [[Shabbat]]. Rav Hershel Schachter ([http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/798018/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Shiur_#11_-_Shabbos_-_Memachaik,_Memare'ach in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 44-48)]) explained that the gemara Avoda Zara 28a seems to clearly support the opinion of those who say that one may not take medication on [[Shabbat]] even if one began to take the medication before [[Shabbat]]. However, he also cited the opinion of the Brit Olam who held that if the only way to take a certain medication was to take it for a number of consecutive days which includes [[Shabbat]], it would be permitted to take the medication on [[Shabbat]]. </ref> Other poskim hold that it is forbidden to take an ongoing antibiotic even if one started before Shabbat and needs to take it every day.<ref>Igrot Moshe O.C. 3:53</ref>

==Non-medical treatment==
===Using a Band Aid===

#It is permitted to put on a band aid on a wound.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 34:3,Tzitz Eliezer 8:15:14:6, Chazon Ovadiah Shabbat vol. 3, page 403, Piskei Teshuvot 328:46 </ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, one should not remove a band aid on [[Shabbat]] if there is hair in the area of the band aid. However, if it is painful one may remove it.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 35:30 (in the new edition) writes that a band aid shouldn’t be removed on [[Shabbat]] in an area where there’s hair because removing the band aid will certainly pull out hairs. However, the Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata writes that it’s permissible to use a Benzine to remove the band aid so it won’t rip out any hairs that’s assuming the cream was set aside before [[Shabbat]] and isn’t [[Muktzeh]]. Nonetheless in the footnote he quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman saying that if it’s painful it may be removed because it’s a pesik reisha delo nicha leih (פסיק רישא דלא ניחא ליה), keleacher yad (כלאחר יד), and mekalkel (מקלקל). </ref> However, Sephardim are more lenient as long as there is a need to remove it, it's permissible.<ref>The Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]] 4 pg 179, kitzur S”A 328:101, 340:6) writes that if there’s a need, it’s permissible to remove a band aid from an area of hair on [[Shabbat]] because it’s a pesik reisha delo nicha leih (פסיק רישא דלא ניחא ליה) for a Derabbanan. In the footnote he writes that even though the Or Letzion (vol 2, pg 259) is strict, his father (Rav Ovadyah, in Haskama to Lev Avraham), Rav Yitzchak Elchanan (Bear Yitzchak Siman 15), and Rav Shlomo Zalman (from Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata) are lenient. </ref>
#Most authorities permit removing the Band-Aid from the protective tabs, while some are stringent and so to satisfy all opinions one should prepare Band-Aids for [[Shabbat]] by peeling off their protective tabs and re-sealing them before [[Shabbat]].<ref>Most poskim (oral ruling by Rav M. Feinstein, quoted in Kitzur Hilchos [[Shabbat]] 44, note 117); Rav S.Z. Auerbach in Shulchan Shelomo 328:45; Ohr l’Tziyon 2:36-15; Az Nidberu 7:34, 35; Rav C.P. Scheinberg, quoted in Children in Halachah, pg. 88; Rav N. Karelitz, quoted in Orchos [[Shabbat]] 11:35) permit removing the protective tabs from a Band-Aid, while others (Minchas Yitzchak 5:39-2; 9:41; Rav Y.S. Elyashiv, quoted in Machazeh Eliyahu 70) are stringent. To satisfy all opinions, one may prepare Band-Aids for [[Shabbat]] use by peeling off their protective tabs and re-sealing them before [[Shabbat]]; once they have been prepared in this fashion, they may be used on [[Shabbat]] (Tzitz Eliezer 16:6-5). Sh”t Bear Moshe 1:36 writes that it is obvious that it is permitted to remove the plastic tabs from the sides of a bandaid on [[Shabbat]] and it isn't [[Koreah]]. </ref>

===Cleaning a wound===

#It is permitted to clean and bandage a wound or to pour hydrogen peroxide over it.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) based on Shulchan Aruch 328:23</ref> Note that doctors today do not recommend this.<ref>[https://www.webmd.com/first-aid/ss/slideshow-wound-care-dos-and-donts WebMD], [https://www.bannerhealth.com/healthcareblog/teach-me/its-time-to-get-hydrogen-peroxide-out-of-your-medicine-cabinet#:~:text=Hydrogen%20peroxide%20is%20not%20an,not%20worth%20the%20antiseptic%20effect.%E2%80%9D Bannerhealth.com]</ref> The recommended solution is to wash the wound with soap and water.

===Braces===

#Braces may be worn on [[Shabbat]] because there is no medicine for aligning teeth properly.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)writes that it is permissible to wear braces on [[Shabbat]] because the goal of the treatment or procedure can only be achieved without the use of medicine. </ref>

===Exercise===

#One may not exercise on Shabbat. If one needs to do physical therapy they should consult their rabbi.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 328:42 writes that one may not do exercise to break a sweat on Shabbat as it is considered refuah. Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 34:22 agrees.</ref>
#Someone health may not do physical therapy on Shabbat. However, someone who is a Choleh Shein Bo Sakana or someone who whom not doing physical therapy might lead to a worse problem may do physical therapy on Shabbat. Breathing and speech therapy are permitted on Shabbat.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 34:23</ref>

==Specific conditions==
===Abscess===

#An abscess may be squeezed to relieve pressure from pus, even if some blood is secreted in the process. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)quoting Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:28 and Mishna Brurah 328:89 </ref>

===Acne===

#All medication for acne may not be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Angina===

#All medication for angina are permitted to be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Arthritis===

#Anti-inflammatory medication for mild arthritis are forbidden. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Asthma===

#All oral and breathing [[medications]] for mild asthma are permitted to be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Athlete’s foot===

#One may not use any medication for athlete’s foot on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Baby Cream===

#If a baby has a rash it is permitted to dab on some baby rash cream and not rub it in. If the cream would become completely absorbed into the skin and no trace would be left on the surface of the skin it would be permitted even to rub it in.<ref>[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?ClipID3542 Rabbi Mansour] explained that according to Rav Ovadia it was permitted to use a medicine for a baby who is in pain because they are considered a choleh shein bo sakana (Rama 328). Dabbing on the cream without rubbing or smoothing it is permitted based on the Chazon Ish. Furthermore, it is permitted to rub in the cream completely and it isn't considered memare'ach (Yabia Omer 4:27 based on Magen Avraham).</ref>

===Back or Neck Brace===

#One may put on or remove a back or neck brace on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) based on ruling of Rav S.Z. Auerbach in Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 113. </ref>

===Bandage===

#It is permissible to put on an ace bandage on [[Shabbat]] as long as you don't tie anything permanent. <ref>Contemporary Questions in Halacha and Hashkafa pg. 144 writes that this is because it wasn't included in the initial gezeira of [[refuah]] since its benefits cannot be duplicated with pills or other standard medicines. </ref>

===Bee sting===

#If one has a bee or wasp sting the stinger may be removed and the area may be washed with ice water, lemon juice or vinegar, etc. The area may not be soaked, however, in those liquids. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 478), [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], See Mishna Brurah 328:141,142 </ref>
#One may use liquid or spray insect repellent on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 14:35; Shalmei Yehudah, pg. 179, [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org]</ref>

===Birth control===

#It's permissible to take birth control pills on [[Shabbat]] (assuming she received halachic permission to take these pills). <ref>[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2228 Rabbi Mansour on DailyHalacha.com], Chacham Ovadia Yosef [http://www.halachayomit.co.il/EnglishDefault.asp?HalachaID=3319 Halacha Yomit], Orot Hatahara 16:52</ref>

===Bone Fracture===

#For a simple bone fracture a non-Jew may be asked to do anything necessary, e.g., make a phone call, drive a car, take x-rays or put on a cast. [If a non-Jew is not available, some poskim permit a Jew to do these acts if they are done with a shinui, in an abnormal manner. <ref>This is the view of Shulchan Aruch ha-Rav 328:19 and Eglei Tal ([[Tochen]] 18). Some poskim (Rav S.Z. Auerbach, quoted in Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 33, note 18; Shevet ha-Levi 8:93) rule that one may rely on this view, especially when there is “danger to a limb.” Note, however, that Mishna Brurah, Aruch ha-Shulchan and most poskim do not agree with this leniency. </ref>] If there is even a small chance of internal bleeding, e.g., the thigh or pelvis bone was fractured, or if the elbow was shattered, all [[Shabbat]] restrictions are lifted. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Bow Legged Baby===

#It is forbidden to straighten the legs of a bow-legged baby on Shabbat since doing so is considered an act of healing.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/893696/rabbi-hershel-schachter/berachos-64-35a-36a-kol-haneheneh-making-a-living-vs-learning-kevius-for-maaser-pas-habaah-bekisnin-medications/ Rav Schachter (Brachot Shiur 64 min 107)]</ref>

===Cellulites===

#Since cellulitis may be life-threatening immediate medical attention is required. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

=== Chapped Hands ===
#For dried (or chapped) hands it is prohibited to rub them with either oil, ointment (Vaseline) or lotion. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481) </ref>One who regularly uses a pourable, liquid lotion or oil on his hands (whether they are chapped or not) may do so on [[Shabbat]], too, even if his hands are chapped.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A 327:1</ref>

===Chapped Lips===

#For dried or cracked lips one may not apply chap stick or any other medication, liquid or otherwise. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Cold===

#For a cold one may not take [[medications]] or vitamins. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], Rav S.Z. Auerbach (Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 52) write that there is room for leniency in kavod ha-beriyos situations, e.g., a constantly dripping nose which is disturbing to people who are around him.</ref> unless one is experiencing discomfort in his whole body or is bedridden. However, one may eat chicken soup or tea with honey to obtain relief.<ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481), The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Contact Lenses===
#Some poskim permit putting soft contact lenses in contact solution.<ref>[[Asicha_Hilchos_Shabbos_Part_2| Rav Mordechai Willig (Asicha Shabbos 2 p. 3)]]</ref> Others permit putting them in saline solution but not the disinfectant solution. Hard contacts are like dishes which can be cleaned.<Ref>Orchot Shabbat 13:11, [https://torah.org/torah-portion/weekly-halacha-5761-chayeisara/ Rabbi Doniel Neustadt]</ref>
#Sephardim hold that it is permitted to soak contact lenses in their solution on Shabbat. <ref>[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=3188 Rabbi Eli Mansour] </ref>

===Cough===

#Cough–medication may not be taken.<ref>Shmirat Shabbat KiHilchata 34:1,3). </ref> If the cough may be an indication of pneumonia or asthma, medication is permitted.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Conception Pills===

#Some poskim permit taking pills for conception.<ref>Chacham Ovadia Yosef, Rav Moshe Stern, and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach cited on [http://www.halachayomit.co.il/EnglishDefault.asp?HalachaID=3319 Halacha Yomit], Orot Hatahara 16:52 </ref>

===Deodorant===

#It is permitted to use a spray deodorant on Shabbat. Some say that one shouldn't use an antiperspirant deodorant on Shabbat since it is medicinal.<ref>Rabbi Heinemann quoted by the [https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/kashrus-kurrents-2019/6238/medicine-on-shabbos-questions-and-answers-from-rav-moshe-heinemann-shlita/ Star-K]</ref>

===Diabetes===

#All necessary [[medications]] for diabetes may be taken on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Diarrhea===

#For diarrhea one may not take medication unless one is in severe pain or weak all over. Any food or drink is permitted. A hot water bottle is permitted when one experiences strong pains.<ref>Mishna Brurah 326:19, The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

=== Dislocated Limb ===

# Many poskim hold that it is permitted to push a dislocated limb back into place on Shabbat.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:47 establishes that it is permitted to push a dislocated limb back into place on Shabbat. Magen Avraham 328:51 disagrees because the Gemara Shabbat 148a only permitted pushing a limb back into place if a bone cracked but just if it is dislocated. Shulchan Aruch Harav 328:52 agrees. Mishna Brurah 328:145 quotes Atzi Shitim who disagrees with Magen Avraham and defends Shulchan Aruch. He adds that even Magen Avraham agrees to allow a non-Jew to push the dislocated limb back into place. Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 33:17 follows Shulchan Aruch and Atzi Shitim.</ref>

===Ear Infection===

#For an ear infection all [[medications]] are permitted. Cotton balls may be inserted. <ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], It is prohibited to tear cotton balling on [[Shabbat]]; Minchas Yitzchak 4:45; Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 35:20. </ref> Even if the infection is no longer present, prescribed medicine begun on a weekday must be continued until finished in order to avoid a relapse. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Eye Inflammation===

#For an eye inflammation eye drops (or ointment) may be instilled in the eye. If the eye is not inflamed but merely irritated, no medication is permitted. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) based on S”A O.C. 328:20. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 328:9 states that if someone's eyes are inflamed or it has pus or blood coming out, or tears pouring out, one can violate Shabbat. Mishna Brurah 328:22 quotes the Gemara which explains that even though for a regular Sakanat Ever we shouldn't violate Shabbat since the health of a person's eyes are linked to his entire health he can violate Shabbat.</ref> Some permit putting in eye drops even if they are irritated.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Shabbat v. 3 p. 233 cited by Tiferet 328:31</ref>
#If the patient feels a stabbing pain in the eye, major pains, or has a sharp drop in vision suddenly he can violate Shabbat to be healed.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 3 p. 234 and Chut Shani 4:89:16 cited by Tiferet 328:31. Chazon Ovadia explains that even though the doctors say that today there's no concern that a loss of a person's vision will lead to a premature death we can continue to follow the health concern of the gemara.</ref>

===Fever===

#For a fever any oral [[medications]] may be taken. A mercury thermometer may be used. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A O.C. 306:7 </ref> If a person is suffering from high-grade fever, a non-Jew may be asked to do whatever the patient needs in order to feel better. <ref>Mishna Brurah 328:46, 47 </ref> If the cause of the fever is unknown, a doctor should be consulted.
#A regular fever can be treated with oral medication should be treated as a Choleh Shein Bo Sakana who can have medicine. If the fever is abnormal such as if it is 104 degrees Fahrenheit or more, it isn't reduced by medicine and its cause is unknown, a person can violate Shabbat because it is a Safek Choleh Sheyesh Bo Sakana. For a child or elderly person even if the fever isn't so high one can violate Shabbat to heal them.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 3 p. 244-6 cited by Tiferet 328:26</ref>

===Headache===

#For a headache medication should not be taken. If the headache is severe enough so that one feels weak all over or is forced to go to bed, medication may be taken. One who is unsure if he has reached that stage of illness may be lenient and take pain- relieving medication.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)See Ketzos ha-Shulchan 138, pg. 100; Minchas Yitzchak 3:35; Be’er Moshe 1:33; 2:32. </ref>

===Heartburn===

#For heartburn foods which will have a soothing effect may be eaten. Some poskim permit taking anti-acid medication while others are stringent. If the medicine is prescribed by a doctor, one may be lenient.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)See Ketzos ha-Shulchan 138, pg. 98; Tzitz Eliezer 8:15 (15-21); Az Nidberu 1:31; Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34:4 </ref>

===Hemorrhoids===

#For a mild case of hemorrhoids medication may not be taken. For a severe case, it is permitted to sit in a “sitz bath” (with water that heated before [[Shabbat]]), or use medicated pads or suppositories.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Herniated Disc===

#For a herniated disc (back and leg pain) ice packs or hot packs are permitted. Physical therapy exercises, e.g. stretching, are permitted. If the pain is severe to the degree that the entire body is in pain, painkillers or other [[medications]] are permitted as well.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Indigestion===

#One may take a leisurely walk in order to help digestion. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 477) </ref>
#One may drink prune juice in order to act as a laxative. <ref>39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 481) </ref>

===Infection===

#For an infection all [[medications]] are permitted. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Lactose===

#For lactose intolerance, some poskim rule that one may not take enzyme supplement tablets. But it is permitted to add enzyme drops to liquid dairy foods before [[Shabbat]] and drink the dairy on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt). See Refuas Yisrael, pg. 245. </ref> Others are lenient.<ref>Rav Yisroel Belsky (Shu"t Shulchan HaLevi 10:2) ruled that lactase pills may be taken because they are not viewed as medicines. Chazal only forbade medicines because a person who is ill is physically distressed and might impetuously grind the ingredients on Shabbos. Lactase pills are not used to treat an illness. They simply provide the body with the missing enzymes that are necessary for the digestion of the milk sugars.</ref>

===Migraine===

#For a migraine headache any oral [[medications]] may be taken. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Mouthwash===

#It is permitted to use mouthwash on [[Shabbat]].<ref>See Beer Moshe 1:34:7page 78 is lenient as is Rivevot Ephraim 2:115:23:page 192, 3:536:6, 4:97:5, 6:195, Nishmas [[Shabbos]] 5:318, Cheshev Ha’efod 2:59 </ref> See the [[Brushing Teeth on Shabbat]] page for more on this topic.

===Nosebleed===

#For a nosebleed bleeding may be stopped with a tissue or a napkin. If none is available, a cloth napkin may be used. <ref>Mishna Brurah 328:146 </ref>

===Raynaud’s Syndrome===

#One who is ill or in need of using chemical hand warmers on [[Shabbat]], such as in the case of Raynaud's syndrome, or a soldier on guard duty who must remain alert may do so on [[Shabbat]].<ref>[http://www.yeshiva.co/ask/?id=4876 Yeshiva.org] based on Rav Dov Lior in his book Dvar Chevron Siman 236 pg. 125 </ref> See [[Getting_Dressed_on_Shabbat#Hand_Warmers_on_Shabbat]] for the fuller discussion.

===Psychotic Break===

#A psychotic break is a [[#If_One_is_Critically_Ill_.28Choleh_Sheyesh_Bo_Sakana.29| Choleh Sheyesh Bo Sakana]]. <ref>Harefuah C'halacha 7:1;3 </ref>

===Retinal Tear===

#If the retina of the eye becomes torn or detached one should go to the hospital or one's doctor immediately.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 3 p. 234 cited by Tiferet 328:31</ref>

===Retainer===

#One may insert and remove a retainer on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34:29 </ref>

===Scab===

#It is permitted to remove a scab as long as blood is not drawn from the wound. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A O.C. 328:22 and Mishna Brurah 90. </ref>

===Sleep disorder===

#There are conflicting views among contemporary poskim about taking sleeping pills or No-Doze pills.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 33:16), and [http://www.halachayomit.co.il/EnglishDefault.asp?HalachaID=3320 Chacham Ovadia Yosef are lenient] See Minchas Yitzchak 3:21, Tzitz Eliezer 9:17, Be’er Moshe 1:33 and Shalmei Yehudah, pg. 176, for the various views. </ref> One who is weak all over or bedridden may take them.
#Cotton balls may be used as ear plugs. It is permitted to use pliable ear plugs, which are made from a wax-like material that spreads to fill the cavity of the ear. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) quoting Rav S.Z. Auerbach (Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 14:45); Shraga ha-Meir 5:23. Rav Y.S. Elyashiv, however, recommends not using pliable ear plugs on [[Shabbat]]; see Ashrei ha-Ish 17:117; 33:7 </ref>

===Sore throat===

#For a sore throat medication may not be taken. Gargling is prohibited.<ref>S”A 328:32</ref> Drinking tea or any other hot drink, or sucking a candy, is permitted even if the intention is for medicinal purposes. <ref>S”A 328:37 </ref>

===Splinter===

#A splinter under the skin may be extracted with the fingers, or with tweezers or a needle. If, unavoidably, a little blood is secreted in the process, it is of no consequence. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)quoting Mishna Brurah 328:88 and Sha’ar ha-Tziyun 63. 39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 478) writes one may remove a splinter even if it may bleed, but one may not remove if it will certainly bleed unless it is very painful. </ref>

===Sprain===

#For a sprain, if the patient is not experiencing severe pain, nothing should be done. If the patient is experiencing severe pain, medication may be taken and a massage may be given. A makeshift splint may be applied, provided that no [[Shabbat]] Labors are transgressed.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Stitches===

#A non-Jew is allowed to stitch any wound, even if the stitching is done only for cosmetic reasons.<ref>Minchat Shelomo 2:34-33 and Nishmas Avraham, vol. 4, O.C. 340. See also Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 33, note 26, and 35, note 65-66.</ref> Some say even a Jew can add extra stitches for cosmetic reasons.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 33 fnt. 26</ref> A Jew may place a butterfly bandage or steri-strips to close a simple laceration or cut. Surgical skin closure glue may also be used.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt). See [http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html].</ref>

===Stopping bleeding===

#Pressure may be applied to a cut to stop bleeding. Sucking or [[squeezing]] out blood is prohibited. <ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], Mishna Brurah 328:147 </ref>
#It is permitted to remove a thorn slowly so that it won’t cause blood to come out. If it is impossible to remove without blood coming out it is nonetheless permitted to relieve pain.<ref>Machasit Hashekel 328:32 is lenient if it is impossible to avoid since it is only derabbanan and for tzaar it is permitted. Kaf Hachaim 308:96 agrees. However, Shulchan Aruch Harav 308:38, Gedulat Elisha 308:53, and Ben Ish Chai Miketz Shana Sheniya n. 12 are strict if it is a pesik reisha. Tehilah LDovid 328:47 asks why would it be forbidden if it is a pesik reisha since it is only a derabbanan of chavala and for tzaar it is permitted. He rejects the implication otherwise from Tosfot Sanhedrin 85a s.v. vrabbi shimon. Biur Halacha 308:11 s.v. hakotz explained the Magen Avraham like the Shulchan Aruch Harav and cites the Chemed Moshe who is lenient like the Machasit Hashekel. Rav Nevinsal in Byitzchak Yikareh 308:11 that he thinks the opinion of the Chemed Moshe is reasonable. See Leviat Chen who agrees.</ref>

===Strep throat===

#For a strep throat all oral [[medications]] may be taken. Even if the infection is no longer present, the prescribed medicine begun on a weekday must be continued until finished. A culture may be taken by a non-Jew.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Sunburn===

#For a ordinary sunburn [[medications]] are not permitted.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

===Sweating===

#It is permitted to sprinkle baby powder on those parts of the body which are perspiring. <ref>Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34:12 </ref>

===Swelling===

#It is permitted to press a knife, etc. against the skin to prevent or minimize swelling.<ref>Mishna Brurah 328:144 </ref>
#It is permitted to wash or soak the swollen area in water.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 8:15 (15-12) </ref> It is permitted to place a compress,<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)writes in order to avoid [[sechitah]] and/or libun, only paper towels or napkins should be used and care should be taken not to squeeze them.</ref> ice (placed in plastic bag) or any frozen item over a swollen area.<ref>Be’er Moshe 1:33-18, Contemporary Questions in Halacha and Hashkafa pg. 144, [http://www.learntorah.com/lt-shiur-details.aspx?id=4985 Rabbi Meyer Yedid]. Rabbi Yedid says that this is because the [[refuah]] cannot be replicated through medicines and therefore wasn't included in the rabbinic enactment against [[refuah]]. See also Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 35:35 </ref> Some forbid applying an ice pack if it is clearly being done for medicinal reasons.<ref>Rabbi Heinemann cited by the [https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/kashrus-kurrents-2019/6238/medicine-on-shabbos-questions-and-answers-from-rav-moshe-heinemann-shlita/ Star-K]. See Shulchan Shlomo 328:37 and Halachos of Refuah on Shabbos p. 29.</ref>

===Toothache===

#A minor (cavity) toothache may not be treated with painkillers, but one is permitted to drink whiskey, etc., provided that it is swallowed immediately.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on S”A O.C. 328:32. See also Mishna Brurah 328:102 </ref> A severe toothache (to the point where one feels weak all over) or gum infection may be treated with oral medication. If the tooth needs to be extracted, a non-Jew may be asked to do so.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)based on Rama, O.C. 328:3. See Tzitz Eliezer 9:17 (2-11)</ref>

===Wound===

#Cuts and abrasions may be washed or soaked in water. It is not permitted, however, to soak absorbent cotton or paper in such a solution and then wash the wound with it. The wound may be covered with a non-medicated Band-Aid.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

==Medicine after Candle Lighting before [[Kiddush]]==

#One is permitted to drink water while taking a pill on [[Shabbos]] after candle lighting before [[Kiddush]].<ref>Refer to Minchas Yitzchok 8:18, Shevet Ha’kehusi 1:109, Nishmas [[Shabbos]] 2:9. </ref>

==Carrying a Pill==

#One who needs to carry a pill on [[Shabbos]] in a place which does not have an eiruv should ask his Rav before doing so.<ref>Refer to Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:7, Tzitz Eliezer 13:34. </ref>

==Cutting Pills on Shabbos==

#One is permitted to cut a tablet in half on [[Shabbos]], and there is no concern of "mechatech" (cutting) on [[Shabbos]].<ref>Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 33:4, Shulchan Shlomo 314:13:3, Avnei Yushfei 4:58 quoting the opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita. Refer to there footnote 30 for the reason. </ref>

==Purchasing the Medicine==

#In situations where one is considered “ill” and is permitted to take medicine on [[Shabbat]], it is also permitted to ask a non-Jew to drive to a drugstore, buy medicine and bring it to him.<ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>

== Vaccination ==

# It is permitted to vaccinate a healthy person on shabbat in a case where there is a risk that they will get sick and be endangered. If the doctor's opinion is that the vaccine is urgent then it is even permissible to violate Torah-level prohibitions, such as writing for registration purposes or driving in a car to buy the dose.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata, 32:62.</ref>

==Medical Plaster==

#It is forbidden to cut or tear medical plaster on shabbat.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata, 35:24</ref>

==Ripping the Packaging of a Medicine==

#According to the opinion of some poskim, on [[Shabbos]] one should rip the wrapping around a medication by destroying it and making it useless.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 1:340:5:page 245. </ref>

==Specific medicines==
===Foods and drinks===

#Even someone with a minor ailment may eat food which healthy people eat even if one’s intention is for improving one’s health. For example, someone who has a head ache may eat honey, a lemon, or suck on candy. Someone who has a hoarse throat may swallow a raw egg.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 34:4 based on Shulchan Aruch 328:37, Aruch Hashulchan 328:48. Refer to Mishna Brurah 328:117-118. See Ketzos Ha’shulchan 134:16:pages 31-32 in depth on what constitutes a health persons food. </ref>
#Foods and drinks are permitted even when they are consumed for medicinal purposes. For example, one may have tea for a sore throat on [[Shabbat]].<ref>[http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5760/chukas.html Rabbi Doniel Neustadt on Torah.org], 39 Melachos (Rabbi Ribiat, vol 2, pg 477) </ref>

===Tylenol or Aspirin===

#Many poskim are of the opinion that Tylenol® and aspirin should not be taken even though healthy people may take them as well.<ref>Minchas Yitzchok 3:35:2, Be’er Moshe 1:33:5, 2:32, 6:39, Shraga Hameir 2:40, Refuas Yisroel page 16:footnote 42. Refer to Divrei Chachumim pages 137-138:389 who quotes a lenient opinion. </ref> However, if one is in great pain then taking them is permitted.<ref>Minchas Yitzchok 3:35:2, Be’er Moshe 1:33:5, Refuas Yisroel page 16:footnote 42, Chazon Ovadia v. 4 p. 141 cited by Tiferet 328:1 </ref>
#Some are lenient to take ibuprofen if a person regularly takes them and if they don't take it they'll be in pain.<ref>Yalkut Yosef v. 4 p. 143 cited by Tiferet 328:2</ref>

===Vitamins===

#If the purpose of the vitamin is to serve as a food supplement it is permitted to take such a vitamin on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt)</ref>
#If the purpose of the vitamin is to strengthen a weak body or to relieve certain symptoms, in the opinion of many poskim, one may not take those vitamins on [[Shabbat]]. <ref>The Weekly Halachah Discussion (Rabbi Doniel Neustadt) references Igros Moshe, O.C. 3:54, Minchas Shelomo 2:37 and Shemiras [[Shabbat]] K’hilchasah 34, note 86, quoting Rav S.Z. Auerbach. See, however, Tzitz Eliezer 14:50, who takes a more lenient approach concerning vitamins on [[Shabbat]]. </ref>
#Some say that a multi-vitamin that one takes everyday is permitted since it is a food and not a [[refuah]].<ref>Opinion of Harav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l quoted in Divrei Chachumim page 137:footnote 389, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 34:footnote 85. In regard to regular vitamins see Divrei Chachumim pages 137-138, Igros Moshe O.C. 3:54, Nishmas Avraham 1:328:pages 212-213, Shulchan Shlomo 328:58, Tzitz Eliezer 14:50, Oz Nedberu 6:72, Be’er Moshe 1:33, Shalmei Yehuda 10:footnote 51. </ref>

==Elective Surgery==

#One should make sure to schedule a non emergency surgery in the first three days of the week but not on or after Wednesday. However, after the fact and if one did the surgery at such a time and there is a situation of Pikuach Nefesh it is totally permissible to violate [[Shabbat]] like any other sick person in danger. <ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 32:33 based on the idea of Baal HaMoer quoted in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 248:4. [https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=131251 Rav Shmuel Fuerst] said that he heard Rav Moshe Feinstein rule the same way. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (chap 32 note 99) quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman who says that if an expert doctor who is needed for this surgery is only available on Wednesday through Friday it is permissible to schedule the surgery then. For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]].</ref> Sephardim could be lenient to schedule such a surgery on Wednesday but not past Thursday.<ref>Yalkut Yosef ([[Shabbat]], vol 1, pg 60) </ref>

==Inducing labor==

#It is permissible for a pregnant woman who is past her term to receive a hormone infusion to induce labor if the doctor feels that there danger to the life of the mother or fetus.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (chap 32, note 98 (note 100, in new one)).For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]]. </ref>

==Caesarian Section==

#If according to the doctor a women has to have a caesarian section and she can choose to schedule the surgery, she should schedule for the first three days of the week and not Wednesday through Friday.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 36:4 based on the principle of the Baal HaMoer. For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]]. </ref>

==A Doctor on Call==

#A doctor who is on call and there is a sick patient under his or her care, some say that the doctor should stay in the hospital or nearby so that the doctor will not have to travel on [[Shabbat]]<ref>Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:131 and Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 30:26 </ref>, while others are lenient if it will ruin the doctor and his family’s oneg [[Shabbat]]. <ref>Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (chap 40 note 71) in name of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach explaining that since there is a mitzvah of oneg [[Shabbat]] one is not obligated to leave one’s home on Friday in order to avoid violation of [[Shabbat]]. For background of this topic [[Brit_Milah#Delayed Milah on Thursday or Friday|see here]]. </ref>
#According to many poskim, a hatzolah member or doctor who was called into the hospital for an emergency can't drive home afterwards.<ref>Even though Igrot Moshe OC 4:80 was lenient, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Minchat Shlomo 1:8 was strict. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Chazon Ovadia (Shabbat v. 3 p. 253) is strict. Tzitz Eliezer 21:59 writes that someone who relies on Rav Moshe has what to rely upon. Shevet Halevi 6:26 and 8:87 fundamentally holds like Rav Moshe, though in practice he writes that the hatzolah should get a non-Jew to drive back.
* Igrot Moshe explains that there are two types of cases where a person goes beyond techum for pikuach nefesh to save Jews. Some are cases where he knew in advance that it would likely take a long time and he would have to be there for the rest of Shabbat and others that he knew were short. The case where he went knowing that he would probably be there for the rest of Shabbat he is only granted 2000 amot but may not go beyond 2000 amot to return home. In the case where he went to save for a short emergency he may return home. The reason for this is ''hiteru sofam mishum techilatam'' (Heb. התירו סופן משום תחלתן; transl. they allowed in the end because of the beginning), meaning, that if they weren't allowed to return they wouldn't go in the first place. He proves that this allowance includes even biblical violations of Shabbat. His proofs are Tosfot Eruvin 44b, Rashba Beitzah 11b, and Rambam (Hilchot Shabbat 2:23 and 27:17). Therefore, he permitted a hatzolah member who drove for an emergency call to even drive back to his home so that they're not discouraged from going another time for an emergency.</ref> However, most poskim including those who do not allow the hatzolah member or doctor to drive home, allow him to ask a non-Jew to drive him home. Nonetheless, this leniency does not allow him to travel home even if he's driven by a non-Jew if he went beyond his techum.<ref>Chatom Sofer (CM 194), Minchat Shlomo 1:8, Shevet Halevi 6:24, Chazon Ovadia (v. 3 p. 253). Chatom Sofer's reason is that he can use a non-Jewish driver is because if he isn't allowed then he might not go another time. Rav Shlomo Zalman questions this but writes that once the Chatom Sofer already ruled that way he isn't going to argue.</ref> Only those who are lenient for him to drive home allow him to return from beyond techum.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 4:80) allows the hatzolah member or doctor to return from beyond the techum because the call was a short call which he thought would finish before the end of Shabbat. Since if he wouldn't be allowed to return home he might not go another time, he is allowed to return from beyond techum. However, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Minchat Shlomo 1:8) argues that he may not return from beyond techum. Chazal only permitted someone went for war and the non-Jews won to return to his original techum, however, a doctor who left his techum to save someone only has 2000 amot where he is but can't return.</ref>
## According to the lenient view who allows a hatzolah member to drive home, the same could be applied to a doctor who is on call and goes into the hospital for an emergency that he can drive home. However, this does not apply to a doctor who needs to go in for rounds or scheduled hours. Since he must go in for his job, according to absolutely everyone he may not drive home.<Ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/851379/rabbi-yaakov-b-neuburger/hilchot-amira-l-akum-and-pikuach-nefesh-on-shabbos-2nd-shiur/ Rabbi Yaakov Neuberger (Pikuach Nefesh #2 min 53-55)] explains that if a doctor has rounds that obligates him to come into the hospital on Shabbat for patients that he may not drive home according to Rav Moshe. Since he is going to come in either way at some point on Shabbat he may not drive home. He is coming in for his job and his patients. However, if he is going in because of an emergency call, even if he is on call, he may drive home according to Rav Moshe. Since whether he goes in depends on a judgement call he may drive home. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1064716/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig/doctors-and-hatzalah-members-driving-back-home-on-shabbos/ Rav Willig] agrees. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Sht Harav Haroshei v. 2 ch. 42 n. 11 p. 595) also writes that a doctor on call ideally he should go back with a non-Jew but if he can't he could even drive himself back home. He is based on Igrot Moshe. Divrei Binayahu 23:37 applies Rav Moshe to a doctor on call as well.</ref> Others argue that even the lenient view wouldn't allow a doctor on call to return home.<Ref>Rav Schachter (B'ikvei Hatzon p. 52) writes that just like the Chatom Sofer (CM 194) writes that the principle of hiteru sofam mishum techilatam doesn't apply to someone going for ayvah since ultimately he is going for himself and would go anyway, the same applies to a doctor on call. The reason he's going into the hospital is for himself to keep his job. Therefore, he may not return home even according to Rav Moshe since he would have gone for the emergency either way.</ref>
## Some write that according to the lenient view who allows a hatzolah member to drive home, that is only if he left on Shabbat for the emergency, but if it began before Shabbat it is forbidden.<ref>Rav Schachter (B’ikvei Hatzon p. 52) based on Magen Avraham 518:6</ref> Others disagree.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1064716/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig/doctors-and-hatzalah-members-driving-back-home-on-shabbos/ Rav Mordechai Willig]</ref>
## Some write that even according to the lenient view this only applies to going to save a Jew but not for a non-Jew. Even though it is permitted to violate Shabbat to save a non-Jew he may not violate Shabbat to return home.<ref>Chatom Sofer (CM 194) explains that ayvah only permits violating Shabbat but not returning home. The only reason he is allowed to return home is because otherwise he wouldn’t go next time. But to save a non-Jew he would go anyway next time since otherwise he would endangered because of ayvah. Rav Schachter (B’ikvei Hatzon p. 52) applies this to Rav Moshe’s leniency of a doctor driving home from an emergency.</ref>
#If someone leaves to leave the techum for an emergency such as for a woman giving birth or a hatzolah member, he doesn’t need to remove any extra clothing he’s wearing even though he’s bringing those clothing beyond the techum. Some say that he should make those clothing ownerless before Shabbos if he knew that it would happen.<ref>Torat Yoledet (p. 40 and Umasfim Utikun siman 2) writes that he doesn’t need to take off his extra clothing like his jacket or tie as the earlier poskim didn’t mention this. He quotes Rav Elyashiv who says that the clothing which are necessary are considered nullified to the person’s body. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchata ch. 42 fnt. 136 and Minchat Shlomo 1:15) explains that the clothing’s techum follows his techum when he leaves for an emergency. Minchat Yitzchak 9:37 and Techumei Shabbat (Miluyim 29 p700) also permit for other reasons. Torat Hayoledet 2:4 quotes Rav Chaim Kanievsky as holding that he should make his clothing ownerless before Shabbat and then they won’t have a techum. Teshuvot Vahanagot 5:89 agrees. Techumei Shabbat quotes Rav Pinchas Sheinberg who argues with this suggestion because his intent is to reacquire it after Shabbat. </ref>
# If the hatzolah member evaluates that probably the ambulance will be necessary for another call later that Shabbat he can drive it back according to everyone.<Ref>Rav Moshe (Igrot Moshe 4:80) writes that it is permitted to drive back the ambulance if it is common that they're need it later that Shabbat. Shevet Halevi 6:26 also allows it and explains that it is considered pikuach nefesh where the need is common. It is considered like choleh lifanenu.</ref>

==Public Safety==

#It is permitted to violate any rabbinic prohibition to prevent something dangerous to the public.<ref>Gemara Shabbat 42a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 308:18, Mishna Brurah 408:77</ref>

==Shomer Shabbos Residency==
Is it permissible to join a non-shomer Shabbos residency?
===Discussion===
One factor to consider is that halacha forbids getting into a situation where it will be necessary to violate Shabbat for pikuach nefesh. This stricture applies even before Shabbos.<ref>Baal Hamoer’s reading to Shabbat 19a</ref> The counter-principle to consider that it is possible that only this doctor will merit to cure a certain patient.<ref>Ran Nedarim 41b s.v. ela</ref> A practical consideration is that taking a Shomer Shabbos residency might mean sacrificing a better education to be an expert in that field of medicine.
====Rav Hershel Schachter====
Rav Hershel Schachter<ref>[https://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2007/rsch_shabbos1.html torahweb.org]</ref> holds that if it can’t be arranged to get a shomer Shabbos residency a person should find another profession.<ref>
* [http://themedhc.org/2016/08/22/shomer-shabbos-medical-training-by-akiva-bergman/ Dr. Akiva Bergman] wrote a nice article on the topic clearly showing the numerous issues with the non-shomer Shabbat residency. 1) One has to opt out of a situation in which one will violating Shabbat for pikuach nefesh including treating non-Jewish patients which is only permitted in self-protection (ayvah). 2) Even planning a trip more than three days before Shabbat is a problem since the residency will certainly involve the violation of Shabbat. 3) Even in terms of protecting a Jew that too doesn't serve as a reason to allow pikuach nefesh ab initio according to the Rama. 4) Furthermore, no resident can be sure that he will certainly have a Jew among his patients. His conclusion is that a non-shomer Shabbat residency is seriously problematic.</ref> Rabbi Chaim Jachter<Ref>[https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/shabbat-and-pikuach-nefesh-part-iii-by-rabbi-howard-jachter koltorah.org]</ref> quotes that Rav Schachter gave two reasons. First, a person can’t set himself up to violate Shabbat even in advance of Shabbat since the treatment of many or most patients is not a mitzvah.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/796071/rabbi-howard-apfel/shomer-shabbos-residencies-pt-2-and-trading-call-with-non-observant-jews/ Rabbi Howard Apfel (Shomer Shabbos Residencies Part 2, min 20-30)] clarified Rav Schachter's opinion is that since doing a non-shomer Shabbos residency will result in a definite violation of Shabbat for pikuach nefesh that is not permitted even for a mitzvah according to the Biur Halacha 248:4 s.v. uposek. </ref> Additionally, he holds that there is a concern that if one becomes used to doing a forbidden activity when it is permitted, he will continue these activities even when it is forbidden.

====Rav Dovid Cohen and Rav Moshe Feinstein====
Rav Dovid Cohen<ref>Quoted by Rabbi Raymond and Dr. Sammy Sultan in RJJ Periodical no. LVIII</ref> holds that initially a person should find a shomer Shabbos residency but if it can’t then he can manage with a non-shomer Shabbos residency. Similarly, Rav Moshe Tendler quotes Rav Moshe Feinstein<ref>Quoted by Rabbi Raymond and Dr. Sammy Sultan in RJJ Periodical no. LVIII from Practical Medical Halacha, Rabbi M. D. Tendler and Dr. F. Rosner, p.150, 1998. Complete text available [http://daneisenberg.com/sstshuvahtendler.pdf here]. </ref> as holding that it is permissible to go to a non-Shomer Shabbos residency with better training as long as one keeps Shabbos even in a less favorable environment. If the superior training comes at the expense of breaking Shabbat in a forbidden way, even if it is only a rabbinic ordinance, he must forgo the better training.
===Summary===
Bottom line, there is a dispute among the contemporary poskim whether a medical student must find a shomer-Shabbos residency or find another profession, or it is permitted to take a non-shomer Shabbos residency. Even according to the lenient view, no transgression of Shabbat is permitted in the name of training to be a doctor. It is just permitted to take the training in a less Shabbos friendly environment and cope with the questions as they arise and only do what is permitted on Shabbat.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/796071/rabbi-howard-apfel/shomer-shabbos-residencies-pt-2-and-trading-call-with-non-observant-jews/ Rabbi Howard Afpel]</ref>
==Related Pages==

#[[Tochen]] ([[grinding]])
#[[Brushing Teeth on Shabbat]]

==Credits==
Halachipedia is very thankful to Rabbi Doniel Neustadt who gave Halachipedia permission to use his valuable article on this topic to improve the Halachipedia page.
==Sources==
<references />
[[Category:Shabbat]]
{{Shabbat Table}}

Koshering a Kitchen

2024-08-25T01:10:40Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

==Utensils Used for Cold==
# Any vessel that is usually used for cold can be koshered by cleaning it well with cold water.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:1. Rashba Teshuva 1:372, 817, 3:279, and Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. aval hold that we follow the majority of the uses of a utensil to determine how it should be koshered.</ref> Ashkenazim are lechatchila (initially) strict for the opinion that if it was used for non-kosher cold that it should be koshered with hagalah.<ref>Rama 451:25, Mishna Brurah 451:149</ref>
==Hagalah==
# A pot that absorbed something via a liquid medium can be koshered<ref>Does hagalah remove all of the beliyot? Hagalat Kelim p. 27 quotes many who say that hagalah removes all of the beliyot including: Piksei Rabbenu Yechiel Mparis 42, Kol Bo Hagalah, Pri Megadim M”Z 452:4, E”A 467:13. However, the Shoel Umeishiv 6:41 s.v. vheneh questions this and instead posits that hagalah removes most of the beliyot and the rest are batel (nullified). This is why hagalah cannot be done on pesach, as there's no concept of bittul for chametz on pesach, as chametz is assur b'mashehu (even a little bit is forbidden). [This would correspond to the Rashba (cited in Shulchan Aruch YD 99:7) as to why one can use a pot initially after hagalah if that involves nullification.]
</ref> with boiling<ref>Does hagalah need to be 212 F? Hagalat Kelim by Rabbi Tzvi Cohen 10:19 writes that if someone is using steam to do hagalah, the water needs to reach 212 F. Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 128 quotes Rav Moshe as holding that strictly speaking, if one knew that a machine was only used for a certain temperature and not more, then it can be koshered with heating water in it to that temperature. Only initially (lechatchila) do we try to actually boil water even if it wasn't used that way (Rama 451:6); otherwise the rule is kbolo kach polto for hagalah (Raah cited by Shach 121:17).
</ref> water<ref>Rama 452:5 writes that we do hagalah specifically with water; however, after the fact, other liquids are also effective. See Bet Yosef 93:1 who believes there's no difference between using water or milk for hagalah.</ref><ref>When is hagalah effective?
#Rabbenu Tam: When the kli is placed in boiling water, it immediately expunges its forbidden taste and then reabsorbs the water's taste. Hagalat Kelim p. 27 cites that this is the opinion of Tosfot Avoda Zara 76a s.v. mkan, Tosfot Chullin 100b s.v. bshekadam, 108b s.v. shnafal, Smag lavin 78, Rosh end of a”z, pesachim 2:7, Sefer Hatrumah 55, Rashba Chullin 108b, Torat Habayit 4:4, respona 1:262, Ran Chullin end of perek 8, Ritva Chullin 108b quoting Rabbenu Tam, Tur and Rama 452:1.
#Rashbam: The kli first absorbs new taste from the water, and only afterwards does it start to expunge its absorbed taste. According to Rashbam, you would have to wait some time for hagalah to be effective. It isn’t clear how long that is. This is the opinion of Rashbam cited by Tosfot Chullin 108b s.v. shnafal.
#Manhig: The kli absorbs taste from the boiling water right away, and only gives off its taste once it is removed from the boiling water or cools down and is washed. This is the opinion of the Ritva Chullin 108b and Manhig.</ref>
# A pot that is usually used for cooking with liquids, but is sometimes used for roasting without liquids: according to Sephardim, this can be koshered with hagalah, and there's no need for libun, since we follow the majority of its use.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 451:6.
*The Gemara Pesachim 30b concludes that knives only need hagalah for pesach, even though it earlier raises the possibility of needing libun. What is the reasoning of the gemara? The Ran Chidushim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that the knife is sometimes used over the fire, and there was a thought that it should need libun, and the conclusion is that it only needs hagalah. One approach is based on Rashi and Raavad, who hold that chametz is hetera baala, and therefore only hagalah is needed. The other approach, according to the Ramban, that chametz is isura baala, is that we only need hagalah because we follow the majority usage the knife. Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim agrees with the second approach.
*The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that we don’t need to be concerned for a minority of usages. The fact that the Torah establishes categories of different vessels (those used with a cold medium, a hot liquid medium, and directly on the fire), indicates that we follow the majority usage, and don't care about the minority. This is reiterated in 1:817 and 3:279 and Ran Pesachim 8b. The Bet Yosef understands that this is also the opinion of the Rif Pesachim 8b and Rambam Machalot Asurot 5.
*However, the Ravyah holds that we’re concerned for a minority of usages of a utensil. Tosfot Avoda Zara 74b s.v. darash, Hagahot Maimoniyot (Hilchot Hagalah), and Tur 451:6 agree. Shulchan Aruch 451:6 follows the Rashba and Rama 451:6 is concerned for the Ravyah.
*How does Rov Tashmisho work? In other words, if we know that a certain vessel came in direct contact with fire once, how does hagalah suffice to kasher it? The Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that following the main use of a utensil is only effective if we’re unsure if the utensil was ever used for the minority usage. We don't need to be concerned that the vessel was used in an abnormal fashion. This is also the opinion of Tosfot Chullin 8a s.v. shlibna, Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim, and Raah cited by Nemukei Yosef Pesachim 30b.
*However, the Ran Chidushim Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata holds that we follow the majority of usages, even though it is certain that it was in fact used for the other type of usage. Ramban Avoda Zara 76a s.v. umah sh’amru and Rashba a”z 76a s.v. vkatav agree. This is also implied by Rabbenu Dovid Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata. Kaf Hachaim 451:100 follows that approach and cites many who agree including: Sharei Kneset Hagedola 451:6, Pri Chadash, Olot Tamid, Eliya Rabba 451:17, Chok Yakov 451:31, Bet Dovid 212, Gan Hamelech 53, Erev Hashulchan 451:11, Chemed Moshe 451:12, and Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:31. Rama Mpano 96, Chazon Ish 119:15 agree. See Darkei Teshuva 121:5 for someone who pasken like the Raah. How can that be explained?
*The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that the reason that we can follow the majority of uses even though it is known that it was used for another type of use, since once 24 hours have passed, the absorptions taste bad (notain taam lif'gam) and the entire need for koshering is rabbinic. The rabbis established that we should follow the majority of usages. This explanation is reiterated by the Rama Mpano 96.
*Chazon Ish OC 119:15 points out that according to this answer, we would not follow the majority usage for a spice grinder, since a dvar charif (sharp food) extracts tastes even though they weren’t used within 24 hours. However, the Mishna Brurah 451:80 seems to apply the rule of rov tashmisho even to a grinder. Chazon Ish answers that Mishna Brurah refers to a case in which we're concerned that it was used for chametz, but we don’t know for sure that it was actually used for chametz. If we knew for sure that it was used for chametz, then we wouldn't be able to rely upon the majority usage.
*However, there is a small group of rishonim that apply the principle of rov tashmisho even for ben yomo utensils which are biblically forbidden. The Machzor Vitri Hilchot Pesach ch. 4 writes that the torah established the categories of koshering based on the majority usage. [https://books.google.com/books?id=CcdVDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT180&lpg=PT180&dq=%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91+%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%95+%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94+%D7%A1%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90&source=bl&ots=RhBy-LvyzG&sig=ACfU3U1MLaZxsX1byp3l0bG8-4nlp0KLkQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjj7qOu2c_hAhWLTd8KHZDeCJIQ6AEwB3oECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91%20%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%95%20%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94%20%D7%A1%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90&f=false Rav Aryeh Idnason in Haotzer v. 15 p. 189] explains that either the Machzor Vitri holds that taam kikar is derabbanan, or that the Torah categorized utensils based on the majority.</ref> Initially (lechatchila) Ashkenazim are concerned even for a minority of uses, and would require libun in this scenario.<ref>Rama 451:6, Mishna Brurah 451:45</ref>
#Hagalah means immersing the vessel with non-kosher absorption into boiling water on the fire that is bubbling.<ref>
Tur YD 121:3 cites a dispute if hagalah must be performed with a kli rishon that is still on the fire, or if a kli rishon can be used for hagalah even once it's been removed from the fire. Bet Yosef notes that by hilchot Shabbot, whether or not it's still on the fire, we still consider it to be a kli rishon. Bet Yosef explains that the two opinions in the Tur are dependent on whether or not we can learn hagalah from the definition of kli rishon by hilchot Shabbat. The reason not to is because the absorbed taste might only be removed in the way that it entered the keli, namely when it was directly on the fire.
*Hagahot Smak 213 n. 5 writes that it needs to be boiling and not just yad soledet bo. Bet Yosef 452:1 and Shach (Nekudat Hakesef 93:1) quote this. Trumat Hadeshen 1:131, 2:150 agrees.
*Maharshal 26 implies that yad soledet is sufficient for hagalah. Pri Megadim M”Z 452:3 does entertain this possibility. He proves it from the Rambam Maaseh Korbanot 8:12.
*Meor Hashemesh 1:2 p. 507 proves from the language of the Tur that ''rotchin'' is the same as yad soledet, and that is sufficient for hagalah. He says that this is also the opinion of the Rosh Pesachim 2:7. He adds that boiling is only necessary so that the taste doesn't reenter the pot.</ref> Some poskim hold that it always needs to be a bubbling boil, while others hold that it is sufficient even if the pot was removed from the fire in a case of a permitted absorption (''hetera baala'').<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:3 doesn’t resolve this question, but simply writes that it is the same as hilchot pesach. Tur 451:6 only mentions the opinion that hagalah is effective even if it is removed from the fire.
*Bach 451:8 is bothered by this discrepancy in the Tur, and resolves it by saying that the Tur was only lenient if the utensil is used off of the fire.
*Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:4 answers that chametz is hetera baala. Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:3-7 writes the opinion of the Rambam (Maaseh Korbanot 8:14) and Tur is that hagalah for hetera balah is effective even if the kli rishon was removed from the fire. However, for a utensil that was used on the fire, even though it was hetera baala and it can be koshered with hagalah, it would require hagalah with a kli rishon on the fire. He concludes that one can be lenient like the Rambam. (Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes the Kahal Yehuda 121:3 who points out that the Shulchan Aruch implies that he doesn’t accept that answer, since he compared chametz with isura. Also, according to the Mikdash Dovid Kodshim 31:1 or Pri Toar 122:5 there is no proof from the Rambam who is lenient for kodshim specifically.) Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:25 also writes that one can rely on the opinion that hagalah off the fire is sufficient whenever it is hetera baala. Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes this also from Emek Sheylah 137:5.
*Rama 452:1 implies that Shulchan Aruch holds that is enough. However, Magen Avraham 452:3, Chok Yakov 452:6, Taz 452:3, Pri Chadash 452:1, Ateret Zekenim 452:2, and Mishna Brurah 452:6 write that there is no such opinion. Bet Yosef meant that you don’t have to concern yourself that if it was boiling and then dipped below boiling that all of the beliyot would return to the kli.</ref> If a knife is only used in hot water off the fire, it can be koshered with hagalah off the fire.<ref>Bach 452:8. Zichron Shaul v. 1 p. 73 explains that this Shulchan Aruch isn’t a proof in general for hagalah. Since knives are only used off the fire they can be koshered that way. Darkei Teshuva 121:49 cites the Yesharesh Yakov who says that only for knives can we use hagalah in a kli rishon off the fire.
* Shulchan Aruch 451:3 writes that knives need hagalah but can be koshered with a kli rishon that was removed from the fire as long as it is boiling. Magen Avraham 451:7 clarifies that it is effective as long as it is yad soledet bo. Similarly, Yalkut Yosef Pesach Moadim Hechsher Kelim Lpesach n. 13 writes you can kosher knives with yad soledet bo even if the pot was removed from the fire. However, Mishna Brurah 451:20 implies that the hagalah is ineffective unless it is actually boiling. (This seemingly can’t mean a bubbling boil since water stops boiling immediately as it is removed from the fire, [https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/380748/why-does-water-stop-boiling-immediately-after-turning-off-the-heat Physics Stackexchange]). </ref>
#Usually it is necessary to kosher a pot on the inside and the rim but if it is used on the outside of the pot such as a ladle it needs to be koshered on both sides.<ref>Magen Avraham 452:11 quoting the Maharil</ref>
#If one has a big pot and can't put it into another pot, one should have a rim added to it, and when the pot boils, the water will splash onto the rim and kosher it. Alternatively, one can boil a pot and drop a rock in, so that the pot boils over the rim.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 452:6</ref>
#If a pot is used on the inside, but became non-kosher on the outside, it needs to be koshered on both sides.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva YD 96:3</ref>
# If one is doing hagalah of iruy on a large item, one should do so bottom up.<ref>Shoel Umeishiv 5:4 writes that if one is pouring hot water on a large item one should do the hagalah bottom up. He explains that if one does the opposite the zeyia from the bottom could rise and infuse non-kosher taste into the top that was already koshered.</ref>
# Hagalah works for pots that were used for liquids, even though in the course of being used they were used for temperatures above 212 degrees.<ref>Hagalat Kelim p. 400 writes that although there’s many cases where cooking involves temperatures above 212 F (such as deep frying in oil, cooking a solid, cooking with a cover so that it pops up because of pressure), it is acceptable to do hagalah with 212 F alone. Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 agrees because we never find in chazal a type of hagalah that needs to be hotter than boiling water.</ref> Additionally, in altitudes where it is possible to boil water at lower than 212, one can use this boiling water (even though it's less than 212 F) for hagalah.<ref>Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman that hagalah doesn’t need to be at the same temperature that the food entered, and the poskim never distinguished between hagalah at different altitudes.</ref>
# With regards to a pressure cooker, which can cook foods at temperatures higher than 212 F, many poskim hold that the boiling water used for hagalah only needs to be 212 F.<ref>Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 p. 124, Hagalat Kelim p. 400 citing Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Chazon Ovadia n. 2, Betzel Chachma 3:55</ref>
# The utensils put in the boiling water should be left there for a few seconds; some recommend that they be left for ten seconds.<ref>The [https://oukosher.org/passover/articles/kashering-for-passover/ OU] writes that one should leave the utensils in the boiling water for ten seconds, while the [https://www.kof-k.org/articles/040408080457W-21%20Hagolah%20(Rabbi%20Neustadt).pdf Kof K] writes a few seconds. Shaar Hatziyun 452:3 writes that the Tur and Pri Chadash hold that the utensils can be removed immediately, unlike the Taz who says that it needs to be there for some time. Shaar Hatziyun recommends leaving it in for a little bit of time.
*Pri Chadash 452:6 writes that the Ramban Chullin 108b s.v. vrabbenu, Rambam Chametz Umatza 5:24, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. vkach, and Rashba 1:479 hold that the utensil should be left in the boiling water for some unspecified amount of time so that the absorptions can be removed. However, the Tur, Mordechai Chullin 579, and Hagahot Maimoniyot Kushta Chametz Umatza 5:23 hold that the utensils can be removed immediately. Pri Chadash concludes that this is the minhag.
*Meiri Avoda Zara 76a s.v. kshemartichin writes that the utensil needs to be left in the pot long enough for the utensil to heat up (to Yad Soledet Bo). See Sefer Hagalat Kelim who cites this.</ref>

==Libun==
# It is possible to do Libun on Pesach but not hagalah.<ref>Rama 452:1</ref>
# Libun Chamur can be accomplished with a minimum temperature of 752 F, because metal would become visibly red hot in the dark at that temperature. Self-clean of a typical oven is 850 degrees and certainly counts as libun chamur.<ref>Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315</ref>
# Libun Kal is certainly achieved at 451 F because paper burns at that temperature.<ref>Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315</ref>
# Libun chamur with a blow torch should be done on each spot for approximately 9 seconds. This could be dangerous and damage the oven thermostat.<ref>Halachos of Pesach by Rabbi Ribiat p. 353</ref>
# Anytime the absorption was permitted (hettera balah), the utensil can be koshered with hagalah and doesn't require libun.<ref>Rav Sheshet in Gemara Avoda Zara 76a says that something that is hetera baala doesn't require libun and can be koshered with hagalah. This is the opinion of the Tosfot Avoda Zara 76b s.v. amar, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. devarim citing Raavad, Maggid Mishna Chametz 5:23 citing Rambam, Rosh Avoda Zara 34, Smag Lavin 77, Kol Bo n. 48 citing Rashba, Rabbenu Meshulam, Yereyim n. 106, Hagahot Maimoniyot Chametz 5:1, Ravyah Pesachim 464, Hagahot Smak 194:3, Raavan Avoza Zara 316, Mordechai Pesachim n. 584, Avoda Zara n. 860, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 509:5, Y.D. 121:4, Shach in Nekudat Hakesef 93:1, and Yabia Omer YD 5:7:7.</ref>
# If someone did hagalah when a kli needed libun, then the kli is still considered not-kosher, even bdiavad (after the fact).<ref>Mordechai Pesachim n. 563, Darkei Moshe 451:5</ref>

==Koshering a Knife==

#A knife should be koshered with hagalah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7</ref>
#The minhag is to have designated meat and milk knives.<ref>Rama 89:4</ref> Preferably one should have three knives, one for meat, one for milk, and one for parve.<ref>Maharshal (Yam Shel Shlomo Chullin 8:8), Badei Hashulchan 89:111</ref>
#It is forbidden to use a dirty meat knife to cut cheese. It is even forbidden to use it to cut bread which will be eaten with cheese.<ref>Rashba (responsa 1:76), Shulchan Aruch YD 89:4</ref> The same is true vice versa.<ref>Rama YD 89:4</ref>

==Using a non-Kosher Knife==

#It is permitted to use a non-kosher knife on a one-time basis for cold if you first stick it into hard earth ten times.<ref>The Gemara Avoda Zara 76b states that in order to kosher a non-kosher knife, one should just stick it in the ground ten times. Tosfot 76b s.v. hasakin says that even though the Yerushalmi says that one should stick it in the ground three times, one should be strict and do it ten times. Tosfot chullin 8b s.v. vehilchata says that sticking it in the ground cleans the knife from non-kosher fat that got stuck on it. Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7 rules accordingly, that in order to use a non-Kosher knife once for cold, it should be stuck into the ground ten times. Shulchan Aruch notes that this procedure is sufficient even if one wants to use the knife to cut a cold sharp food (such as an onion). The Rama adds that if one wants to use it on a consistent basis, then one must do a proper hechsher. </ref> But in order to use the knife for hot, even once, one needs to do a proper hechsher.
#Similarly, to use a meat knife on a one time basis to cut cold bread that will be eaten with cheese, it is sufficient to stick it in hard earth ten times. However, in order to use a meat knife to cut cheese, one should do a proper hechsher.<ref>The Rama YD 89:4 writes that to kosher a meat knife to be used for cold dairy it is sufficient to stick it in the ground ten times. The Taz 89:6 explains that if one is just going to cut bread for dairy using the knife, it just needs to be cleaned. But if one intends to use it for cheese, then it should be stuck in the ground ten times. However, the Shach 89:22 says that it should be stuck into the ground ten times even to cut bread that will be used for dairy. The Badei Hashulchan 89:108 is strict for the Shach and explains that it is forbidden to cut cheese with a meat knife unless one did a proper hechsher. </ref>
##Some poskim say that if one doesn't have a knife, cleaning the knife with soap is considered the equivalent of sticking it in the ground ten times.<ref>Maadenei HaShulchan (M'taamei Hashulchan YD 89:17 p. 62)</ref>
#If one wants to use a meat knife on a consistent basis for cold dairy, then one must do a hechsher of the knife.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 89:108 based on Rama YD 121:5</ref>

==Using Non-Kosher Utensils==

#It is permitted to use a clean cold non-Kosher utensil to eat cold kosher food on an irregular basis for a one-time use. See footnote regarding earthenware.<ref>*The Ran (Chullin 40b s.v. imlich) asks why a non-kosher earthenware utensil has to be broken, if it ostensibly can be used for cold kosher food. He answers that it must be that there is a rabbinic prohibition not to use the earthenware utensil for cold food, because one might come to use it for hot food. The Ran notes that this is limited to earthenware which can't be kashered, as there's a greater likelihood that you'll come to use it with hot food. The Mordechai (Pesachim no. 565) disagrees with Ran and thinks that this rabbinic prohibition extends to vessels of all materials, that one shouldn't use them with cold, lest one come to use them with hot. Rama YD 121:5 rules that on an irregular basis one may use non-kosher utensils for cold kosher food, but one may not do so on a consistent basis, out of concern for the opinion of the Mordechai. This is also the opinion of Shulchan Aruch YD 94:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, and Kaf Hachaim 94:40.
*Chelkat Binyamin 121:42 says based on the Pri Chadash that one shouldn't use earthenware utensils even for a one-time use, unless you're in a non-Jew's house and there's no possibility to do a hechsher.</ref> Knives have to first be stuck in the ground ten times.<ref>Shach 121:9</ref> See section on using non-kosher knives.
#It is initially (lechatchila) forbidden to place cold kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-Kosher if the container wasn’t washed since the kosher food that goes into the container will have some non-kosher on it and one might forget to wash off the kosher food. If the kosher food is usually washed before being eaten it is permitted to initially place it in a cold pot used for non-kosher.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 91:2 based on the Baal HaItur and Tur</ref>
#It is initially permitted to place kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-kosher if the container was washed.<ref>Shach 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, Kaf HaChaim 91:5. Is there a concern of beliyot when using a utensil for cold?

*The Orchot Chaim states that it is permitted to store spices in a non-kosher utensil since there are no beliyot of non-kosher being transferred by storing the spices in the utensil. The Bet Yosef 105 cites this. The Tur 451 permits storing cold matzah in a chametz utensil.
*However, the Tur 91:2 cites the Baal Haitur who writes that it is forbidden to place meat in a dairy utensil since one might forget to wash it off afterwards.
*''Question'': The Rama (Torat Chatat 17:2 and Darkei Moshe 91) is bothered with this contradiction. He answers 4 answers:
#We are concerned with meat since it is moist but not concerned about spices or matzah which are dry.
#We are concerned for other prohibitions but not chametz.
#We are concerned when the utensil was originally used for hot non-kosher but not if it was used for cold non-kosher (or meat in pot that was originally used for cold dairy).
#We are concerned when the utensil wasn't cleaned well.
*Rama 91:2 implies that he accepts answers 1 and 3 and requires both but Taz 91:3 explains that either is sufficient. Shach 91:3 only accepts the fourth answer.</ref> However, one shouldn’t use non-kosher earthenware utensils even for cold.<ref>Shach 91:3, Pri Chadash 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15. Pri Chadash 91:3 explains that the reason to be strict is that we're concerned that a person is going to use it for hot. However, for a metal utensil we're not concerned for a short usage that one will use it with hot since one would first do hagalah. See Kaf HaChaim 91:10 who permits using non-kosher earthenware utensils that belong to a non-Jew for cold.</ref>
#It is permitted to own a non-kosher utensil and not use it as there’s no concern that you’ll come to use it for a forbidden use.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 91:9. See Chashukei Chemed Yoma 66a who cites the Panim Meirot 1:23 who says that there's no concern that if one owns a non-kosher utensil one will come to use it. However, the Ketav Sofer YD 28 holds that it is a concern. It is similar to the Gemara Yoma 66a and Pesachim 20b where chazal are concerned about holding onto something forbidden because you might use it.
* Rambam Trumot 12:12 implies that there's a prohibition to keep impure trumah and we don't allow keeping it in order to sprinkle on the floor periodically since we're concerned that a person is going to make a mistake and eat it. Mahari Kurkus explains that the rambam held this even though the Gemara Pesachim 20b implies that Bet Hillel isn't concerned for that because in several places the Gemara (Shabbat 17b) is concerned. Bet Halevi 1:52 adds that Sotah 48a is another proof. However, the Rabbenu Chananel Pesachim 20b and Rashba b"k 115b s.v. vtakala hold like Bet Hillel.</ref>

==Frying Pan==

#A frying pan that became non-kosher can only be koshered with libun chamur.<ref>The Rosh (Pesachim Kol Shaah 7) records a dispute between the Ravyah and his grandfather the Raavan whether a frying pan needs libun. The Raavan held it needed libun as it's comparable to baking. On the other hand, the Ravyah held it needed hagalah as it's comparable to cooking. The Rosh comments that he agrees with the Ravyah since the food is cooked in a liquid medium (oil) in a pot. The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 is strict like the Raavan.</ref>
#A frying pan that was used for chametz can be koshered for pesach with libun kal or hagalah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that even though for other isurim a frying pan needs libun chamur, for koshering for pesach it only needs hagalah. The Biur Hagra YD 121:9 explains that the Shulchan Aruch really holds like the Rosh that a frying pan only needs hagalah, but is strict to generally require libun chamur. When it comes to pesach, since there are some who hold that chametz is hetera baala and would only need hagalah, we can suffice with hagalah. Yabia Omer YD 10:58:18 and Yalkut Yosef YD 121:3 agree. </ref> See [[Kashering_the_Kitchen_for_Pesach#Pans]] for Ashkenazic minhag and fuller discussion.
# A frying pan that is milk and one wants to make it parve, or if one wants to make a meat frying pan parve, one can kosher it with hagalah or libun kal.<ref>The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that one can kosher a frying pan from meat to milk or parve with hagalah since absorbing meat or milk are permitted and since it is hetera baala (a permitted absorption) it can be removed with hagalah (Avoda Zara 75a). The Shach YD 121:8 quotes the Rama Mpano 96 who says that a frying pan used for non-kosher needs libun, since the non-kosher came in contact with the frying pan itself unlike chametz which is cooked in the frying pan with a non-chametz liquid such as water or oil. The Shach concludes that the Rama Mpano implies that if one used a frying pan for milk or meat, it would need libun to be koshered. However, Rabbi Akiva Eiger 121:1 asks that either way milk and meat separately are permitted and as such should never require libun. Chelkat Binyamin 121:4 s.v. linyan explains that in fact the Rama Mpano never said that a meat or milk pan needed libun. He only meant a frying pan that was used for meat and milk needs libun. He adds that this could also be the intent of the Shach.</ref> However, if it was used for meat and milk, it needs to be koshered with libun.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4, Shach 121:8. See Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:13 and 25 who implies that even if a pot is used for meat and milk within 24 hours, it can still be koshered with hagalah since meat and milk is called hetera baala. However, this seems to be at odds with the rishonim. Divrei Shalom 451:98 on Shulchan Aruch Harav and Maharsham 2:42 understand Shulchan Aruch Harav as only discussing liquid milk after meat. In that case hagalah is sufficient because the milk entered as a liquid. But if the meat and milk were both solids, then the pot would require libun. Also, Isur Veheter 58:23 writes explicitly that a meat pot which a drop of milk made non-kosher needs libun. </ref>
# If it is used for meat and 24 hours later is used for milk it can be koshered with hagalah or libun kal. The opposite is true of the opposite (unless it is used for a sharp food - [[Dvar Charif]]).<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 110 cited by Pitchei Teshuva 121:7</ref>

==Not Switching Between Meat and Milk==

#The Ashkenazic minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk except before Pesach when one is koshering the utensils for Pesach anyway.<ref>Magen Avraham 509:11 writes that the minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk since one might come to make a mistake and forget whether it's currently meat or milk. Pri Megadim E"A 509:11 seems to say that the minhag is to make a utensil non-kosher so that it needs to be koshered, and then switch it over from meat to milk. Pri Megadim E"A 451:30 writes that when koshering utensils for Pesach, it is permitted to switch them over from meat to milk. Chatom Sofer YD 110 (cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 121:7), Badei Hashulchan 89:112, and [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/871104/Basic-Kitchen-Kashrut-for-Young-Couples Rav Schachter (Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23)] agree. However, the Aruch Hashulchan 89:17 argues with the Magen Avraham that we can't invent gezerot nowadays, and there's no issue to switch utensils from meat to milk.</ref> Sephardim never had this practice.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 509:45, Yabia Omer YD 3:4</ref>
#Some say that it is permitted to kosher a utensil that used to be Parve and now became dairy or meat to become parve again.<ref>Maharsham (responsa 2:241) explains that there was never a minhag in such a case to be strict not to change it over and also there's other factors to be lenient. Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei questions this maharsham.</ref>
#It is permitted to switch over utensils after 12 months have passed.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei citing Maharsham 2:241</ref>
#Some have the practice that if one has a utensil which one wants to switch from meat to milk that one intentionally makes that utensil non-kosher and then it is fine to kosher it and use it for the other type.<ref>Pri Megadim EA 509:11 (cited by Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei), [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/871104/Basic-Kitchen-Kashrut-for-Young-Couples Rav Schachter (Basic Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23)]. Badei Hashulchan questions the Pri Megadim since one might forget to do the koshering altogether.</ref>

==Glass==
#According to Ashkenazim, glass can not be kashered for Pesach. For other prohibitions ,such as meat and milk, it is a dispute whether it does not absorb anything, does absorb and can be kashered, or does absorb but can not be kashered.<ref>[https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/kashering-glass-part-ii-by-rabbi-chaim-jachter Rabbi Jachter] quotes Rav Schachter who holds that glass can be kashered three times, Yachava Daat 1:6, Sereidei Esh 2:36, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:86 hold that glass can absorb but can be kashered, while Shevet Halevi 1:43 holds that glass can not be kashered even for other prohibitions. </ref>
#According to most Sephardim, glass utensils don't absorb any taste and do not become non-kosher, both for meat and milk as well as chametz on pesach. However, the common practice is to have two sets of dishes, one for milk and one for meat.<ref>Rabbi Mansour on [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/m/halacha.aspx?id=855 dailyhalacha.com] writes that Syrains are lenient but still have two sets of dishes. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 451:39) writes that most Sephardim are lenient, but some Persians are strict about this for Pesach but not milk and meat.</ref>

==Sources==
<references />
{{Kashrut}}

Koshering a Kitchen

2024-08-23T22:26:41Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

==Utensils Used for Cold==
# Any vessel that is usually used for cold can be koshered by cleaning it well with cold water.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:1. Rashba Teshuva 1:372, 817, 3:279, and Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. aval hold that we follow the majority of the uses of a utensil to determine how it should be koshered.</ref> Ashkenazim are lechatchila (initially) strict for the opinion that if it was used for non-kosher cold that it should be koshered with hagalah.<ref>Rama 451:25, Mishna Brurah 451:149</ref>
==Hagalah==
# A pot that absorbed something via a liquid medium can be koshered<ref>Does hagalah remove all of the beliyot? Hagalat Kelim p. 27 quotes many who say that hagalah removes all of the beliyot including: Piksei Rabbenu Yechiel Mparis 42, Kol Bo Hagalah, Pri Megadim M”Z 452:4, E”A 467:13. However, the Shoel Umeishiv 6:41 s.v. vheneh questions this and instead posits that hagalah removes most of the beliyot and the rest are batel (nullified). This is why hagalah cannot be done on pesach, as there's no concept of bittul for chametz on pesach, as chametz is assur b'mashehu (even a little bit is forbidden). [This would correspond to the Rashba (cited in Shulchan Aruch YD 99:7) as to why one can use a pot initially after hagalah if that involves nullification.]
</ref> with boiling<ref>Does hagalah need to be 212 F? Hagalat Kelim by Rabbi Tzvi Cohen 10:19 writes that if someone is using steam to do hagalah, the water needs to reach 212 F. Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 128 quotes Rav Moshe as holding that strictly speaking, if one knew that a machine was only used for a certain temperature and not more, then it can be koshered with heating water in it to that temperature. Only initially (lechatchila) do we try to actually boil water even if it wasn't used that way (Rama 451:6); otherwise the rule is kbolo kach polto for hagalah (Raah cited by Shach 121:17).
</ref> water<ref>Rama 452:5 writes that we do hagalah specifically with water; however, after the fact, other liquids are also effective. See Bet Yosef 93:1 who believes there's no difference between using water or milk for hagalah.</ref><ref>When is hagalah effective?
#Rabbenu Tam: When the kli is placed in boiling water, it immediately expunges its forbidden taste and then reabsorbs the water's taste. Hagalat Kelim p. 27 cites that this is the opinion of Tosfot Avoda Zara 76a s.v. mkan, Tosfot Chullin 100b s.v. bshekadam, 108b s.v. shnafal, Smag lavin 78, Rosh end of a”z, pesachim 2:7, Sefer Hatrumah 55, Rashba Chullin 108b, Torat Habayit 4:4, respona 1:262, Ran Chullin end of perek 8, Ritva Chullin 108b quoting Rabbenu Tam, Tur and Rama 452:1.
#Rashbam: The kli first absorbs new taste from the water, and only afterwards does it start to expunge its absorbed taste. According to Rashbam, you would have to wait some time for hagalah to be effective. It isn’t clear how long that is. This is the opinion of Rashbam cited by Tosfot Chullin 108b s.v. shnafal.
#Manhig: The kli absorbs taste from the boiling water right away, and only gives off its taste once it is removed from the boiling water or cools down and is washed. This is the opinion of the Ritva Chullin 108b and Manhig.</ref>
# A pot that is usually used for cooking with liquids, but is sometimes used for roasting without liquids: according to Sephardim, this can be koshered with hagalah, and there's no need for libun, since we follow the majority of its use.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 451:6.
*The Gemara Pesachim 30b concludes that knives only need hagalah for pesach, even though it earlier raises the possibility of needing libun. What is the reasoning of the gemara? The Ran Chidushim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that the knife is sometimes used over the fire, and there was a thought that it should need libun, and the conclusion is that it only needs hagalah. One approach is based on Rashi and Raavad, who hold that chametz is hetera baala, and therefore only hagalah is needed. The other approach, according to the Ramban, that chametz is isura baala, is that we only need hagalah because we follow the majority usage the knife. Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim agrees with the second approach.
*The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that we don’t need to be concerned for a minority of usages. The fact that the Torah establishes categories of different vessels (those used with a cold medium, a hot liquid medium, and directly on the fire), indicates that we follow the majority usage, and don't care about the minority. This is reiterated in 1:817 and 3:279 and Ran Pesachim 8b. The Bet Yosef understands that this is also the opinion of the Rif Pesachim 8b and Rambam Machalot Asurot 5.
*However, the Ravyah holds that we’re concerned for a minority of usages of a utensil. Tosfot Avoda Zara 74b s.v. darash, Hagahot Maimoniyot (Hilchot Hagalah), and Tur 451:6 agree. Shulchan Aruch 451:6 follows the Rashba and Rama 451:6 is concerned for the Ravyah.
*How does Rov Tashmisho work? In other words, if we know that a certain vessel came in direct contact with fire once, how does hagalah suffice to kasher it? The Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that following the main use of a utensil is only effective if we’re unsure if the utensil was ever used for the minority usage. We don't need to be concerned that the vessel was used in an abnormal fashion. This is also the opinion of Tosfot Chullin 8a s.v. shlibna, Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim, and Raah cited by Nemukei Yosef Pesachim 30b.
*However, the Ran Chidushim Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata holds that we follow the majority of usages, even though it is certain that it was in fact used for the other type of usage. Ramban Avoda Zara 76a s.v. umah sh’amru and Rashba a”z 76a s.v. vkatav agree. This is also implied by Rabbenu Dovid Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata. Kaf Hachaim 451:100 follows that approach and cites many who agree including: Sharei Kneset Hagedola 451:6, Pri Chadash, Olot Tamid, Eliya Rabba 451:17, Chok Yakov 451:31, Bet Dovid 212, Gan Hamelech 53, Erev Hashulchan 451:11, Chemed Moshe 451:12, and Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:31. Rama Mpano 96, Chazon Ish 119:15 agree. See Darkei Teshuva 121:5 for someone who pasken like the Raah. How can that be explained?
*The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that the reason that we can follow the majority of uses even though it is known that it was used for another type of use, since once 24 hours have passed, the absorptions taste bad (notain taam lif'gam) and the entire need for koshering is rabbinic. The rabbis established that we should follow the majority of usages. This explanation is reiterated by the Rama Mpano 96.
*Chazon Ish OC 119:15 points out that according to this answer, we would not follow the majority usage for a spice grinder, since a dvar charif (sharp food) extracts tastes even though they weren’t used within 24 hours. However, the Mishna Brurah 451:80 seems to apply the rule of rov tashmisho even to a grinder. Chazon Ish answers that Mishna Brurah refers to a case in which we're concerned that it was used for chametz, but we don’t know for sure that it was actually used for chametz. If we knew for sure that it was used for chametz, then we wouldn't be able to rely upon the majority usage.
*However, there is a small group of rishonim that apply the principle of rov tashmisho even for ben yomo utensils which are biblically forbidden. The Machzor Vitri Hilchot Pesach ch. 4 writes that the torah established the categories of koshering based on the majority usage. [https://books.google.com/books?id=CcdVDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT180&lpg=PT180&dq=%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91+%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%95+%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94+%D7%A1%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90&source=bl&ots=RhBy-LvyzG&sig=ACfU3U1MLaZxsX1byp3l0bG8-4nlp0KLkQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjj7qOu2c_hAhWLTd8KHZDeCJIQ6AEwB3oECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91%20%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%95%20%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94%20%D7%A1%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90&f=false Rav Aryeh Idnason in Haotzer v. 15 p. 189] explains that either the Machzor Vitri holds that taam kikar is derabbanan, or that the Torah categorized utensils based on the majority.</ref> Initially (lechatchila) Ashkenazim are concerned even for a minority of uses, and would require libun in this scenario.<ref>Rama 451:6, Mishna Brurah 451:45</ref>
#Hagalah means immersing the vessel with non-kosher absorption into boiling water on the fire that is bubbling.<ref>
Tur YD 121:3 cites a dispute if hagalah must be performed with a kli rishon that is still on the fire, or if a kli rishon can be used for hagalah even once it's been removed from the fire. Bet Yosef notes that by hilchot Shabbot, whether or not it's still on the fire, we still consider it to be a kli rishon. Bet Yosef explains that the two opinions in the Tur are dependent on whether or not we can learn hagalah from the definition of kli rishon by hilchot Shabbat. The reason not to is because the absorbed taste might only be removed in the way that it entered the keli, namely when it was directly on the fire.
*Hagahot Smak 213 n. 5 writes that it needs to be boiling and not just yad soledet bo. Bet Yosef 452:1 and Shach (Nekudat Hakesef 93:1) quote this. Trumat Hadeshen 1:131, 2:150 agrees.
*Maharshal 26 implies that yad soledet is sufficient for hagalah. Pri Megadim M”Z 452:3 does entertain this possibility. He proves it from the Rambam Maaseh Korbanot 8:12.
*Meor Hashemesh 1:2 p. 507 proves from the language of the Tur that ''rotchin'' is the same as yad soledet, and that is sufficient for hagalah. He says that this is also the opinion of the Rosh Pesachim 2:7. He adds that boiling is only necessary so that the taste doesn't reenter the pot.</ref> Some poskim hold that it always needs to be a bubbling boil, while others hold that it is sufficient even if the pot was removed from the fire in a case of a permitted absorption (''hetera baala'').<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:3 doesn’t resolve this question, but simply writes that it is the same as hilchot pesach. Tur 451:6 only mentions the opinion that hagalah is effective even if it is removed from the fire.
*Bach 451:8 is bothered by this discrepancy in the Tur, and resolves it by saying that the Tur was only lenient if the utensil is used off of the fire.
*Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:4 answers that chametz is hetera baala. Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:3-7 writes the opinion of the Rambam (Maaseh Korbanot 8:14) and Tur is that hagalah for hetera balah is effective even if the kli rishon was removed from the fire. However, for a utensil that was used on the fire, even though it was hetera baala and it can be koshered with hagalah, it would require hagalah with a kli rishon on the fire. He concludes that one can be lenient like the Rambam. (Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes the Kahal Yehuda 121:3 who points out that the Shulchan Aruch implies that he doesn’t accept that answer, since he compared chametz with isura. Also, according to the Mikdash Dovid Kodshim 31:1 or Pri Toar 122:5 there is no proof from the Rambam who is lenient for kodshim specifically.) Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:25 also writes that one can rely on the opinion that hagalah off the fire is sufficient whenever it is hetera baala. Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes this also from Emek Sheylah 137:5.
*Rama 452:1 implies that Shulchan Aruch holds that is enough. However, Magen Avraham 452:3, Chok Yakov 452:6, Taz 452:3, Pri Chadash 452:1, Ateret Zekenim 452:2, and Mishna Brurah 452:6 write that there is no such opinion. Bet Yosef meant that you don’t have to concern yourself that if it was boiling and then dipped below boiling that all of the beliyot would return to the kli.</ref> If a knife is only used in hot water off the fire, it can be koshered with hagalah off the fire.<ref>Bach 452:8. Zichron Shaul v. 1 p. 73 explains that this Shulchan Aruch isn’t a proof in general for hagalah. Since knives are only used off the fire they can be koshered that way. Darkei Teshuva 121:49 cites the Yesharesh Yakov who says that only for knives can we use hagalah in a kli rishon off the fire.
* Shulchan Aruch 451:3 writes that knives need hagalah but can be koshered with a kli rishon that was removed from the fire as long as it is boiling. Magen Avraham 451:7 clarifies that it is effective as long as it is yad soledet bo. Similarly, Yalkut Yosef Pesach Moadim Hechsher Kelim Lpesach n. 13 writes you can kosher knives with yad soledet bo even if the pot was removed from the fire. However, Mishna Brurah 451:20 implies that the hagalah is ineffective unless it is actually boiling. (This seemingly can’t mean a bubbling boil since water stops boiling immediately as it is removed from the fire, [https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/380748/why-does-water-stop-boiling-immediately-after-turning-off-the-heat Physics Stackexchange]). </ref>
#Usually it is necessary to kosher a pot on the inside and the rim but if it is used on the outside of the pot such as a ladle it needs to be koshered on both sides.<ref>Magen Avraham 452:11 quoting the Maharil</ref>
#If one has a big pot and can't put it into another pot, one should have a rim added to it, and when the pot boils, the water will splash onto the rim and kosher it. Alternatively, one can boil a pot and drop a rock in, so that the pot boils over the rim.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 452:6</ref>
#If a pot is used on the inside, but became non-kosher on the outside, it needs to be koshered on both sides.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva YD 96:3</ref>
# If one is doing hagalah of iruy on a large item, one should do so bottom up.<ref>Shoel Umeishiv 5:4 writes that if one is pouring hot water on a large item one should do the hagalah bottom up. He explains that if one does the opposite the zeyia from the bottom could rise and infuse non-kosher taste into the top that was already koshered.</ref>
# Hagalah works for pots that were used for liquids, even though in the course of being used they were used for temperatures above 212 degrees.<ref>Hagalat Kelim p. 400 writes that although there’s many cases where cooking involves temperatures above 212 F (such as deep frying in oil, cooking a solid, cooking with a cover so that it pops up because of pressure), it is acceptable to do hagalah with 212 F alone. Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 agrees because we never find in chazal a type of hagalah that needs to be hotter than boiling water.</ref> Additionally, in altitudes where it is possible to boil water at lower than 212, one can use this boiling water (even though it's less than 212 F) for hagalah.<ref>Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman that hagalah doesn’t need to be at the same temperature that the food entered, and the poskim never distinguished between hagalah at different altitudes.</ref>
# With regards to a pressure cooker, which can cook foods at temperatures higher than 212 F, many poskim hold that the boiling water used for hagalah only needs to be 212 F.<ref>Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 p. 124, Hagalat Kelim p. 400 citing Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Chazon Ovadia n. 2, Betzel Chachma 3:55</ref>
# The utensils put in the boiling water should be left there for a few seconds; some recommend that they be left for ten seconds.<ref>The [https://oukosher.org/passover/articles/kashering-for-passover/ OU] writes that one should leave the utensils in the boiling water for ten seconds, while the [https://www.kof-k.org/articles/040408080457W-21%20Hagolah%20(Rabbi%20Neustadt).pdf Kof K] writes a few seconds. Shaar Hatziyun 452:3 writes that the Tur and Pri Chadash hold that the utensils can be removed immediately, unlike the Taz who says that it needs to be there for some time. Shaar Hatziyun recommends leaving it in for a little bit of time.
*Pri Chadash 452:6 writes that the Ramban Chullin 108b s.v. vrabbenu, Rambam Chametz Umatza 5:24, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. vkach, and Rashba 1:479 hold that the utensil should be left in the boiling water for some unspecified amount of time so that the absorptions can be removed. However, the Tur, Mordechai Chullin 579, and Hagahot Maimoniyot Kushta Chametz Umatza 5:23 hold that the utensils can be removed immediately. Pri Chadash concludes that this is the minhag.
*Meiri Avoda Zara 76a s.v. kshemartichin writes that the utensil needs to be left in the pot long enough for the utensil to heat up (to Yad Soledet Bo). See Sefer Hagalat Kelim who cites this.</ref>

==Libun==
# It is possible to do Libun on Pesach but not hagalah.<ref>Rama 452:1</ref>
# Libun Chamur can be accomplished with a minimum temperature of 752 F, because metal would become visibly red hot in the dark at that temperature. Self-clean of a typical oven is 850 degrees and certainly counts as libun chamur.<ref>Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315</ref>
# Libun Kal is certainly achieved at 451 F because paper burns at that temperature.<ref>Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315</ref>
# Libun chamur with a blow torch should be done on each spot for approximately 9 seconds. This could be dangerous and damage the oven thermostat.<ref>Halachos of Pesach by Rabbi Ribiat p. 353</ref>
# Anytime the absorption was permitted (hettera balah), the utensil can be koshered with hagalah and doesn't require libun.<ref>Rav Sheshet in Gemara Avoda Zara 76a says that something that is hetera baala doesn't require libun and can be koshered with hagalah. This is the opinion of the Tosfot Avoda Zara 76b s.v. amar, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. devarim citing Raavad, Maggid Mishna Chametz 5:23 citing Rambam, Rosh Avoda Zara 34, Smag Lavin 77, Kol Bo n. 48 citing Rashba, Rabbenu Meshulam, Yereyim n. 106, Hagahot Maimoniyot Chametz 5:1, Ravyah Pesachim 464, Hagahot Smak 194:3, Raavan Avoza Zara 316, Mordechai Pesachim n. 584, Avoda Zara n. 860, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 509:5, Y.D. 121:4, Shach in Nekudat Hakesef 93:1, and Yabia Omer YD 5:7:7.</ref>
# If someone did hagalah when a kli needed libun, then the kli is still considered not-kosher, even bdiavad (after the fact).<ref>Mordechai Pesachim n. 563, Darkei Moshe 451:5</ref>

==Koshering a Knife==

#A knife should be koshered with hagalah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7</ref>
#The minhag is to have designated meat and milk knives.<ref>Rama 89:4</ref> Preferably one should have three knives, one for meat, one for milk, and one for parve.<ref>Maharshal (Yam Shel Shlomo Chullin 8:8), Badei Hashulchan 89:111</ref>
#It is forbidden to use a dirty meat knife to cut cheese. It is even forbidden to use it to cut bread which will be eaten with cheese.<ref>Rashba (responsa 1:76), Shulchan Aruch YD 89:4</ref> The same is true vice versa.<ref>Rama YD 89:4</ref>

==Using a non-Kosher Knife==

#It is permitted to use a non-kosher knife on a one-time basis for cold if you first stick it into hard earth ten times.<ref>The Gemara Avoda Zara 76b states that in order to kosher a non-kosher knife, one should just stick it in the ground ten times. Tosfot 76b s.v. hasakin says that even though the Yerushalmi says that one should stick it in the ground three times, one should be strict and do it ten times. Tosfot chullin 8b s.v. vehilchata says that sticking it in the ground cleans the knife from non-kosher fat that got stuck on it. Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7 rules accordingly, that in order to use a non-Kosher knife once for cold, it should be stuck into the ground ten times. Shulchan Aruch notes that this procedure is sufficient even if one wants to use the knife to cut a cold sharp food (such as an onion). The Rama adds that if one wants to use it on a consistent basis, then one must do a proper hechsher. </ref> But in order to use the knife for hot, even once, one needs to do a proper hechsher.
#Similarly, to use a meat knife on a one time basis to cut cold bread that will be eaten with cheese, it is sufficient to stick it in hard earth ten times. However, in order to use a meat knife to cut cheese, one should do a proper hechsher.<ref>The Rama YD 89:4 writes that to kosher a meat knife to be used for cold dairy it is sufficient to stick it in the ground ten times. The Taz 89:6 explains that if one is just going to cut bread for dairy using the knife, it just needs to be cleaned. But if one intends to use it for cheese, then it should be stuck in the ground ten times. However, the Shach 89:22 says that it should be stuck into the ground ten times even to cut bread that will be used for dairy. The Badei Hashulchan 89:108 is strict for the Shach and explains that it is forbidden to cut cheese with a meat knife unless one did a proper hechsher. </ref>
##Some poskim say that if one doesn't have a knife, cleaning the knife with soap is considered the equivalent of sticking it in the ground ten times.<ref>Maadenei HaShulchan (M'taamei Hashulchan YD 89:17 p. 62)</ref>
#If one wants to use a meat knife on a consistent basis for cold dairy, then one must do a hechsher of the knife.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 89:108 based on Rama YD 121:5</ref>

==Using Non-Kosher Utensils==

#It is permitted to use a clean cold non-Kosher utensil to eat cold kosher food on an irregular basis for a one-time use. See footnote regarding earthenware.<ref>*The Ran (Chullin 40b s.v. imlich) asks why a non-kosher earthenware utensil has to be broken, if it ostensibly can be used for cold kosher food. He answers that it must be that there is a rabbinic prohibition not to use the earthenware utensil for cold food, because one might come to use it for hot food. The Ran notes that this is limited to earthenware which can't be kashered, as there's a greater likelihood that you'll come to use it with hot food. The Mordechai (Pesachim no. 565) disagrees with Ran and thinks that this rabbinic prohibition extends to vessels of all materials, that one shouldn't use them with cold, lest one come to use them with hot. Rama YD 121:5 rules that on an irregular basis one may use non-kosher utensils for cold kosher food, but one may not do so on a consistent basis, out of concern for the opinion of the Mordechai. This is also the opinion of Shulchan Aruch YD 94:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, and Kaf Hachaim 94:40.
*Chelkat Binyamin 121:42 says based on the Pri Chadash that one shouldn't use earthenware utensils even for a one-time use, unless you're in a non-Jew's house and there's no possibility to do a hechsher.</ref> Knives have to first be stuck in the ground ten times.<ref>Shach 121:9</ref> See section on using non-kosher knives.
#It is initially (lechatchila) forbidden to place cold kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-Kosher if the container wasn’t washed since the kosher food that goes into the container will have some non-kosher on it and one might forget to wash off the kosher food. If the kosher food is usually washed before being eaten it is permitted to initially place it in a cold pot used for non-kosher.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 91:2 based on the Baal HaItur and Tur</ref>
#It is initially permitted to place kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-kosher if the container was washed.<ref>Shach 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, Kaf HaChaim 91:5. Is there a concern of beliyot when using a utensil for cold?

*The Orchot Chaim states that it is permitted to store spices in a non-kosher utensil since there are no beliyot of non-kosher being transferred by storing the spices in the utensil. The Bet Yosef 105 cites this. The Tur 451 permits storing cold matzah in a chametz utensil.
*However, the Tur 91:2 cites the Baal Haitur who writes that it is forbidden to place meat in a dairy utensil since one might forget to wash it off afterwards.
*''Question'': The Rama (Torat Chatat 17:2 and Darkei Moshe 91) is bothered with this contradiction. He answers 4 answers:
#We are concerned with meat since it is moist but not concerned about spices or matzah which are dry.
#We are concerned for other prohibitions but not chametz.
#We are concerned when the utensil was originally used for hot non-kosher but not if it was used for cold non-kosher (or meat in pot that was originally used for cold dairy).
#We are concerned when the utensil wasn't cleaned well.
*Rama 91:2 implies that he accepts answers 1 and 3 and requires both but Taz 91:3 explains that either is sufficient. Shach 91:3 only accepts the fourth answer.</ref> However, one shouldn’t use non-kosher earthenware utensils even for cold.<ref>Shach 91:3, Pri Chadash 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15. Pri Chadash 91:3 explains that the reason to be strict is that we're concerned that a person is going to use it for hot. However, for a metal utensil we're not concerned for a short usage that one will use it with hot since one would first do hagalah. See Kaf HaChaim 91:10 who permits using non-kosher earthenware utensils that belong to a non-Jew for cold.</ref>
#It is permitted to own a non-kosher utensil and not use it as there’s no concern that you’ll come to use it for a forbidden use.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 91:9. See Chashukei Chemed Yoma 66a who cites the Panim Meirot 1:23 who says that there's no concern that if one owns a non-kosher utensil one will come to use it. However, the Ketav Sofer YD 28 holds that it is a concern. It is similar to the Gemara Yoma 66a and Pesachim 20b where chazal are concerned about holding onto something forbidden because you might use it.
* Rambam Trumot 12:12 implies that there's a prohibition to keep impure trumah and we don't allow keeping it in order to sprinkle on the floor periodically since we're concerned that a person is going to make a mistake and eat it. Mahari Kurkus explains that the rambam held this even though the Gemara Pesachim 20b implies that Bet Hillel isn't concerned for that because in several places the Gemara (Shabbat 17b) is concerned. Bet Halevi 1:52 adds that Sotah 48a is another proof. However, the Rabbenu Chananel Pesachim 20b and Rashba b"k 115b s.v. vtakala hold like Bet Hillel.</ref>

==Frying Pan==

#A frying pan that became non-kosher can only be koshered with libun chamur.<ref>The Rosh (Pesachim Kol Shaah 7) records a dispute between the Ravyah and his grandfather the Raavan whether a frying pan needs libun. The Raavan held it needed libun and is comparable to baking but the Ravyah held it needed hagalah and is comparabale to cooking. The Rosh comments that he agrees with the Ravyah since the oil serves to intervene between the food and the pot. The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 is strict like the Raavan.</ref>
#A frying pan that was used for chametz can be koshered for pesach with libun kal or hagalah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that even though for other isurim a frying pan needs libun chamur, for koshering from chametz to pesach it only needs hagalah. The Biur Hagra YD 121:9 explains that the Shulchan Aruch really holds like the Rosh that a frying pan only needs hagalah, however in general we're strict to require libun chamur. Yet, for pesach since anyway some hold that chametz is hetera baala and certainly hagalah is sufficient for this case we can rely upon that opinion. Yabia Omer YD 10:58:18 and Yalkut Yosef YD 121:3 agree. </ref> See [[Kashering_the_Kitchen_for_Pesach#Pans]] for Ashkenazic minhag and fuller discussion.
# A frying pan that is milk and one wants to make it parve or the opposite, one can kosher it with hagalah or libun kal.<ref>The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that one can kosher a frying pan from meat to milk or parve with hagalah since absorbing meat or milk are permitted and since it is hetera baala (a permitted absorption) it can be removed with hagalah (Avoda Zara 75a). The Shach YD 121:8 quotes the Rama Mpano 96 who says that a frying pan used for non-kosher needs libun since the non-kosher came in contact with the frying pan itself unlike chametz which is cooked in the frying pan with a non-chametz liquid such as water or oil. The Shach concludes that the Rama Mpano implies that if one used a frying pan for milk or meat it would need libun to be koshered. However, Rabbi Akiva Eiger 121:1 asks that either way milk and meat separately are permitted and as such should never require libun. Chelkat Binyamin 121:4 s.v. linyan explains that in fact the Rama Mpano never said that a meat or milk pan needed libun. He only meant a frying pan that was used for meat and milk needs libun. He adds that this could also be the intent of the Shach.</ref> However, if it is used for meat and milk it needs to be koshered with libun.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4, Shach 121:8. See Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:13 and 25 who implies that even if a pot is used for meat and milk within 24 hours it can still be koshered with hagalah since meat and milk is called hetera baala. However, this seems to be at odds with the rishonim. Divrei Shalom 451:98 on Shulchan Aruch Harav and Maharsham 2:42 understand Shulchan Aruch Harav as only discussing liquid milk after meat. In that case hagalah is sufficient because the milk entered as a liquid, but if the meat and milk were both solids entering with heat the pot would require libun. Also, Isur Veheter 58:23 writes explicitly that a meat pot which a drop of milk made it non-kosher needs libun. </ref>
# If it is used for meat and 24 hours later is used for milk it can be koshered with hagalah or libun kal. The opposite is true of the opposite (unless it is used for a sharp food - [[Dvar Charif]]).<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 110 cited by Pitchei Teshuva 121:7</ref>

==Not Switching Between Meat and Milk==

#The Ashkenazic minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk except before Pesach when one is koshering the utensils for Pesach anyway.<ref>Magen Avraham 509:11 writes that the minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk since one might come to make a mistake and forget whether currently it is meat or meat. Pri Megadim E"A 509:11 seems to say that the minhag is to make a utensil non-kosher so that it needs to be koshered and then switch it over from meat to milk. Pri Megadim E"A 451:30 writes that when koshering utensils for Pesach it is permitted to switch them over from meat to milk. Chatom Sofer YD 110 (cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 121:7), Badei Hashulchan 89:112, and [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/871104/Basic-Kitchen-Kashrut-for-Young-Couples Rav Schachter (Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23)] agree. However, the Aruch Hashulchan 89:17 argues with the Magen Avraham that we can't invent gezerot nowadays and there's no issue to kosher from meat to milk.</ref> Sephardim never had this practice.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 509:45, Yabia Omer YD 3:4</ref>
#Some say that it is permitted to kosher a utensil that used to be Parve and now became dairy or meat to become parve again.<ref>Maharsham (responsa 2:241) explains that there was never a minhag in such a case to be strict not to change it over and also there's other factors to be lenient. Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei questions this maharsham.</ref>
#It is permitted to switch over utensils after 12 months have passed.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei citing Maharsham 2:241</ref>
#Some have the practice that if one has a utensil which one wants to switch from meat to milk that one intentionally makes that utensil non-kosher and then it is fine to kosher it and use it for the other type.<ref>Pri Megadim EA 509:11 (cited by Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei), [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/871104/Basic-Kitchen-Kashrut-for-Young-Couples Rav Schachter (Basic Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23)]. Badei Hashulchan questions the Pri Megadim since one might forget to do the koshering altogether.</ref>

==Glass==
#According to Ashkenazim, glass can not be kashered for Pesach. For other prohibitions such as meat and milk it is a dispute whether it does not absorb anything, does absorb and can be kashered, or can not be kashered.<ref>[https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/kashering-glass-part-ii-by-rabbi-chaim-jachter Rabbi Jachter] quotes Rav Schachter holds that glass can be kashered three times, Yachava Daat 1:6, Sereidei Esh 2:36, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:86 hold that glass can absorb but can be kashered, while Shevet Halevi 1:43 holds that glass can not be kashered even for other prohibitions. </ref>
#According to most Sephardim, glass utensils don't absorb any taste and therefore, do not become non-kosher, between meat and milk or chametz and pesach. However, the common practice is to have two sets of dishes, one for milk and one for meat.<ref>Rabbi Mansour on [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/m/halacha.aspx?id=855 dailyhalacha.com] writes that Syrains are lenient but still have two sets of dishes. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 451:39) writes that most Sephardim are lenient but some Persians are strict about this for Pesach but not milk and meat.</ref>

==Sources==
<references />
{{Kashrut}}

Koshering a Kitchen

2024-08-23T20:44:35Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

==Utensils Used for Cold==
# Any vessel that is usually used for cold can be koshered by cleaning it well with cold water.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:1. Rashba Teshuva 1:372, 817, 3:279, and Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. aval hold that we follow the majority of the uses of a utensil to determine how it should be koshered.</ref> Ashkenazim are lechatchila (initially) strict for the opinion that if it was used for non-kosher cold that it should be koshered with hagalah.<ref>Rama 451:25, Mishna Brurah 451:149</ref>
==Hagalah==
# A pot that absorbed something via a liquid medium can be koshered<ref>Does hagalah remove all of the beliyot? Hagalat Kelim p. 27 quotes many who say that hagalah removes all of the beliyot including: Piksei Rabbenu Yechiel Mparis 42, Kol Bo Hagalah, Pri Megadim M”Z 452:4, E”A 467:13. However, the Shoel Umeishiv 6:41 s.v. vheneh questions this and instead posits that hagalah removes most of the beliyot and the rest are batel (nullified). This is why hagalah cannot be done on pesach, as there's no concept of bittul for chametz on pesach, as chametz is assur b'mashehu (even a little bit is forbidden). [This would correspond to the Rashba (cited in Shulchan Aruch YD 99:7) as to why one can use a pot initially after hagalah if that involves nullification.]
</ref> with boiling<ref>Does hagalah need to be 212 F? Hagalat Kelim by Rabbi Tzvi Cohen 10:19 writes that if someone is using steam to do hagalah, the water needs to reach 212 F. Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 128 quotes Rav Moshe as holding that strictly speaking, if one knew that a machine was only used for a certain temperature and not more, then it can be koshered with heating water in it to that temperature. Only initially (lechatchila) do we try to actually boil water even if it wasn't used that way (Rama 451:6); otherwise the rule is kbolo kach polto for hagalah (Raah cited by Shach 121:17).
</ref> water<ref>Rama 452:5 writes that we do hagalah specifically with water; however, after the fact, other liquids are also effective. See Bet Yosef 93:1 who believes there's no difference between using water or milk for hagalah.</ref><ref>When is hagalah effective?
#Rabbenu Tam: When the kli is placed in boiling water, it immediately expunges its forbidden taste and then reabsorbs the water's taste. Hagalat Kelim p. 27 cites that this is the opinion of Tosfot Avoda Zara 76a s.v. mkan, Tosfot Chullin 100b s.v. bshekadam, 108b s.v. shnafal, Smag lavin 78, Rosh end of a”z, pesachim 2:7, Sefer Hatrumah 55, Rashba Chullin 108b, Torat Habayit 4:4, respona 1:262, Ran Chullin end of perek 8, Ritva Chullin 108b quoting Rabbenu Tam, Tur and Rama 452:1.
#Rashbam: The kli first absorbs new taste from the water, and only afterwards does it start to expunge its absorbed taste. According to Rashbam, you would have to wait some time for hagalah to be effective. It isn’t clear how long that is. This is the opinion of Rashbam cited by Tosfot Chullin 108b s.v. shnafal.
#Manhig: The kli absorbs taste from the boiling water right away, and only gives off its taste once it is removed from the boiling water or cools down and is washed. This is the opinion of the Ritva Chullin 108b and Manhig.</ref>
# A pot that is usually used for cooking with liquids, but is sometimes used for roasting without liquids: according to Sephardim, this can be koshered with hagalah, and there's no need for libun, since we follow the majority of its use.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 451:6.
*The Gemara Pesachim 30b concludes that knives only need hagalah for pesach, even though it earlier raises the possibility of needing libun. What is the reasoning of the gemara? The Ran Chidushim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that the knife is sometimes used over the fire, and there was a thought that it should need libun, and the conclusion is that it only needs hagalah. One approach is based on Rashi and Raavad, who hold that chametz is hetera baala, and therefore only hagalah is needed. The other approach, according to the Ramban, that chametz is isura baala, is that we only need hagalah because we follow the majority usage the knife. Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim agrees with the second approach.
*The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that we don’t need to be concerned for a minority of usages. The fact that the Torah establishes categories of different vessels (those used with a cold medium, a hot liquid medium, and directly on the fire), indicates that we follow the majority usage, and don't care about the minority. This is reiterated in 1:817 and 3:279 and Ran Pesachim 8b. The Bet Yosef understands that this is also the opinion of the Rif Pesachim 8b and Rambam Machalot Asurot 5.
*However, the Ravyah holds that we’re concerned for a minority of usages of a utensil. Tosfot Avoda Zara 74b s.v. darash, Hagahot Maimoniyot (Hilchot Hagalah), and Tur 451:6 agree. Shulchan Aruch 451:6 follows the Rashba and Rama 451:6 is concerned for the Ravyah.
*How does Rov Tashmisho work? In other words, if we know that a certain vessel came in direct contact with fire once, how does hagalah suffice to kasher it? The Maharam Chalavah Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata writes that following the main use of a utensil is only effective if we’re unsure if the utensil was ever used for the minority usage. We don't need to be concerned that the vessel was used in an abnormal fashion. This is also the opinion of Tosfot Chullin 8a s.v. shlibna, Meiri Pesachim 30b s.v. hasakinim, and Raah cited by Nemukei Yosef Pesachim 30b.
*However, the Ran Chidushim Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata holds that we follow the majority of usages, even though it is certain that it was in fact used for the other type of usage. Ramban Avoda Zara 76a s.v. umah sh’amru and Rashba a”z 76a s.v. vkatav agree. This is also implied by Rabbenu Dovid Pesachim 30b s.v. vhilchata. Kaf Hachaim 451:100 follows that approach and cites many who agree including: Sharei Kneset Hagedola 451:6, Pri Chadash, Olot Tamid, Eliya Rabba 451:17, Chok Yakov 451:31, Bet Dovid 212, Gan Hamelech 53, Erev Hashulchan 451:11, Chemed Moshe 451:12, and Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:31. Rama Mpano 96, Chazon Ish 119:15 agree. See Darkei Teshuva 121:5 for someone who pasken like the Raah. How can that be explained?
*The Rashba responsa 1:372 writes that the reason that we can follow the majority of uses even though it is known that it was used for another type of use, since once 24 hours have passed, the absorptions taste bad (notain taam lif'gam) and the entire need for koshering is rabbinic. The rabbis established that we should follow the majority of usages. This explanation is reiterated by the Rama Mpano 96.
*Chazon Ish OC 119:15 points out that according to this answer, we would not follow the majority usage for a spice grinder, since a dvar charif (sharp food) extracts tastes even though they weren’t used within 24 hours. However, the Mishna Brurah 451:80 seems to apply the rule of rov tashmisho even to a grinder. Chazon Ish answers that Mishna Brurah refers to a case in which we're concerned that it was used for chametz, but we don’t know for sure that it was actually used for chametz. If we knew for sure that it was used for chametz, then we wouldn't be able to rely upon the majority usage.
*However, there is a small group of rishonim that apply the principle of rov tashmisho even for ben yomo utensils which are biblically forbidden. The Machzor Vitri Hilchot Pesach ch. 4 writes that the torah established the categories of koshering based on the majority usage. [https://books.google.com/books?id=CcdVDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT180&lpg=PT180&dq=%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91+%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%95+%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94+%D7%A1%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90&source=bl&ots=RhBy-LvyzG&sig=ACfU3U1MLaZxsX1byp3l0bG8-4nlp0KLkQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjj7qOu2c_hAhWLTd8KHZDeCJIQ6AEwB3oECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91%20%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%95%20%D7%94%D7%92%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%94%20%D7%A1%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%90&f=false Rav Aryeh Idnason in Haotzer v. 15 p. 189] explains that either the Machzor Vitri holds that taam kikar is derabbanan, or that the Torah categorized utensils based on the majority.</ref> Initially (lechatchila) Ashkenazim are concerned even for a minority of uses, and would require libun in this scenario.<ref>Rama 451:6, Mishna Brurah 451:45</ref>
#Hagalah means immersing the vessel with non-kosher absorption into boiling water on the fire that is bubbling.<ref>
Tur YD 121:3 cites a dispute if hagalah must be performed with a kli rishon that is still on the fire, or if a kli rishon can be used for hagalah even once it's been removed from the fire. Bet Yosef notes that by hilchot Shabbot, whether or not it's still on the fire, we still consider it to be a kli rishon. Bet Yosef explains that the two opinions in the Tur are dependent on whether or not we can learn hagalah from the definition of kli rishon by hilchot Shabbat. The reason not to is because the absorbed taste might only be removed in the way that it entered the keli, namely when it was directly on the fire.
*Hagahot Smak 213 n. 5 writes that it needs to be boiling and not just yad soledet bo. Bet Yosef 452:1 and Shach (Nekudat Hakesef 93:1) quote this. Trumat Hadeshen 1:131, 2:150 agrees.
*Maharshal 26 implies that yad soledet is sufficient for hagalah. Pri Megadim M”Z 452:3 does entertain this possibility. He proves it from the Rambam Maaseh Korbanot 8:12.
*Meor Hashemesh 1:2 p. 507 proves from the language of the Tur that ''rotchin'' is the same as yad soledet, and that is sufficient for hagalah. He says that this is also the opinion of the Rosh Pesachim 2:7. He adds that boiling is only necessary so that the taste doesn't reenter the pot.</ref> Some poskim hold that it always needs to be a bubbling boil, while others hold that it is sufficient even if the pot was removed from the fire in a case of a permitted absorption (''hetera baala'').<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:3 doesn’t resolve this question, but simply writes that it is the same as hilchot pesach. Tur 451:6 only mentions the opinion that hagalah is effective even if it is removed from the fire.
*Bach 451:8 is bothered by this discrepancy in the Tur, and resolves it by saying that the Tur was only lenient if the utensil is used off of the fire.
*Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:4 answers that chametz is hetera baala. Ayin Yitzchak YD 13:3-7 writes the opinion of the Rambam (Maaseh Korbanot 8:14) and Tur is that hagalah for hetera balah is effective even if the kli rishon was removed from the fire. However, for a utensil that was used on the fire, even though it was hetera baala and it can be koshered with hagalah, it would require hagalah with a kli rishon on the fire. He concludes that one can be lenient like the Rambam. (Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes the Kahal Yehuda 121:3 who points out that the Shulchan Aruch implies that he doesn’t accept that answer, since he compared chametz with isura. Also, according to the Mikdash Dovid Kodshim 31:1 or Pri Toar 122:5 there is no proof from the Rambam who is lenient for kodshim specifically.) Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:25 also writes that one can rely on the opinion that hagalah off the fire is sufficient whenever it is hetera baala. Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quotes this also from Emek Sheylah 137:5.
*Rama 452:1 implies that Shulchan Aruch holds that is enough. However, Magen Avraham 452:3, Chok Yakov 452:6, Taz 452:3, Pri Chadash 452:1, Ateret Zekenim 452:2, and Mishna Brurah 452:6 write that there is no such opinion. Bet Yosef meant that you don’t have to concern yourself that if it was boiling and then dipped below boiling that all of the beliyot would return to the kli.</ref> If a knife is only used in hot water off the fire, it can be koshered with hagalah off the fire.<ref>Bach 452:8. Zichron Shaul v. 1 p. 73 explains that this Shulchan Aruch isn’t a proof in general for hagalah. Since knives are only used off the fire they can be koshered that way. Darkei Teshuva 121:49 cites the Yesharesh Yakov who says that only for knives can we use hagalah in a kli rishon off the fire.
* Shulchan Aruch 451:3 writes that knives need hagalah but can be koshered with a kli rishon that was removed from the fire as long as it is boiling. Magen Avraham 451:7 clarifies that it is effective as long as it is yad soledet bo. Similarly, Yalkut Yosef Pesach Moadim Hechsher Kelim Lpesach n. 13 writes you can kosher knives with yad soledet bo even if the pot was removed from the fire. However, Mishna Brurah 451:20 implies that the hagalah is ineffective unless it is actually boiling. (This seemingly can’t mean a bubbling boil since water stops boiling immediately as it is removed from the fire, [https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/380748/why-does-water-stop-boiling-immediately-after-turning-off-the-heat Physics Stackexchange]). </ref>
#Usually it is necessary to kosher a pot on the inside and the rim but if it is used on the outside of the pot such as a ladle it needs to be koshered on both sides.<ref>Magen Avraham 452:11 quoting the Maharil</ref>
#If one has a big pot and can't put it into another pot, one should have a rim added to it, and when the pot boils, the water will splash onto the rim and kosher it. Alternatively, one can boil a pot and drop a rock in, so that the pot boils over the rim.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 452:6</ref>
#If a pot is used on the inside, but became non-kosher on the outside, it needs to be koshered on both sides.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva YD 96:3</ref>
# If one is doing hagalah of iruy on a large item, one should do so bottom up.<ref>Shoel Umeishiv 5:4 writes that if one is pouring hot water on a large item one should do the hagalah bottom up. He explains that if one does the opposite the zeyia from the bottom could rise and infuse non-kosher taste into the top that was already koshered.</ref>
# Hagalah works for pots that were used for liquids, even though in the course of being used they were used for temperatures above 212 degrees.<ref>Hagalat Kelim p. 400 writes that although there’s many cases where cooking involves temperatures above 212 F (such as deep frying in oil, cooking a solid, cooking with a cover so that it pops up because of pressure), it is acceptable to do hagalah with 212 F alone. Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 agrees because we never find in chazal a type of hagalah that needs to be hotter than boiling water.</ref> Additionally, in altitudes where it is possible to boil water at lower than 212, one can use this boiling water (even though it's less than 212 F) for hagalah.<ref>Hagalat Kelim p. 401 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman that hagalah doesn’t need to be at the same temperature that the food entered, and the poskim never distinguished between hagalah at different altitudes.</ref>
# With regards to a pressure cooker, which can cook foods at temperatures higher than 212 F, many poskim hold that the boiling water used for hagalah only needs to be 212 F.<ref>Chut Shani Pesach 10:8 p. 124, Hagalat Kelim p. 400 citing Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Chazon Ovadia n. 2, Betzel Chachma 3:55</ref>
# The utensils put in the boiling water should be left there for a few seconds; some recommend that they be left for ten seconds.<ref>The [https://oukosher.org/passover/articles/kashering-for-passover/ OU] writes that one should leave the utensils in the boiling water for ten seconds, while the [https://www.kof-k.org/articles/040408080457W-21%20Hagolah%20(Rabbi%20Neustadt).pdf Kof K] writes a few seconds. Shaar Hatziyun 452:3 writes that the Tur and Pri Chadash hold that the utensils can be removed immediately, unlike the Taz who says that it needs to be there for some time. Shaar Hatziyun recommends leaving it in for a little bit of time.
*Pri Chadash 452:6 writes that the Ramban Chullin 108b s.v. vrabbenu, Rambam Chametz Umatza 5:24, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. vkach, and Rashba 1:479 hold that the utensil should be left in the boiling water for some unspecified amount of time so that the absorptions can be removed. However, the Tur, Mordechai Chullin 579, and Hagahot Maimoniyot Kushta Chametz Umatza 5:23 hold that the utensils can be removed immediately. Pri Chadash concludes that this is the minhag.
*Meiri Avoda Zara 76a s.v. kshemartichin writes that the utensil needs to be left in the pot long enough for the utensil to heat up (to Yad Soledet Bo). See Sefer Hagalat Kelim who cites this.</ref>

==Libun==
# It is possible to do Libun on Pesach but not hagalah.<ref>Rama 452:1</ref>
# Libun Chamur can be accomplished with a minimum temperature of 752 degrees fahrenheit, because metal would become visibly red hot in the dark at that temperature. Self-clean of an typical oven is 850 degrees and is certainly libun chamur.<ref>Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315</ref>
# Libun Kal is certainly achieved at fahrenheit 451 because paper burns at that temperature.<ref>Rabbi Ribiat in Halachos of Pesach p. 315</ref>
# Libun chamur with a blow torch should be done on each spot for approximately 9 seconds. The could be dangerous and damage the oven thermostat.<ref>Halachos of Pesach by Rabbi Ribiat p. 353</ref>
# Anytime the absorption was permitted the utensil can be koshered with hagalah and doesn't require libun.<ref>Rav Sheshet in Gemara Avoda Zara 76a says that something that is hetera baala doesn't require libun and can be koshered with hagalah. This is the opinion of the Tosfot Avoda Zara 76b s.v. amar, Ran Pesachim 8b s.v. devarim citing Raavad, Maggid Mishna Chametz 5:23 citing Rambam, Rosh Avoda Zara 34, Smag Lavin 77, Kol Bo n. 48 citing Rashba, Rabbenu Meshulam, Yereyim n. 106, Hagahot Maimoniyot Chametz 5:1, Ravyah Pesachim 464, Hagahot Smak 194:3, Raavan Avoza Zara 316, Mordechai Pesachim n. 584, Avoda Zara n. 860, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 509:5, Y.D. 121:4, Shach in Nekudat Hakesef 93:1, and Yabia Omer YD 5:7:7.</ref>
# If someone did hagalah when a kli needed libun it doesn't work even after the fact.<ref>Mordechai Pesachim n. 563, Darkei Moshe 451:5</ref>

==Koshering a Knife==

#A knife should be koshered with hagalah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7</ref>
#The minhag is to have designated meat and milk knives.<ref>Rama 89:4</ref> Preferably one should have three knives, one for meat, one for milk, and one for parve.<ref>Maharshal (Yam Shel Shlomo Chullin 8:8), Badei Hashulchan 89:111</ref>
#It is forbidden to use a dirty meat knife to cut cheese or even bread which will be eaten with cheese.<ref>Rashba (responsa 1:76), Shulchan Aruch YD 89:4</ref> The same is true vice versa.<ref>Rama YD 89:4</ref>

==Using a non-Kosher Knife==

#It is permitted to use a non-kosher knife on a one-time basis for cold if you first stick it into hard earth ten times.<ref>The Gemara Avoda Zara 76b states that in order to kosher a non-kosher knife one should just stick it in the ground ten times. Tosfot 76b s.v. hasakin says that even though the Yerushalmi says three times one should be strict to stick it in the ground ten times. Tosfot chullin 8b s.v. vehilchata says that sticking it in the ground cleans the knife from non-kosher fat that got stuck to it. Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7 rules accordingly that in order to use a non-Kosher knife once for cold it should be stuck into earth ten times. The Rama carefully adds that if one wants to use it on a consistent basis one must do a proper hechsher. </ref> But in order to use the knife for hot one even once one needs to do a proper hechsher.<ref>Rav Huna in Gemara Avoda Zara 76b, Shulchan Aruch YD 121:7. Shulchan Aruch explains that this procedure is sufficient even to cut a cold sharp food (such as an onion).</ref>
#Similarly, to use a meat knife to one time cut cold bread that will be eaten with cheese it is sufficient to stick it in hard earth ten times. However, in order to use a meat knife to cut cheese one should do a proper hechsher.<ref>The Rama YD 89:4 writes that to kosher a meat knife to be used for cold dairy it is sufficient to stick it in the ground ten times. The Taz 89:6 explains that if one is just going to cut bread for dairy use the knife just needs to be cleaned, however, for cheese it should be stuck in the ground ten times. However, the Shach 89:22 says that it should be stuck into the ground ten times even to cut bread that will be used for dairy. The Badei Hashulchan 89:108 is strict for the Shach and explains that it is forbidden to cut cheese with a meat knife unless one did a proper hechsher. </ref>
##Some poskim say that if one doesn't have a knife, cleaning the knife with soap is considered the equivalent of sticking it in the ground ten times.<ref>Maadenei HaShulchan (M'taamei Hashulchan YD 89:17 p. 62)</ref>
#If one wants to use on a consistent basis a meat knife for cold dairy one must do a hechsher of the knife.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 89:108 based on Rama YD 121:5</ref>

==Using Non-Kosher Utensils==

#It is permitted to use a clean cold non-Kosher utensil to eat cold kosher food on an irregular basis for a one-time use. See footnote regarding earthenware.<ref>*The Ran (Chullin 40b s.v. imlich) asks why a non-kosher earthenware utensil had to be broken if it could just have been used for cold uses for kosher food. He answers that it must be that there is a rabbinic prohibition not to use the earthenware utensil for cold because one might come to use it for hot. However, that's only true by earthenware which can't be fixed. On the other hand, the Mordechai (Pesachim no. 565) uses this logic to say that one shouldn't use any material non-kosher utensil for cold lest one come to use it for hot. The Rama YD 121:5 rules that on an irregular basis one may use non-kosher utensils for cold kosher food but not consistently to be concerned for the opinion of the Mordechai. This is also the opinion of Shulchan Aruch YD 94:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, and Kaf Hachaim 94:40.
*Chelkat Binyamin 121:42 says based on the Pri Chadash that one shouldn't use earthenware utensils even for a one-time use unless it is a non-Jew's house and there's no possibility to do a hechsher.</ref> However, knives have another requirement that they first be stuck into the ground ten times.<ref>Shach 121:9</ref> See section on using non-kosher knives.
#It is initially forbidden to place cold kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-Kosher if the container wasn’t washed since the kosher food that goes into the container will have some non-kosher on it and one might forget to wash off the kosher food. If the kosher food is usually washed before being eaten it is permitted to initially place it in a cold pot used for non-kosher.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 91:2 based on the Baal HaItur and Tur</ref>
#It is initially permitted to place kosher food into a cold pot or container that was used for non-kosher if the container was washed.<ref>Shach 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15, Kaf HaChaim 91:5. Is there a concern of beliyot when using a utensil for cold?

*The Orchot Chaim states that it is permitted to store spices in a non-kosher utensil since there are no beliyot of non-kosher being transferred by storing the spices in the utensil. The Bet Yosef 105 cites this. The Tur 451 permits storing cold matzah in a chametz utensil.
*However, the Tur 91:2 cites the Baal Haitur who writes that it is forbidden to place meat in a dairy utensil since one might forget to wash it off afterwards.
*''Question'': The Rama (Torat Chatat 17:2 and Darkei Moshe 91) is bothered with this contradiction. He answers 4 answers:
#We are concerned with meat since it is moist but not concerned about spices or matzah which are dry.
#We are concerned for other prohibitions but not chametz.
#We are concerned when the utensil was originally used for hot non-kosher but not if it was used for cold non-kosher (or meat in pot that was originally used for cold dairy).
#We are concerned when the utensil wasn't cleaned well.
*Rama 91:2 implies that he accepts answers 1 and 3 and requires both but Taz 91:3 explains that either is sufficient. Shach 91:3 only accepts the fourth answer.</ref> However, one shouldn’t use non-kosher earthenware utensils even for cold.<ref>Shach 91:3, Pri Chadash 91:3, Badei Hashulchan 91:15. Pri Chadash 91:3 explains that the reason to be strict is that we're concerned that a person is going to use it for hot. However, for a metal utensil we're not concerned for a short usage that one will use it with hot since one would first do hagalah. See Kaf HaChaim 91:10 who permits using non-kosher earthenware utensils that belong to a non-Jew for cold.</ref>
#It is permitted to own a non-kosher utensil and not use it as there’s no concern that you’ll come to use it for a forbidden use.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 91:9. See Chashukei Chemed Yoma 66a who cites the Panim Meirot 1:23 who says that there's no concern that if one owns a non-kosher utensil one will come to use it. However, the Ketav Sofer YD 28 holds that it is a concern. It is similar to the Gemara Yoma 66a and Pesachim 20b where chazal are concerned about holding onto something forbidden because you might use it.
* Rambam Trumot 12:12 implies that there's a prohibition to keep impure trumah and we don't allow keeping it in order to sprinkle on the floor periodically since we're concerned that a person is going to make a mistake and eat it. Mahari Kurkus explains that the rambam held this even though the Gemara Pesachim 20b implies that Bet Hillel isn't concerned for that because in several places the Gemara (Shabbat 17b) is concerned. Bet Halevi 1:52 adds that Sotah 48a is another proof. However, the Rabbenu Chananel Pesachim 20b and Rashba b"k 115b s.v. vtakala hold like Bet Hillel.</ref>

==Frying Pan==

#A frying pan that became non-kosher can only be koshered with libun chamur.<ref>The Rosh (Pesachim Kol Shaah 7) records a dispute between the Ravyah and his grandfather the Raavan whether a frying pan needs libun. The Raavan held it needed libun and is comparable to baking but the Ravyah held it needed hagalah and is comparabale to cooking. The Rosh comments that he agrees with the Ravyah since the oil serves to intervene between the food and the pot. The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 is strict like the Raavan.</ref>
#A frying pan that was used for chametz can be koshered for pesach with libun kal or hagalah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that even though for other isurim a frying pan needs libun chamur, for koshering from chametz to pesach it only needs hagalah. The Biur Hagra YD 121:9 explains that the Shulchan Aruch really holds like the Rosh that a frying pan only needs hagalah, however in general we're strict to require libun chamur. Yet, for pesach since anyway some hold that chametz is hetera baala and certainly hagalah is sufficient for this case we can rely upon that opinion. Yabia Omer YD 10:58:18 and Yalkut Yosef YD 121:3 agree. </ref> See [[Kashering_the_Kitchen_for_Pesach#Pans]] for Ashkenazic minhag and fuller discussion.
# A frying pan that is milk and one wants to make it parve or the opposite, one can kosher it with hagalah or libun kal.<ref>The Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4 writes that one can kosher a frying pan from meat to milk or parve with hagalah since absorbing meat or milk are permitted and since it is hetera baala (a permitted absorption) it can be removed with hagalah (Avoda Zara 75a). The Shach YD 121:8 quotes the Rama Mpano 96 who says that a frying pan used for non-kosher needs libun since the non-kosher came in contact with the frying pan itself unlike chametz which is cooked in the frying pan with a non-chametz liquid such as water or oil. The Shach concludes that the Rama Mpano implies that if one used a frying pan for milk or meat it would need libun to be koshered. However, Rabbi Akiva Eiger 121:1 asks that either way milk and meat separately are permitted and as such should never require libun. Chelkat Binyamin 121:4 s.v. linyan explains that in fact the Rama Mpano never said that a meat or milk pan needed libun. He only meant a frying pan that was used for meat and milk needs libun. He adds that this could also be the intent of the Shach.</ref> However, if it is used for meat and milk it needs to be koshered with libun.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 121:4, Shach 121:8. See Shulchan Aruch Harav 451:13 and 25 who implies that even if a pot is used for meat and milk within 24 hours it can still be koshered with hagalah since meat and milk is called hetera baala. However, this seems to be at odds with the rishonim. Divrei Shalom 451:98 on Shulchan Aruch Harav and Maharsham 2:42 understand Shulchan Aruch Harav as only discussing liquid milk after meat. In that case hagalah is sufficient because the milk entered as a liquid, but if the meat and milk were both solids entering with heat the pot would require libun. Also, Isur Veheter 58:23 writes explicitly that a meat pot which a drop of milk made it non-kosher needs libun. </ref>
# If it is used for meat and 24 hours later is used for milk it can be koshered with hagalah or libun kal. The opposite is true of the opposite (unless it is used for a sharp food - [[Dvar Charif]]).<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 110 cited by Pitchei Teshuva 121:7</ref>

==Not Switching Between Meat and Milk==

#The Ashkenazic minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk except before Pesach when one is koshering the utensils for Pesach anyway.<ref>Magen Avraham 509:11 writes that the minhag is not to switch over utensils from meat to milk since one might come to make a mistake and forget whether currently it is meat or meat. Pri Megadim E"A 509:11 seems to say that the minhag is to make a utensil non-kosher so that it needs to be koshered and then switch it over from meat to milk. Pri Megadim E"A 451:30 writes that when koshering utensils for Pesach it is permitted to switch them over from meat to milk. Chatom Sofer YD 110 (cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 121:7), Badei Hashulchan 89:112, and [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/871104/Basic-Kitchen-Kashrut-for-Young-Couples Rav Schachter (Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23)] agree. However, the Aruch Hashulchan 89:17 argues with the Magen Avraham that we can't invent gezerot nowadays and there's no issue to kosher from meat to milk.</ref> Sephardim never had this practice.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 509:45, Yabia Omer YD 3:4</ref>
#Some say that it is permitted to kosher a utensil that used to be Parve and now became dairy or meat to become parve again.<ref>Maharsham (responsa 2:241) explains that there was never a minhag in such a case to be strict not to change it over and also there's other factors to be lenient. Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei questions this maharsham.</ref>
#It is permitted to switch over utensils after 12 months have passed.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei citing Maharsham 2:241</ref>
#Some have the practice that if one has a utensil which one wants to switch from meat to milk that one intentionally makes that utensil non-kosher and then it is fine to kosher it and use it for the other type.<ref>Pri Megadim EA 509:11 (cited by Badei Hashulchan 89:4 s.v. shnei), [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/871104/Basic-Kitchen-Kashrut-for-Young-Couples Rav Schachter (Basic Kashrut for Young Couples, min 23)]. Badei Hashulchan questions the Pri Megadim since one might forget to do the koshering altogether.</ref>

==Glass==
#According to Ashkenazim, glass can not be kashered for Pesach. For other prohibitions such as meat and milk it is a dispute whether it does not absorb anything, does absorb and can be kashered, or can not be kashered.<ref>[https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/kashering-glass-part-ii-by-rabbi-chaim-jachter Rabbi Jachter] quotes Rav Schachter holds that glass can be kashered three times, Yachava Daat 1:6, Sereidei Esh 2:36, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:86 hold that glass can absorb but can be kashered, while Shevet Halevi 1:43 holds that glass can not be kashered even for other prohibitions. </ref>
#According to most Sephardim, glass utensils don't absorb any taste and therefore, do not become non-kosher, between meat and milk or chametz and pesach. However, the common practice is to have two sets of dishes, one for milk and one for meat.<ref>Rabbi Mansour on [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/m/halacha.aspx?id=855 dailyhalacha.com] writes that Syrains are lenient but still have two sets of dishes. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 451:39) writes that most Sephardim are lenient but some Persians are strict about this for Pesach but not milk and meat.</ref>

==Sources==
<references />
{{Kashrut}}

Serving Guests

2024-08-23T19:14:05Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

==Guest with Different Standards of Kashrut==
===Utensils===
# It is permitted to eat on the utensils of someone who holds of an opinion regarding kashrut than you don't follow, unless you know that they were used within 24 hours for food that is problematic. The reason is because we assume that generally a pot wasn't used within the last 24 hours, and as such the food made in those pots is fully kosher. The owner doesn't have to kasher his pots, since according to the opinions he follows it is kosher and doesn't need kashering.<ref>Maharalbach 121, Shach YD 119:20</ref>
===Serving Something that Someone Else Holds is Forbidden===
# If someone holds that something is forbidden and you hold that it is permitted, there is a prohibition of <ref>Vayikra 19:14</ref>לפני עוור (placing a stumbling block before a blind person) to serve it to him without telling him about it.<ref>Maharalbach 121, Shach YD 119:20, Raah Yevamot 14</ref>
# If someone doesn't trust a certain hashgacha, and you know for sure that it is a good hashgacha, then you can serve it to him without telling him. If he asks you directly if you served that hashgacha, you can't lie and tell him that you didn't.<ref>Vayitzev Avraham 2:47:5 writes that according to the Maharalbach, it is only considered a problem of lifnei iver to cause him to stumble on something that he holds is forbidden for a halachic reason. When it comes to a halachic reason, each opinion can be authentic in a torah sense because of elu v'elu. However, if he has a mistaken opinion, and it isn't based on a particular opinion or chumra, then there's no lifnei iver if you give it to him, since there's nothing wrong with it. Therefore, if you know for certain that something has a good hashgacha and he is just concerned because of a rumor, then you can give it to him without telling him. Lying if asked is a problem of [[genivat daat]].</ref>
==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Kashrut]]
{{Kashrut}}

Non-Jewish Food Vendors

2024-08-23T18:58:01Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

==General==

#According to Torah law, any time a piece of meat is found and one is unsure whether it is kosher or not, one may rely on the majority. If the majority of butchers in town sell kosher meat, then one may presume that it is kosher. However, the Rabbis forbade any piece of meat that wasn't kept in sight of a Jew. There are a few exceptions to this rabbinic prohibition.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 63:1</ref>
#If a piece of kosher meat left one's eyesight, then it is presumed to be non-kosher unless it has a unique identifying mark, one recognizes its look, and one is certain that it is the same piece of meat. Alternatively, if it was wrapped and sealed then it's ok. <ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 63:1, Yalkut Yosef YD 63:2</ref>

==Nowadays==

#The Ashkenazic minhag is that anytime one leaves a piece of meat and finds it in the same place that one left it, it is presumed to be kosher. <ref>Rama YD 63:2 writes that the minhag is to assume that as long as the piece of meat is in the same place as it was earlier, it is the same piece of kosher meat. Be'er Heitiv YD 63:6 cites a dispute between the Shach who follows the Rama and the Taz who is even more lenient. Aruch HaShulchan YD 63:9 also rules like the Rama.</ref>
#For Sephardim, if one left meat in one's house, and one's windows are closed so that the birds can't come in, or if the meat was covered and remained covered, it is kosher. <ref>Yalkut Yosef YD 63:1</ref>

==Buying Meat From Non-Jews==

#The Rabbis established that it is not permitted to (buy and) eat any meat that a non-Jew has in their possession, even if all the meat stores and slaughterhouses in the area are Kosher. This is even true if it is known that the non-Jew bought the meat from a Jew, because of ''Basar Shenitalem Min Haayin''.<ref>Shach Y.D. 118:5, Chochmat Adam Klal 27:12</ref> However, there are some that disagree with the last point, and believe that if it is known that the non-Jew bought the meat originally from a Jew, then it is okay to (buy and) eat it, if there was no way for the non-Jew to switch the meat.<ref>see the Shach Y.D. 118:5 who quotes the Levush who is Meikil</ref>
#It is okay to buy (Kosher) meat from a non-Jewish vendor if the vendor makes sure to sell them with the proper double-seal from the Jewish distributors, given that this type of double-seal is well-known.<ref>Iggrot Moshe Y.D. 1:56</ref> Rabbi Moshe Feinstein explains that if the store owner switched the meat and forged the double-seal of the Kosher butcher, then he would miss out on selling the pieces of Kosher meat for a more expensive price.<ref>Iggrot Moshe Y.D. 1:56</ref>

==Sources==
<references />
[[Category:Kashrut]]
{{Kashrut}}

Medications

2024-08-23T18:48:30Z

Bchernigoff: edited grammar

[[Image:Medication.png | right | 100 px]]
Nowadays, when one is not feeling up to par, he takes a few medications and with Hashem's help feels better within a couple of days and then goes back to his regular routine. There are many halachic issues with regard to medications which need to be addressed. Is a beracha recited on pleasant tasting medication such as cough syrup? Does one have to recite a beracha on water when ingesting a pill? Can one walk into the bathroom with medicine? Can one take pills on [[Shabbos]]? Is it permitted to take a gel-cap? Can one take liquid medication which is full of flavors? What about vitamins? These issues will be dealt with at length in the upcoming sections.

==Beracha on Medication==
# A beracha is not recited on food which is eaten to heal if one does not have enjoyment from the food. However, if one does have enjoyment from the food, a beracha rishona and achrona (see below) are recited.<ref>Mesechtas Berochos 38a, Tosfas Mesechtas Berochos 36a “k’von,” Meiri Mesechtas Berochos 35b, Tur 204, Shulchan Aruch 204:8, Shulchan Aruch Harav 204:14, Chesed L’alafim 204-205:5, Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82. </ref> Even if one does not want the good tasting food and is only eating it because he is ill, a beracha is recited because he receives enjoyment from it.<ref>Mishna Brurah 43. </ref> Examples of medicines which require a beracha due to their pleasant taste are herbal teas and cough drops.<ref>V’sein Beracha page 200. Refer to Ateres Shlomo 8:page 110. This is the opinion and custom of Harav Pinchus Bodner Shlita (Personal telephone conversation with Harav Bodner Shlita). </ref>

==Medicine mixed with Sweeteners==
# Some say that even if the medicine itself does not have flavor, but is mixed with other ingredients (sweeteners) that have flavor, one still recites a beracha on the medicine.<ref>Opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita as expressed in Vezos Ha’beracha page 113. </ref> The reason for this opinion is because the mixture tastes pleasant and we do not look at the medicine before the taste was placed into it.<ref>Vezos Ha’beracha Birur Halacha page 310. </ref> This is the opinion of many poskim.<ref>Refer to Da’as Torah 204, Vezos Ha’beracha pages 310-311 in depth, opinion of Harav Ovadia Yosef Shlita quoted in Nishmas Avraham (English) page 89:footnote E. </ref>
# Some say that if one consumes a medicine which contains sweeteners (and if not for the need of the medicine one would not consume the sweeteners), then no beracha is required.<ref>Opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha pages 113-114, and in V’sein Beracha page 201:footnote 15.1. See explanation of this opinion in Vezos Ha’beracha page 312. Refer to Pnei Ha’shulchan page 151-152, Nishmas Avraham 1:204:page 91, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 191, Nishmas Avraham 1:page 90 (English), Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. In the Halichos Shlomo [[Yom Kippur]] 5:footnote 42 it states that Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l retracted his previous position with regard to not reciting a beracha on sweetened medication. Refer to Vezos Ha’beracha page 356:9 notes of Harav Forst Shlita on Vezos Ha’beracha. The opinion of Harav Pinchus Bonder Shlita is that no beracha is recited on pleasant tasting cough syrup based on the pesak he heard from Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l (Personal telephone conversation with Harav Bodner Shlita). </ref> Others say no beracha is recited because such sweetener is only a tafel to the actual medication, and if no beracha is recited on the ikur, then one does not recite a beracha on the tafel.<ref>Opinion of Harav Neuwirth Shlita quoted in Nishmas [[Shabbos]] 4:204, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 191. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:pages 282-284 in depth. However, see Mishna Brurah 174:39 and 212:1 who says the halacha is that a beracha is recited on the tafel. See Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 246 who disputes the claim that the reason why no beracha is recited here is because no beracha is recited on the tafel. Refer to Rivevos Ephraim 4:54:39. </ref> Nonetheless, others disagree with this reasoning and maintain that a beracha should be recited even in this situation.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 114, and in V’sein Beracha page 200:footnote 15, opinion of Harav Ovadia Yosef quoted in Yalkut Yosef 204:10:footnote 10, opinion of Harav Feinhandler Shlita (Avnei Yushfei in a personal e-[[mail]]). Refer to Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82, Pischei Halacha (Berochos page 246). Others say that it could be that Harav Elyashiv Shlita held this only in regard to medicine that is thoroughly enjoyed (Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:page 77:footnote 43).</ref> Since there is a dispute in this regard, one should recite a beracha on a different [[shehakol]] food and have in mind to exempt the medicine.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 75. </ref>
# According to all opinions, medicine for children which is sweet like candy would require a beracha.<ref>Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 68:footnote 39 alef. </ref>

==No Beracha Required ==
# One who is forced to eat or drink something does not recite a beracha, even if it tastes pleasant.<ref>Shulchan Aruch {{ibid}}, Kaf Ha’chaim 49, see Magen Avraham 20 Taz 12, Aruch Ha’shulchan 19. Refer to Mishna Brurah 204:44 who maintains if one is forced to eat bread and he is satisfied, he should bentch since it is d’oraisa. </ref>
# A bad tasting food does not require a beracha before eating it.<ref>Bais Yosef, Magen Avraham 19, Mishna Brurah 43, Kaf Ha’chaim 48. </ref>
==How Much to Eat or Drink? ==
# Some poskim are of the opinion that one does not recite a beracha on a pleasant tasting medicine unless one ate a kezayis or drank a reviis of it. The reason for this is that just as one who tastes food does not recite a beracha unless a kezayis or reviis is consumed (Berachot 14a); the same applies for medications, since one does not have intent for eating.<ref>Refer to Shevet Ha’kehusi 3:84:3. </ref> Nonetheless, the poskim do not make this comparison, and therefore a beracha on pleasant tasting medicine would be required regardless of the amount being consumed, since one's intent is to swallow the medicine, as opposed to the "tasting" case where one does not intend to have enjoyment.<ref>Refer to Mikroei Kodesh [[Pesach]] 2:page 144, Halacha U’[[refuah]] page 278, Pischei Halacha (Berochos page 66:footnote 38), Chazzon Ovadia Berochos page 159:footnote 6. </ref>

==Which Beracha Rishona?==
# The Rama<ref>204:11. Refer to Aruch Ha’shulchan 22. </ref> says that any food which a healthy person does not eat requires a [[shehakol]] if taken as medication, regardless of the food's real beracha.<ref>Aruch Ha’shulchan 22. Refer to Mishna Brurah 54. The Shar Ha’tzyion 45 says this applies to medicine which was made from the five grains as well. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284. </ref> Others say one should recite the appropriate beracha.<ref>Magen Avraham 24, Mishna Brurah 55, Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82. </ref> The Mishna Brurah<ref>212:4-5. </ref> maintains that one should avoid this situation when possible.<ref>Some say one should eat the other food before the medicine and then consume the medicine (Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284). </ref>

==Beracha Achrona==
# One who recited a [[shehakol]] on a medication would be required to recite a beracha achrona if the proper shiur was consumed.<ref>Halacha U’[[refuah]] page 278. </ref>
==Listerine Pocketpaks®==
# For years, people have been erroneously consuming Listerine Pocketpaks® without a hechsher, but obviously this product needs a hechsher,<ref>See www.koltorah.org quoting the opinion of Rabbi Chaim Jachter Shlita. </ref> especially since it is digested in the stomach.<ref>Opinion of Harav Yisroel Belsky as expressed in OU document I-98:page 2. </ref> Recently, this product has become available with a hechsher. The question arises if this product requires a beracha prior to placing it in one's mouth. Many people do not recite a beracha. However, even though this product melts in the mouth, it is swallowed and therefore, according to some poskim, a beracha of [[shehakol]] should be recited before placing it in the mouth.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, opinion of Harav Forscheimer Shlita (personal telephone conversation), and Harav Doniel Neustadt Shlita. </ref> Others maintain that a beracha does not need to be recited.<ref>Opinion of Harav Pinchus Bodner Shlita, Harav Ephraim Greenblatt Shlita (Personal telephone conversations). Harav Forst Shlita says that if one takes it to enjoy the flavor, then a beracha is recited. However, if one takes it remove one's bad breath, then no beracha is recited. The opinions of Rabbi Wikler Shlita, Harav Felder Shlita, Harav Fuerst Shlita (personal telephone conversations with the aforementioned rabbonim). This is the opinion of Harav Yisroel Reisman Shlita (as related by Rabbi Shimon Newmark). </ref>
# The company says that there is nothing unsafe with swallowing it, since there is no alcohol in the product.<ref>Based on a conversation with Lisa at the Johnson and Johnson Company. </ref> If one uses a breath mist (with a hechsher), then one does not recite a beracha on it. Instead, one should make a [[shehakol]] on a different food.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita.</ref>
==Pills which are swallowed==
# If there is no flavor in the coating of a pill, then no beracha is recited, because there is no enjoyment from the pill. Additionally, swallowing medication without chewing it first, is not the normal manner of consumption and is not viewed halachically as eating. Furthermore, it is possible that these pills are not fit to be eaten<ref>Refer to Mesechtas Avodah Zarah 67-68, Mesechtas Pesachim 21b and 45b. In addition see Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 103, and Y.D. 155:3. </ref> and therefore do not require a beracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 202:2, see Chazzon Ovadia Berochos page 158, Piskei Teshuvos 204:18:footnote 70. </ref> Some say that this even applies to a pill which has a sweet coating; since one swallows it, no beracha is recited.<ref>Vezos Ha’beracha page 311, Piskei Teshuvos 204:18, see Nishmas Avraham 4:204:footnote 1. With regards to vitamins, refer to Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 68:footnote 39 alef, Beracha Achrona (Boreh Nefoshos) page 201. Refer to Nishmas Avraham (English) pages 89-90 quoting the opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l that a beracha is required. See Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. The same applies to vitamins (Yalkut Yosef 3:page 436). </ref>
# Some say that if one takes a pill in order to lose weight, and by taking the pill it makes one feel full, then one should recite a beracha on the pill, since it takes the place of food. Nonetheless, the poskim suggest that one should make a beracha on something else instead.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 70. </ref>
==Chewable ==
# According to those who recite a beracha on pleasant tasting medications, a beracha should be recited on a chewable pill which has a pleasant taste.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:18:footnote 74. </ref> One should recite a [[shehakol]] on a different food before consuming flavored Tums® that have a hechsher.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita. The Diamond – K hechsher on Tums may be relied upon (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita). One may not use Tums on [[Pesach]] if they are not certified for [[Pesach]] (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita). </ref>
==Intravenous==
# One who receives food in a liquid form from an intravenous injection does not recite a beracha on the food.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 13:35:3, Vezos Ha’beracha page 113 quoting the opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita. </ref>
==Drinking before a Procedure==
Very often, before a medical procedure is performed, the patient is given something to drink. This drink does not necessarily taste good on its own, but sweeteners are added to it. The status of whether a beracha would be recited is dependent on whether or not a beracha is recited on medicine that had sweetener added to it.<ref>Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:page 74:footnote 36. </ref> One who is given something to eat before a procedure would recite a beracha on the food.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 4:204:pages 7-8 quoting the opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l. </ref>

==Drinking Water for Medical Purposes ==
# When one is taking a pill that does not taste pleasant, and wants to drink water to mask the bad taste, no beracha is recited on the water.<ref>Aruch Ha’shulchan 204:18, Pnei Ha’shulchan page 146, Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 64, Binyan Sholom (old print) page 96, Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. Refer to Sheilas Rav 2:18:5. If one places water in liquid medicine to make it taste better, no beracha is recited on the water (Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76). If one needs to drink water for medical purposes and he is not thirsty, he should recite a beracha on something else and have in mind to exempt the water from a beracha (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Eishel Avraham Butchatch 204:7). </ref> The same is true if one is taking a pill and is not thirsty.<ref>Ben Ish Chai Mattos 1:12, Aruch Ha’shulchan 204:18, Miyum Ha’halacha 22, Rivevos Ephraim 6:76, Pischei Halacha Berochos 4:8, Oz Nedberu 10:22. Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l maintains that one may drink more water than necessary for a pill, and a beracha would not be required on that water (Ve’aleihu Lo Yeibol 1:pages 110-111). </ref>
# Before a woman goes for an ultrasound/sonogram, she is asked to drink water. No beracha is recited on the water.<ref>Refer to Yufei Leleiv 204:10, Sdei Chemed Berochos 33:page 260, Me’am Loez Yisro 247:page 580, Pnei Ha’shulchan page 146, Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76. </ref> It would seem that a nursing woman, who needs to drink a lot of water, would not recite a beracha on the water if she is not thirsty.<ref>Refer to Toras Hayoledes 62:3, Beracha Achrona page 196:5.</ref> However, others maintain that she should take food whose beracha is [[shehakol]] and exempt the beracha on the water.<ref>Toras Hayoledes {{ibid}}. </ref>
# Many times, after one brushes his teeth or rinses with mouthwash, he drinks water to rinse out his mouth. One does not recite a beracha on such water.<ref>Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76.</ref>
# If one has a sore throat and drinks water to clear his throat, it would seem that a beracha is not recited.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita.</ref> (In all the above situations, if one is thirsty, a beracha is recited). One who drinks a tasty beverage to take his pill, would recite a beracha on the beverage.<ref>Chesed L’alafim 204-205:4, Mishna Brurah 204:42, Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111, Yalkut Yosef 204:page 436. </ref>

==Medicine mixed with a food or water==
# It is very common to take a powdered medicine and mix it with a food or water. Some say that since the food which the medicine is mixed into is tafel, no beracha is recited. Nonetheless, others say that one should recite a beracha on the mixture.<ref>Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:pages 78-79. </ref> If the food (not medicine) is not a [[shehakol]],<ref>For example chunky applesauce. </ref> the Rama<ref>212:1. </ref> holds the beracha is a [[shehakol]] regardless of the beracha of the food, while others argue with this ruling.<ref>Refer to Magen Avraham 4, Gr’a, Mishna Brurah 4-5, 10, see Taz 7. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284. </ref> The Mishna Brurah<ref>212:4-5. </ref> maintains that one should avoid this situation when possible.<ref>Some say one should eat the other food before the medicine and then consume the medicine (Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284). </ref>

==Medicine taken during a Meal==
# When one consumes a medicine during a meal, a separate beracha is required since the medicine is not part of the meal.<ref>Shevet Ha’kehusi 3:78. </ref>

==Medicine in Pocket While Sleeping ==
# Food that was in one's pocket while he was sleeping may be eaten.<ref>Salmas Chaim 2:7, Rivevos Ephraim 4:7, Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:242, see Yufei Leleiv Y.D. 3:116:6, Yabia Omer Y.D. 1:9:23.</ref> The same halacha goes for medicine that was in one's pocket.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 17:35, Rivevos Ephraim 6:4, Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:245, Tosfas Orah page 421:3, see Nezer Ha’chaim page 217:165, Doleh U’mashka page 367.</ref>

==Storing food under a bed==
# Since there is ruach ra'ah under a bed, one should not store food under a bed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 116:5. </ref> However, one is allowed to store medicine under a bed and there is no concern of ruach ra'ah.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 17:32. Some say that if it's a medication which one recites a beracha on because of its pleasant taste, then it should not be placed under a bed (Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:245, see 3:229:2). </ref>

==Taking Medicine into the Bathroom ==
# It is permitted for one to walk into the bathroom with a pill etc.<ref>Be’er Moshe 8:41. </ref> Additionally, it is permitted to keep medicines in a medicine cabinet that is in the bathroom,<ref>Rivevos Ephraim 1:8:2, 2:6, Teshuvos V’hanhugos 1:11, Be’er Moshe 8:41. </ref> but one should not take his medicine with water in a bathroom.

==Reciting a Tefilla before taking Medication ==
# Some have a custom before taking medication to recite a yehi ratzon that all should be well.<ref>Refer to Shulchan Aruch 230:4, Magen Avraham 6, Mishna Brurah 6. Some say saying the yihiy ratzon exempts one from the beracha that one would recite on a sweet medication (Refer to Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111, Nishmas Avraham 204:page 91). </ref> This [[tefilla]] may be recited on [[Shabbos]] and is not a concern of asking for personal needs on [[Shabbos]].<ref>Refer to Shar Ha’tzyion 230:8, Bakashas B’[[Shabbos]] page 27:footnote 15. See Betzel Hachuchma 5:41.</ref>

==Taking Medicine on Shabbos ==
see [[Medicine on Shabbat]]

==Taking Pills on a Fast Day ==
# On a fast day, if someone is not feeling well and wants to take a pill, it's permitted to do so. Some say that one should wrap the pill in a tissue before swallowing it.<ref>Halichos Shlomo Moadim 2:13:footnote 8. </ref> Some poskim say that one may not use water to swallow a pill.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 550:4.</ref> (However, if one's doctor instructs him to take a pill on a fast day, then even according to this opinion, one may use a little water).<ref> Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]] etc) 16:3, Nishmas Avraham 5:page 46. </ref> Others say that if one cannot take a pill without water, then one may use a little water.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Teshuvos V’hanhugos 3:156. </ref> One should avoid this if possible on [[Tisha BeAv]] and on [[Yom Kippur]], since using water in order to swallow a pill is forbidden.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Teshuvos V’hanhugos 3:156.</ref> One is permitted to take a medication before a fast if it will enable him to have an easier fast.<ref>Nechamas Yisroel 27:22. </ref>
# There is a discussion in the poskim if one is allowed to use mouthwash on the morning of a fast day. Some poskim are stringent,<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Kinyan Torah 2:49:2, Modanei Yeshurin page 108, Chai Ha’Levi 5:48, Divrei Chachumim page 166:471 quoting the opinion of Harav Sheinberg Shlita. Some say if there is a need, brushing ones teeth is permitted (Divrei Chachumim Ibid). </ref> while others say that if one will have bad breath then it is permitted.<ref>Be’er Moshe 8:94. Refer to Minchas Yitzchok 4:109. </ref>
# Taking Listerine Pocketpaks® (that have a hechsher) is not permitted on a fast day, since one swallows the liquid which melts in the mouth.

==Consuming Gelatin and Gel-caps ==
# When one walks down the aisles in a pharmacy, he may see many pills which contain a [[gelatin]] coating. This issue involves the discussion of [[gelatin]]. Below we will discuss what [[gelatin]] is, whether or not it's kosher and how it applies to ingesting gel-caps.

==What is Gelatin?<ref>Gelatin comes from the Latin word “gelatus” which means stiff or frozen. </ref>==
#[[Gelatin]] is a protein which is derived from a naturally occurring protein known as collagen. Collagen is the component of animal connective tissue, bones, sinews and skin. [[Gelatin]] does not have any taste to it. [[Gelatin]] is widely used in the pharmaceutical industry to coat capsules as well as hold tablets together. In addition, [[gelatin]] is used in marshmallows, yogurt, ice cream, jello,<ref>Refer to [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 10-14. </ref> to remove cloudiness or haze in apple juice,<ref>www.oukosher.org. </ref> in gummy bears, throat lozenges, frostings, protein supplements, and sugar glazes.<ref>Star-K in Kashrus Kurrents in an article by Rabbi Mushell. This article can be seen at http://www.star-k.org/kashrus/kk-palate-gelatin.htm.</ref>

==How is it Manufactured? ==
# The source of [[gelatin]] is almost always the bones or hides of non-kosher animals. To improve the quality of the process, the raw material is pretreated by soaking the hard bones in a mixture of lime and water for 70-120 days. Soft bone and hides are treated with a five percent concentration of mineral acids for ten to thirty hours. [[Gelatin]] is then extracted from the pretreated material in a process which is like [[cooking]]. The bones are warmed in a series of runs at increasing temperatures. Eventually, [[gelatin]] liquor is formed, which is then filtered and evaporated to remove the water and concentrate the liquor. The liquor is then cooled to form a gel. The gel is dried and cut into desired shapes.<ref>Refer to Medicines and Kashrus page 16, [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 15-22 in great depth, Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11. See Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 67:footnote 2 who maintains that most [[gelatin]] today is from pig skins. </ref>
# The poskim discuss many reasons why consuming [[gelatin]] may be permitted. Each one will be dealt with below.

==Bones from non-Kosher animals==
# The Torat Kohanim<ref>Parshas Sheminei 2:4. </ref> says that the posuk "from non-pure animals one should not eat their flesh"<ref>Vayikra 11:8. </ref> excludes bones, sinews, and hooves. There is a discussion if there is no issur at all, or if there is an issur d'rabanan to consume the above items. The Rambam<ref>Hilchos Machalas Asuros 4:18. Refer to Rashi Vayikra 11:8 “mivsaram.” See Kashrus pages 245-249.</ref> is of the opinion that "one who eats from a non-kosher animal, it's skin, bones, sinews, horns, hooves, or nails, even though they are forbidden, is excused from punishment." It seems from the opinion of the Rambam that bones are forbidden d'rabanan, while others maintain that Rambam holds that there isn't even an issur d'rabanan.<ref>Refer to Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:27 (end) page 44 who says [[gelatin]] is a sofuk issur. </ref> The opinion of Tosfot,<ref>Mesechtas Avodah Zarah 69a “ha’hu.” Refer to Rosh Avodah Zarah 5:11. </ref> who discusses permitting bee legs, implies that bones are indeed permitted. The opinion of some poskim is that the Rambam, when implying that an issur d'rabbanan exists for bones, was referring to soft bones which have some moisture to it, but hard and dry bones are permitted even according to the Rambam.<ref>Refer to Achiezer 3:33:5, Introduction of the Tzitz Eliezer volume 4 where he brings the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l. Some say there are no commercially made [[gelatin]] that come from hard bones today (Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 69). </ref>

==The Gelatin has changed ==
# The Mishna Brurah<ref>O.C. 216:7, see Magen Avraham 3. See OU document P-86 who says that fermentations are not considered kitniyos sh’nishtana. </ref> and others<ref>Shiurei Knesses Hagedolah 216:7, Rosh (Teshuvos) klal 24:6, Buei Chai Y.D. 103. </ref> say regarding "musk," which is a byproduct of blood that is found in the neck of a deer, we can consider it "changed," since the blood is turned into a new entity. Many poskim follow this opinion.<ref>Refer to Rosh Mesechtas Berochos 6:38, Mishna Brurah {{ibid}}. Refer to Magen Avraham O.C. 216:3, Taz 2. </ref> Using the same line of reasoning, some poskim permit the use of [[gelatin]] since it is totally changed from it original state.<ref>Refer to Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11:15, Tzitz Eliezer’s opinion expressed in the introduction to volume 4, see Melamed L’hoyel 2:35. </ref> Others are not convinced that one can draw a parallel between musk and [[gelatin]].<ref>Refer to Achi Ezer 3:33:5, Tzitz Eliezer {{ibid}} quoting the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Yeishiv Moshe page 165. </ref>

==Dried out Stomach / Gelatin ==
# The Rama<ref>Y.D. 87:10, see Shach 114:21. Refer to Pischei Teshuva 87:19, 21. </ref> says that an animal's stomach lining which was salted and dried out so that it becomes like a piece of wood may be filled with milk, since it does not retain any taste of meat.<ref>See Shach 87:33 who says this applies to other organs as well, but lechatchila (initially) this should not be done (Be’er Heitiv 27, see Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham 33). Refer to Achi Ezer 3:33:5 who says that the Shach does not apply to hard bones. Some say that this does not apply when a product is dried in a modern facility (Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 72:footnote 14). </ref> The same would apply to [[gelatin]] which is completely dried out.<ref>Opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l quoted in Kashrus and Medicines page 53:footnote 20, see Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11 in depth. </ref>
# If non-kosher food becomes completely dried out like wood, but later becomes edible again, is it permitted to eat? Do we view it as having fundamentally changed, and it's therefore permitted, or do we say that once it becomes edible again, its original non-Kosher status returns? Some say that once the product has been completely dried out, even if it later becomes edible again, it does not regain its non-kosher status.<ref>Refer o Shach Y.D. 114:21, Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 87:20, Nodeh B’Yehuda Y.D. 26, Aruch Ha’shulchan Y.D. 87:43, Achiezer 2:11, 3:33:5, Har Tzvi Y.D. 83, opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l (Edos L’Yisroel page 132), Orchos Habayis page 29. </ref> Others are stringent in this regard.<ref>Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham Y.D. 87:33, Chasam Sofer Y.D. 81, see Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:37, 2:27, Kovetz Teshuvos 1:73:page 107. See Mishnas Rav Aron 1:17:2. </ref>

==Contemporary Opinions==
# The opinion of the Achiezer<ref>2:11, 3:33:5. </ref> and others<ref>Refer to [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 95-119 in depth, Tzitz Eliezer introduction to volume 4 quoting the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l, Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11 in depth, Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l adds until now (1951) it has been accepted that [[gelatin]] is not permitted. Therefore he is concerned about permitting it. </ref> is that it's permitted to consume [[gelatin]]. The opinion of Harav Henkin zt"l<ref>Edos L’Yisroel page 177. </ref> is that since this matter has not been decided conclusively, one should be stringent. This is the opinion of Harav Moshe Feinstein zt"l<ref>Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:27 (end). </ref> and others as well.<ref>Mishnas Rav Aron 17, Kovetz Teshuvos 1:73:page 107, Medicines and Kashrus pages 16-17 quoting other poskim.</ref> The opinion of the Israeli Rabbinate is that the consumption of [[gelatin]] is permitted,<ref>Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 66:footnote 1. One who moves to Eretz Yisroel should ask if he can follow their opinion. </ref> while the Mehadrin kosher certification in Eretz Yisroel does not permit [[gelatin]].<ref>Kashrus page 349. </ref> The major kashrus organizations in the United States do not allow non-certified [[gelatin]].<ref>The Laws of [[Pesach]]: A Digest 2006 page 602. </ref> (The above discussion does not apply to taking gel-caps, as this will be discussed below).

==Status of Kosher Gelatin ==
# [[Gelatin]] made from a kosher source is considered pareve.<ref>Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:37, 2:27, Mishnas Rav Aron 1:16. </ref> Kosher [[gelatin]] is [[gelatin]] made from fish<ref>One may eat this together with meat as well, and we are not concerned about the halacha of refraining from eating fish and meat together (Mesechtas Pesachim 76b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 116:2). Additionally, it is botel b’shishim. Some say that the whole concern is limited to eating the flesh of fish with meat, but doesn't extend to fish skins nor bones. Additionally, the [[gelatin]] made from fish (and other sources) does not have a flavor (Star–K Kashrus Kurrents in an article by Rabbi Mushell). </ref> or glatt kosher beef hides.

==Gel Caps - Not in the Normal Manner==
# One who is sick is permitted to eat non-kosher food in an unusual manner.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:3, Shach 14, Mishna Brurah O.C. 466:1. An example of this is giving someone non-kosher food with an intravenous injection. The reason why it's ok is because eating forbidden foods in an unusual fashion is rabbinically forbidden, and the rabbis waived the prohibiton for someone who is sick. However, when it comes to basar b'chalav (a mixture of meat and milk) and kelai ha'kerem (a mixture of species in a vineyard), it is forbidden from the Torah to consume them in an unusual fashion (since the Torah doesn't use the lashon of "achilah" when forbidding them to be eaten, see Pesachim 24b-25a). Therefore, it would be forbidden for a sick person to consume either basar b'chalav or kelai ha'kerem, even in an unusual fashion. </ref> Based on this, some poskim think that a sick person may swallow a pill made from a [[gelatin]] coating, as swallowing is not the usual manner of eating.<ref>Opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l quoted in Edos L’Yisroel page 132, opinion of Harav Shachter Shlita as expressed in OU document I-97. He adds that the gel-caps have no taste to them and are nifsal from feeding to a dog. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/894931/rabbi-hershel-schachter/berachos-73-38b-39a-ta-am-matzah-and-maror-non-kosher-pills-kavush-kemevushal-kezayis-beriah/ Rav Schachter (Brachot Shiur 73 min 18-30)] ruled that a sick person is strictly speaking permitted to take non-kosher pills. If kosher ones are available, then a person should preferably take those, in order to avoid the spiritual detriments of consuming non-kosher food. (This is similar to what Rama Yoreh Deah 81:7 writes about a Jewish baby suckling from a non-Jewish woman. Even though it's strictly speaking permitted, the Rama advises that it be avoided in order to obviate "timtum ha'lev", negative spiritual effects of non-kosher food). Rav Schachter explained that if a person is a choleh shein bo sakana (someone who cannot function normally because of his sickness, such as being bedridden from a migraine), then it's certainly permitted to take non-kosher pills, since it is shelo kderech achilato (an unusual manner of eating). Beyond this, Rav Schachter said that gelatin pills are totally permitted, since they are nifsal machila (unfit for consumption), and even if they're reconstituted and made fit for eating, they aren't considered non-kosher (Chavot Daat YD 103). There's no achshevei (a prohibition that comes from the fact that a person subjectively grants significance to something that's objectively unfit for consumption) since it is eaten in a reconstituted form and not when it's mixed with other ingredients (Rav Chaim Ozer 3:31). According to Rav Schachter, this is why Rav Soloveitchik was lenient to allow one to take non-kosher pills. Also, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1525&st=&pgnum=295 Rabbi Yitzchak Abadi in Or Yitzchak 1:24] permits all medicines that are bitter or don't have a taste since they aren't food and are considered nifsal machila.
*See Yachava Daat 2:60 who assumes that if medicine doesn't taste good then it's considered shelo kderech achilato, and not nifsal machila.
*[https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/many-medications-encased-gelatin-capsules-may-used/?category Rav Belsky] held that hard capsules can be eaten by a choleh, and that soft capsules can be eaten in a tissue paper. This is only when there are no alternatives.</ref> However, there are poskim who maintain that swallowing a pill is considered a regular manner of consumption.<ref>Refer to Nodeh B’Yehuda Y.D. 35, Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 155:6, Har Tzvi Y.D. 97, opinions of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l and Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Medicines and Kashrus page 57:footnote 17, Yeishiv Moshe page 165, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 169, Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]]) 1:page 69. This is the opinion of Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita quoting the opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l, see www.koltorah.org. </ref> Others are lenient and maintain that swallowing a pill is considered an unusual manner of eating.<ref>Halichos Shlomo 1:17:1 (although he is quoted in the footnote above as saying otherwise), see Toras Chaim (Chullin 120) who is lenient</ref> Additionally, even those who are stringent by [[gelatin]], would be lenient by medicines. However, according to those who are strict about [[gelatin]], one who only has a headache<ref>Refer to Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]]) pages 71-72 who is unsure if this should be permitted with a slight pain. See Minchas Shlomo 1:17:3. </ref> or a slight discomfort<ref>This does not apply to one who is bedridden (Halichos Shlomo Moadim [[Pesach]]) pages 71-72:8. The Shach 13 says this heter of the Rama is even for a healthy person. See Mishnah L’melech Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah 5:8 in depth, Zera Emes 2:48. Refer to Pri Megadim M.Z. O.C. 328:11, Shagas Aryeh 74, Binas Adom 52:page 86, Shevet Ha’Levi 7:135 who argue. Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita maintains if one has a headache he should not swallow gel-caps without wrapping it in a tissue. </ref> should take a pill which has no [[gelatin]] or wrap the gel-cap in a tissue.<ref>Refer to Mesora 14:page 92. Others say that the custom is to be lenient even if someone only has a headache (Chai Ha’Levi 3:111:2). </ref>

==Children's Medication==
# Liquid medicines for children are generally sweet. If it contains glycerin, and one doesn't doesn't know if it's the kosher type of gelatin, one shouldn't use the medicine until one first dilutes it with 12 ml of another food for every 1 ml of medicine.<ref>Rabbi Dovid Heber in [https://www.star-k.org/articles/articles/medicine/452/a-kashrus-guide-to-medications-vitamins-and-nutritional-supplements Kosher Kurrents 2005] wrote that glycerin in medicines is a safek deoritta, since much of it is made from animals, even though some of it is made from plants. However, since it is only a safek, it is permitted to be mevatel (nullify) it. One can do so if one dilutes the medicine in 1 to 12 of another food, and you won't lose the potency of the medicine. See Mesorah Journal v. 7 pp. 91-97 by Rabbi Dovid Heber for a potential justification for giving medicines to children even if there are non-kosher ingredients. His argument is as follows: There is a machloket rishonim between rashba and rambam whether or not it's permitted to feed an issur derabanan to a child (Bet Yosef OC 343). It might only be an isur derabbanan if it is a chatzi shiur in a tarovet. Also the isur is only a safek isur. Therefore, possibly there's a safek safeka, safek if it is a muter glycerin and if it is asur perhaps it is derabbanan (chatzi shiur btarovet). On the rabbinic level it is muter since it is a safek derabbanan. Additionally, a child is a choleh for whom some allow feeding a derabbanan isur. Either way it is a leniency based on complex factors.
*[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/731730/rabbi-daniel-stein/רפואות-שנתערבו-בהם-גליצערי-ן/ Rabbi Daniel Stein] in an article permits children's medicines with glycerins for a number of reasons: 1) If the taste is bad even though there's other flavors added and it leaves a bad aftertaste perhaps that's considered nifsal machila. It seems difficult because donkey urine, ear wax, and mucus aren't considered nifsal machila (RSZA in Minchat Shlomo 1:17, Halichot Shlomo Nissan ch. 4 Dvar Halacha 9 p. 72). 2) Since it doesn't taste good, it might be shelo kderech achila. If this is the case, then it'd be permitted for a sick person. 3) There's a safek if they're safek made from plants. 4) Isur Shenishtana, since it changed from the taste and look of animal fat. 5) Maybe made inedible in the processing. 6) If its taste is masked by the other flavors, you only need bitul brov since it doesn't have any taam and we can use kefilah. 7) It is only chatzi shiur of isur in a taarovet and for a sick person perhaps it is muter. He quotes Rav Schachter and Rav Willig as agreeing with him.</ref> However, the [https://www.star-k.org/resource/list/RR8I4NNG/Pain-Relievers-and-Fever-Reducers Star-K has an updated list] of kosher children's medicines, which as of December 2018 includes Infant and Children's Advil and Tylenol. See [https://www.star-k.org/resources_medicine here] for more brands or medicines.

==Toothpaste and Mouthwash==
# There are ingredients in some toothpastes which are non-kosher animal products, such as glycerin. Nonetheless, many poskim are lenient to allow a person to use such toothpastes since the non-kosher ingredients are inedible, mixed with kosher ingredients, and a person doesn't intend to eat the toothpaste but rather to brush with it, which is the halachic equivalent of tasting.<ref>Har Tzvi 95 was lenient regarding non-kosher toothpastes because the ingredients were processed and became inedible, were mixed with kosher ingredients, and also a person is jut tasting the toothpaste and spitting it out. [http://www.tzohar.org.il/?p=2422 tzohar.org] quotes Ama Dvar p. 155 quoting Rav Mordechai Eliyahu who agreed. They also quote Mishneh Halachot 9:153 who disagreed. [https://oukosher.org/blog/consumer-kosher/kashruth-issues-of-toothpaste/ OU] wrote that some rabbis don't feel that one can rely on the Har Tzvi nowadays since the toothpastes have a good taste. But others still rely on the Har Tzvi. They cited Rav Henkin responsa 75 who mostly agreed with the Har Tzvi, but wouldn't be lenient with toothpastes with glycerin.</ref>
# Some say that one shouldn't use mouthwash with glycerin in it, since one might swallow some and glycerin can be made from non-kosher animals.<ref>Rav Belsky (cited in the article "Kashrut Rulings From Rabbi Belsky ZT"L" p. 37) held that since people sometimes swallow mouthwash, it's forbidden to use if there's a non-kosher ingredient, similar to Taz 98:2. Rav Belsky didn't consider mouthwash to be considered inedible.</ref> Others are lenient but still recommend getting a kosher one if available. See [https://www.crcweb.org/OTCMedicineReport.pdf CRC's list] for recommended mouthwashes and toothpastes.<ref> [https://www.ok.org/kosherspirit/fall-2007/students-questions/#:~:text=a%20kosher%20symbol%3F-,Answer%3A,not%20require%20a%20kosher%20symbol. The OK] is lenient on mouthwash and lipstick since they are not consumed. [https://www.crcweb.org/OTCMedicineReport.pdf CRC] quotes Rav Gedalya Dov Schwartz as holding that mouthwash doesn't need a hechsher but it is preferable to get one if it is possible. [https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/do-dental-products-require-a-hechsher-part-ii-the-kashrut-of-toothpaste-and-mouthwash-year-round-and-pesach-by-dr-ephraim-rudolph-98 Rav Jachter] quotes Rav Schachter as holding that mouthwash is considered inedible and therefore permitted even without a hechsher.</ref>

==Credits==
# Special thanks to Rabbi Moishe Dovid Lebovits Rabbinical Administrator for KOF-K Kosher Supervision and author of Halachically Speaking for this article. To reach the author please email mlebovits@kof-k.org.

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Kashrut]]
{{Kashrut}}

Medications

2024-08-23T16:05:39Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

[[Image:Medication.png | right | 100 px]]
Nowadays, when one is not feeling up to par, he takes a few medications and with Hashem's help feels better within a couple of days and then goes back to his regular routine. There are many halachic issues with regard to medications which need to be addressed. Is a beracha recited on pleasant tasting medication such as cough syrup? Does one have to recite a beracha on water when ingesting a pill? Can one walk into the bathroom with medicine? Can one take pills on [[Shabbos]]? Is it permitted to take a gel-cap? Can one take liquid medication which is full of flavors? What about vitamins? These issues will be dealt with at length in the upcoming sections.

==Beracha on Medication==
# A beracha is not recited on food which is eaten to heal if one does not have enjoyment from the food. However, if one does have enjoyment from the food, a beracha rishona and achrona (see below) are recited.<ref>Mesechtas Berochos 38a, Tosfas Mesechtas Berochos 36a “k’von,” Meiri Mesechtas Berochos 35b, Tur 204, Shulchan Aruch 204:8, Shulchan Aruch Harav 204:14, Chesed L’alafim 204-205:5, Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82. </ref> Even if one does not want the good tasting food and is only eating it because he is ill, a beracha is recited because he receives enjoyment from it.<ref>Mishna Brurah 43. </ref> Examples of medicines which require a beracha due to their pleasant taste are herbal teas and cough drops.<ref>V’sein Beracha page 200. Refer to Ateres Shlomo 8:page 110. This is the opinion and custom of Harav Pinchus Bodner Shlita (Personal telephone conversation with Harav Bodner Shlita). </ref>

==Medicine mixed with Sweeteners==
# Some say that even if the medicine itself does not have flavor, but is mixed with other ingredients (sweeteners) that have flavor, one still recites a beracha on the medicine.<ref>Opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita as expressed in Vezos Ha’beracha page 113. </ref> The reason for this opinion is because the mixture tastes pleasant and we do not look at the medicine before the taste was placed into it.<ref>Vezos Ha’beracha Birur Halacha page 310. </ref> This is the opinion of many poskim.<ref>Refer to Da’as Torah 204, Vezos Ha’beracha pages 310-311 in depth, opinion of Harav Ovadia Yosef Shlita quoted in Nishmas Avraham (English) page 89:footnote E. </ref>
# Some say that if one consumes a medicine which contains sweeteners (and if not for the need of the medicine one would not consume the sweeteners), then no beracha is required.<ref>Opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha pages 113-114, and in V’sein Beracha page 201:footnote 15.1. See explanation of this opinion in Vezos Ha’beracha page 312. Refer to Pnei Ha’shulchan page 151-152, Nishmas Avraham 1:204:page 91, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 191, Nishmas Avraham 1:page 90 (English), Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. In the Halichos Shlomo [[Yom Kippur]] 5:footnote 42 it states that Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l retracted his previous position with regard to not reciting a beracha on sweetened medication. Refer to Vezos Ha’beracha page 356:9 notes of Harav Forst Shlita on Vezos Ha’beracha. The opinion of Harav Pinchus Bonder Shlita is that no beracha is recited on pleasant tasting cough syrup based on the pesak he heard from Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l (Personal telephone conversation with Harav Bodner Shlita). </ref> Others say no beracha is recited because such sweetener is only a tafel to the actual medication, and if no beracha is recited on the ikur, then one does not recite a beracha on the tafel.<ref>Opinion of Harav Neuwirth Shlita quoted in Nishmas [[Shabbos]] 4:204, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 191. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:pages 282-284 in depth. However, see Mishna Brurah 174:39 and 212:1 who says the halacha is that a beracha is recited on the tafel. See Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 246 who disputes the claim that the reason why no beracha is recited here is because no beracha is recited on the tafel. Refer to Rivevos Ephraim 4:54:39. </ref> Nonetheless, others disagree with this reasoning and maintain that a beracha should be recited even in this situation.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 114, and in V’sein Beracha page 200:footnote 15, opinion of Harav Ovadia Yosef quoted in Yalkut Yosef 204:10:footnote 10, opinion of Harav Feinhandler Shlita (Avnei Yushfei in a personal e-[[mail]]). Refer to Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82, Pischei Halacha (Berochos page 246). Others say that it could be that Harav Elyashiv Shlita held this only in regard to medicine that is thoroughly enjoyed (Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:page 77:footnote 43).</ref> Since there is a dispute in this regard, one should recite a beracha on a different [[shehakol]] food and have in mind to exempt the medicine.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 75. </ref>
# According to all opinions, medicine for children which is sweet like candy would require a beracha.<ref>Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 68:footnote 39 alef. </ref>

==No Beracha Required ==
# One who is forced to eat or drink something does not recite a beracha, even if it tastes pleasant.<ref>Shulchan Aruch {{ibid}}, Kaf Ha’chaim 49, see Magen Avraham 20 Taz 12, Aruch Ha’shulchan 19. Refer to Mishna Brurah 204:44 who maintains if one is forced to eat bread and he is satisfied, he should bentch since it is d’oraisa. </ref>
# A bad tasting food does not require a beracha before eating it.<ref>Bais Yosef, Magen Avraham 19, Mishna Brurah 43, Kaf Ha’chaim 48. </ref>
==How Much to Eat or Drink? ==
# Some poskim are of the opinion that one does not recite a beracha on a pleasant tasting medicine unless one ate a kezayis or drank a reviis of it. The reason for this is that just as one who tastes food does not recite a beracha unless a kezayis or reviis is consumed (Berachot 14a); the same applies for medications, since one does not have intent for eating.<ref>Refer to Shevet Ha’kehusi 3:84:3. </ref> Nonetheless, the poskim do not make this comparison, and therefore a beracha on pleasant tasting medicine would be required regardless of the amount being consumed, since one's intent is to swallow the medicine, as opposed to the "tasting" case where one does not intend to have enjoyment.<ref>Refer to Mikroei Kodesh [[Pesach]] 2:page 144, Halacha U’[[refuah]] page 278, Pischei Halacha (Berochos page 66:footnote 38), Chazzon Ovadia Berochos page 159:footnote 6. </ref>

==Which Beracha Rishona?==
# The Rama<ref>204:11. Refer to Aruch Ha’shulchan 22. </ref> says that any food which a healthy person does not eat requires a [[shehakol]] if taken as medication, regardless of the food's real beracha.<ref>Aruch Ha’shulchan 22. Refer to Mishna Brurah 54. The Shar Ha’tzyion 45 says this applies to medicine which was made from the five grains as well. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284. </ref> Others say one should recite the appropriate beracha.<ref>Magen Avraham 24, Mishna Brurah 55, Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82. </ref> The Mishna Brurah<ref>212:4-5. </ref> maintains that one should avoid this situation when possible.<ref>Some say one should eat the other food before the medicine and then consume the medicine (Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284). </ref>

==Beracha Achrona==
# One who recited a [[shehakol]] on a medication would be required to recite a beracha achrona if the proper shiur was consumed.<ref>Halacha U’[[refuah]] page 278. </ref>
==Listerine Pocketpaks®==
# For years, people have been erroneously consuming Listerine Pocketpaks® without a hechsher, but obviously this product needs a hechsher,<ref>See www.koltorah.org quoting the opinion of Rabbi Chaim Jachter Shlita. </ref> especially since it is digested in the stomach.<ref>Opinion of Harav Yisroel Belsky as expressed in OU document I-98:page 2. </ref> Recently, this product has become available with a hechsher. The question arises if this product requires a beracha prior to placing it in one's mouth. Many people do not recite a beracha. However, even though this product melts in the mouth, it is swallowed and therefore, according to some poskim, a beracha of [[shehakol]] should be recited before placing it in the mouth.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, opinion of Harav Forscheimer Shlita (personal telephone conversation), and Harav Doniel Neustadt Shlita. </ref> Others maintain that a beracha does not need to be recited.<ref>Opinion of Harav Pinchus Bodner Shlita, Harav Ephraim Greenblatt Shlita (Personal telephone conversations). Harav Forst Shlita says that if one takes it to enjoy the flavor, then a beracha is recited. However, if one takes it remove one's bad breath, then no beracha is recited. The opinions of Rabbi Wikler Shlita, Harav Felder Shlita, Harav Fuerst Shlita (personal telephone conversations with the aforementioned rabbonim). This is the opinion of Harav Yisroel Reisman Shlita (as related by Rabbi Shimon Newmark). </ref>
# The company says that there is nothing unsafe with swallowing it, since there is no alcohol in the product.<ref>Based on a conversation with Lisa at the Johnson and Johnson Company. </ref> If one uses a breath mist (with a hechsher), then one does not recite a beracha on it. Instead, one should make a [[shehakol]] on a different food.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita.</ref>
==Pills which are swallowed==
# If there is no flavor in the coating of a pill, then no beracha is recited, because there is no enjoyment from the pill. Additionally, swallowing medication without chewing it first, is not the normal manner of consumption and is not viewed halachically as eating. Furthermore, it is possible that these pills are not fit to be eaten<ref>Refer to Mesechtas Avodah Zarah 67-68, Mesechtas Pesachim 21b and 45b. In addition see Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 103, and Y.D. 155:3. </ref> and therefore do not require a beracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 202:2, see Chazzon Ovadia Berochos page 158, Piskei Teshuvos 204:18:footnote 70. </ref> Some say that this even applies to a pill which has a sweet coating; since one swallows it, no beracha is recited.<ref>Vezos Ha’beracha page 311, Piskei Teshuvos 204:18, see Nishmas Avraham 4:204:footnote 1. With regards to vitamins, refer to Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 68:footnote 39 alef, Beracha Achrona (Boreh Nefoshos) page 201. Refer to Nishmas Avraham (English) pages 89-90 quoting the opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l that a beracha is required. See Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. The same applies to vitamins (Yalkut Yosef 3:page 436). </ref>
# Some say that if one takes a pill in order to lose weight, and by taking the pill it makes one feel full, then one should recite a beracha on the pill, since it takes the place of food. Nonetheless, the poskim suggest that one should make a beracha on something else instead.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 70. </ref>
==Chewable ==
# According to those who recite a beracha on pleasant tasting medications, a beracha should be recited on a chewable pill which has a pleasant taste.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:18:footnote 74. </ref> One should recite a [[shehakol]] on a different food before consuming flavored Tums® that have a hechsher.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita. The Diamond – K hechsher on Tums may be relied upon (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita). One may not use Tums on [[Pesach]] if they are not certified for [[Pesach]] (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita). </ref>
==Intravenous==
# One who receives food in a liquid form from an intravenous injection does not recite a beracha on the food.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 13:35:3, Vezos Ha’beracha page 113 quoting the opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita. </ref>
==Drinking before a Procedure==
Very often, before a medical procedure is performed, the patient is given something to drink. This drink does not necessarily taste good on its own, but sweeteners are added to it. The status of whether a beracha would be recited is dependent on whether or not a beracha is recited on medicine that had sweetener added to it.<ref>Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:page 74:footnote 36. </ref> One who is given something to eat before a procedure would recite a beracha on the food.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 4:204:pages 7-8 quoting the opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l. </ref>

==Drinking Water for Medical Purposes ==
# When one is taking a pill that does not taste pleasant, and wants to drink water to mask the bad taste, no beracha is recited on the water.<ref>Aruch Ha’shulchan 204:18, Pnei Ha’shulchan page 146, Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 64, Binyan Sholom (old print) page 96, Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. Refer to Sheilas Rav 2:18:5. If one places water in liquid medicine to make it taste better, no beracha is recited on the water (Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76). If one needs to drink water for medical purposes and he is not thirsty, he should recite a beracha on something else and have in mind to exempt the water from a beracha (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Eishel Avraham Butchatch 204:7). </ref> The same is true if one is taking a pill and is not thirsty.<ref>Ben Ish Chai Mattos 1:12, Aruch Ha’shulchan 204:18, Miyum Ha’halacha 22, Rivevos Ephraim 6:76, Pischei Halacha Berochos 4:8, Oz Nedberu 10:22. Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l maintains that one may drink more water than necessary for a pill, and a beracha would not be required on that water (Ve’aleihu Lo Yeibol 1:pages 110-111). </ref>
# Before a woman goes for an ultrasound/sonogram, she is asked to drink water. No beracha is recited on the water.<ref>Refer to Yufei Leleiv 204:10, Sdei Chemed Berochos 33:page 260, Me’am Loez Yisro 247:page 580, Pnei Ha’shulchan page 146, Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76. </ref> It would seem that a nursing woman, who needs to drink a lot of water, would not recite a beracha on the water if she is not thirsty.<ref>Refer to Toras Hayoledes 62:3, Beracha Achrona page 196:5.</ref> However, others maintain that she should take food whose beracha is [[shehakol]] and exempt the beracha on the water.<ref>Toras Hayoledes {{ibid}}. </ref>
# Many times, after one brushes his teeth or rinses with mouthwash, he drinks water to rinse out his mouth. One does not recite a beracha on such water.<ref>Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76.</ref>
# If one has a sore throat and drinks water to clear his throat, it would seem that a beracha is not recited.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita.</ref> (In all the above situations, if one is thirsty, a beracha is recited). One who drinks a tasty beverage to take his pill, would recite a beracha on the beverage.<ref>Chesed L’alafim 204-205:4, Mishna Brurah 204:42, Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111, Yalkut Yosef 204:page 436. </ref>

==Medicine mixed with a food or water==
# It is very common to take a powdered medicine and mix it with a food or water. Some say that since the food which the medicine is mixed into is tafel, no beracha is recited. Nonetheless, others say that one should recite a beracha on the mixture.<ref>Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:pages 78-79. </ref> If the food (not medicine) is not a [[shehakol]],<ref>For example chunky applesauce. </ref> the Rama<ref>212:1. </ref> holds the beracha is a [[shehakol]] regardless of the beracha of the food, while others argue with this ruling.<ref>Refer to Magen Avraham 4, Gr’a, Mishna Brurah 4-5, 10, see Taz 7. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284. </ref> The Mishna Brurah<ref>212:4-5. </ref> maintains that one should avoid this situation when possible.<ref>Some say one should eat the other food before the medicine and then consume the medicine (Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284). </ref>

==Medicine taken during a Meal==
# When one consumes a medicine during a meal, a separate beracha is required since the medicine is not part of the meal.<ref>Shevet Ha’kehusi 3:78. </ref>

==Medicine in Pocket While Sleeping ==
# Food that was in one's pocket while he was sleeping may be eaten.<ref>Salmas Chaim 2:7, Rivevos Ephraim 4:7, Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:242, see Yufei Leleiv Y.D. 3:116:6, Yabia Omer Y.D. 1:9:23.</ref> The same halacha goes for medicine that was in one's pocket.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 17:35, Rivevos Ephraim 6:4, Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:245, Tosfas Orah page 421:3, see Nezer Ha’chaim page 217:165, Doleh U’mashka page 367.</ref>

==Storing food under a bed==
# Since there is ruach ra'ah under a bed, one should not store food under a bed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 116:5. </ref> However, one is allowed to store medicine under a bed and there is no concern of ruach ra'ah.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 17:32. Some say that if it's a medication which one recites a beracha on because of its pleasant taste, then it should not be placed under a bed (Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:245, see 3:229:2). </ref>

==Taking Medicine into the Bathroom ==
# It is permitted for one to walk into the bathroom with a pill etc.<ref>Be’er Moshe 8:41. </ref> Additionally, it is permitted to keep medicines in a medicine cabinet that is in the bathroom,<ref>Rivevos Ephraim 1:8:2, 2:6, Teshuvos V’hanhugos 1:11, Be’er Moshe 8:41. </ref> but one should not take his medicine with water in a bathroom.

==Reciting a Tefilla before taking Medication ==
# Some have a custom before taking medication to recite a yehi ratzon that all should be well.<ref>Refer to Shulchan Aruch 230:4, Magen Avraham 6, Mishna Brurah 6. Some say saying the yihiy ratzon exempts one from the beracha that one would recite on a sweet medication (Refer to Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111, Nishmas Avraham 204:page 91). </ref> This [[tefilla]] may be recited on [[Shabbos]] and is not a concern of asking for personal needs on [[Shabbos]].<ref>Refer to Shar Ha’tzyion 230:8, Bakashas B’[[Shabbos]] page 27:footnote 15. See Betzel Hachuchma 5:41.</ref>

==Taking Medicine on Shabbos ==
see [[Medicine on Shabbat]]

==Taking Pills on a Fast Day ==
# On a fast day, if someone is not feeling well and wants to take a pill, it's permitted to do so. Some say that one should wrap the pill in a tissue before swallowing it.<ref>Halichos Shlomo Moadim 2:13:footnote 8. </ref> Some poskim say that one may not use water to swallow a pill.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 550:4.</ref> (However, if one's doctor instructs him to take a pill on a fast day, then even according to this opinion, one may use a little water).<ref> Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]] etc) 16:3, Nishmas Avraham 5:page 46. </ref> Others say that if one cannot take a pill without water, then one may use a little water.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Teshuvos V’hanhugos 3:156. </ref> One should avoid this if possible on [[Tisha BeAv]] and on [[Yom Kippur]], since using water in order to swallow a pill is forbidden.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Teshuvos V’hanhugos 3:156.</ref> One is permitted to take a medication before a fast if it will enable him to have an easier fast.<ref>Nechamas Yisroel 27:22. </ref>
# There is a discussion in the poskim if one is allowed to use mouthwash on the morning of a fast day. Some poskim are stringent,<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Kinyan Torah 2:49:2, Modanei Yeshurin page 108, Chai Ha’Levi 5:48, Divrei Chachumim page 166:471 quoting the opinion of Harav Sheinberg Shlita. Some say if there is a need, brushing ones teeth is permitted (Divrei Chachumim Ibid). </ref> while others say that if one will have bad breath then it is permitted.<ref>Be’er Moshe 8:94. Refer to Minchas Yitzchok 4:109. </ref>
# Taking Listerine Pocketpaks® (that have a hechsher) is not permitted on a fast day, since one swallows the liquid which melts in the mouth.

==Consuming Gelatin and Gel-caps ==
# When one walks down the aisles in a pharmacy, he may see many pills which contain a [[gelatin]] coating. This issue involves the discussion of [[gelatin]]. Below we will discuss what [[gelatin]] is, whether or not it's kosher and how it applies to ingesting gel-caps.

==What is Gelatin?<ref>Gelatin comes from the Latin word “gelatus” which means stiff or frozen. </ref>==
#[[Gelatin]] is a protein which is derived from a naturally occurring protein known as collagen. Collagen is the component of animal connective tissue, bones, sinews and skin. [[Gelatin]] does not have any taste to it. [[Gelatin]] is widely used in the pharmaceutical industry to coat capsules as well as hold tablets together. In addition, [[gelatin]] is used in marshmallows, yogurt, ice cream, jello,<ref>Refer to [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 10-14. </ref> to remove cloudiness or haze in apple juice,<ref>www.oukosher.org. </ref> in gummy bears, throat lozenges, frostings, protein supplements, and sugar glazes.<ref>Star-K in Kashrus Kurrents in an article by Rabbi Mushell. This article can be seen at http://www.star-k.org/kashrus/kk-palate-gelatin.htm.</ref>

==How is it Manufactured? ==
# The source of [[gelatin]] is almost always the bones or hides of non-kosher animals. To improve the quality of the process, the raw material is pretreated by soaking the hard bones in a mixture of lime and water for 70-120 days. Soft bone and hides are treated with a five percent concentration of mineral acids for ten to thirty hours. [[Gelatin]] is then extracted from the pretreated material in a process which is like [[cooking]]. The bones are warmed in a series of runs at increasing temperatures. Eventually, [[gelatin]] liquor is formed, which is then filtered and evaporated to remove the water and concentrate the liquor. The liquor is then cooled to form a gel. The gel is dried and cut into desired shapes.<ref>Refer to Medicines and Kashrus page 16, [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 15-22 in great depth, Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11. See Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 67:footnote 2 who maintains that most [[gelatin]] today is from pig skins. </ref>
# The poskim discuss many reasons why consuming [[gelatin]] may be permitted. Each one will be dealt with below.

==Bones from non-Kosher animals==
# The Torat Kohanim<ref>Parshas Sheminei 2:4. </ref> says that the posuk "from non-pure animals one should not eat their flesh"<ref>Vayikra 11:8. </ref> excludes bones, sinews, and hooves. There is a discussion if there is no issur at all, or if there is an issur d'rabanan to consume the above items. The Rambam<ref>Hilchos Machalas Asuros 4:18. Refer to Rashi Vayikra 11:8 “mivsaram.” See Kashrus pages 245-249.</ref> is of the opinion that "one who eats from a non-kosher animal, it's skin, bones, sinews, horns, hooves, or nails, even though they are forbidden, is excused from punishment." It seems from the opinion of the Rambam that bones are forbidden d'rabanan, while others maintain that Rambam holds that there isn't even an issur d'rabanan.<ref>Refer to Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:27 (end) page 44 who says [[gelatin]] is a sofuk issur. </ref> The opinion of Tosfot,<ref>Mesechtas Avodah Zarah 69a “ha’hu.” Refer to Rosh Avodah Zarah 5:11. </ref> who discusses permitting bee legs, implies that bones are indeed permitted. The opinion of some poskim is that the Rambam, when implying that an issur d'rabbanan exists for bones, was referring to soft bones which have some moisture to it, but hard and dry bones are permitted even according to the Rambam.<ref>Refer to Achiezer 3:33:5, Introduction of the Tzitz Eliezer volume 4 where he brings the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l. Some say there are no commercially made [[gelatin]] that come from hard bones today (Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 69). </ref>

==The Gelatin has changed ==
# The Mishna Brurah<ref>O.C. 216:7, see Magen Avraham 3. See OU document P-86 who says that fermentations are not considered kitniyos sh’nishtana. </ref> and others<ref>Shiurei Knesses Hagedolah 216:7, Rosh (Teshuvos) klal 24:6, Buei Chai Y.D. 103. </ref> say regarding "musk," which is a byproduct of blood that is found in the neck of a deer, we can consider it "changed," since the blood is turned into a new entity. Many poskim follow this opinion.<ref>Refer to Rosh Mesechtas Berochos 6:38, Mishna Brurah {{ibid}}. Refer to Magen Avraham O.C. 216:3, Taz 2. </ref> Using the same line of reasoning, some poskim permit the use of [[gelatin]] since it is totally changed from it original state.<ref>Refer to Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11:15, Tzitz Eliezer’s opinion expressed in the introduction to volume 4, see Melamed L’hoyel 2:35. </ref> Others are not convinced that one can draw a parallel between musk and [[gelatin]].<ref>Refer to Achi Ezer 3:33:5, Tzitz Eliezer {{ibid}} quoting the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Yeishiv Moshe page 165. </ref>

==Dried out Stomach / Gelatin ==
# The Rama<ref>Y.D. 87:10, see Shach 114:21. Refer to Pischei Teshuva 87:19, 21. </ref> says that an animal's stomach lining which was salted and dried out so that it becomes like a piece of wood may be filled with milk, since it does not retain any taste of meat.<ref>See Shach 87:33 who says this applies to other organs as well, but lechatchila (initially) this should not be done (Be’er Heitiv 27, see Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham 33). Refer to Achi Ezer 3:33:5 who says that the Shach does not apply to hard bones. Some say that this does not apply when a product is dried in a modern facility (Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 72:footnote 14). </ref> The same would apply to [[gelatin]] which is completely dried out.<ref>Opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l quoted in Kashrus and Medicines page 53:footnote 20, see Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11 in depth. </ref>
# If non-kosher food becomes completely dried out like wood, but later becomes edible again, is it permitted to eat? Do we view it as having fundamentally changed, and it's therefore permitted, or do we say that once it becomes edible again, its original non-Kosher status returns? Some say that once the product has been completely dried out, even if it later becomes edible again, it does not regain its non-kosher status.<ref>Refer o Shach Y.D. 114:21, Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 87:20, Nodeh B’Yehuda Y.D. 26, Aruch Ha’shulchan Y.D. 87:43, Achiezer 2:11, 3:33:5, Har Tzvi Y.D. 83, opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l (Edos L’Yisroel page 132), Orchos Habayis page 29. </ref> Others are stringent in this regard.<ref>Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham Y.D. 87:33, Chasam Sofer Y.D. 81, see Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:37, 2:27, Kovetz Teshuvos 1:73:page 107. See Mishnas Rav Aron 1:17:2. </ref>

==Contemporary Opinions==
# The opinion of the Achiezer<ref>2:11, 3:33:5. </ref> and others<ref>Refer to [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 95-119 in depth, Tzitz Eliezer introduction to volume 4 quoting the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l, Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11 in depth, Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l adds until now (1951) it has been accepted that [[gelatin]] is not permitted. Therefore he is concerned about permitting it. </ref> is that it's permitted to consume [[gelatin]]. The opinion of Harav Henkin zt"l<ref>Edos L’Yisroel page 177. </ref> is that since this matter has not been decided conclusively, one should be stringent. This is the opinion of Harav Moshe Feinstein zt"l<ref>Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:27 (end). </ref> and others as well.<ref>Mishnas Rav Aron 17, Kovetz Teshuvos 1:73:page 107, Medicines and Kashrus pages 16-17 quoting other poskim.</ref> The opinion of the Israeli Rabbinate is that the consumption of [[gelatin]] is permitted,<ref>Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 66:footnote 1. One who moves to Eretz Yisroel should ask if he can follow their opinion. </ref> while the Mehadrin kosher certification in Eretz Yisroel does not permit [[gelatin]].<ref>Kashrus page 349. </ref> The major kashrus organizations in the United States do not allow non-certified [[gelatin]].<ref>The Laws of [[Pesach]]: A Digest 2006 page 602. </ref> (The above discussion does not apply to taking gel-caps, as this will be discussed below).

==Status of Kosher Gelatin ==
# [[Gelatin]] made from a kosher source is considered pareve.<ref>Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:37, 2:27, Mishnas Rav Aron 1:16. </ref> Kosher [[gelatin]] is [[gelatin]] made from fish<ref>One may eat this together with meat as well, and we are not concerned about the halacha of refraining from eating fish and meat together (Mesechtas Pesachim 76b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 116:2). Additionally, it is botel b’shishim. Some say that the whole concern is limited to eating the flesh of fish with meat, but doesn't extend to fish skins nor bones. Additionally, the [[gelatin]] made from fish (and other sources) does not have a flavor (Star–K Kashrus Kurrents in an article by Rabbi Mushell). </ref> or glatt kosher beef hides.

==Gel Caps - Not in the Normal Manner==
# One who is sick is permitted to eat a non-kosher food (which is normally ossur b'achilah) in an unusual manner.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:3, Shach 14, Mishna Brurah O.C. 466:1. An example of this is giving someone non-kosher food through intravenous. </ref> Based on this, the opinion of some poskim is that swallowing a pill made from a [[gelatin]] coating is permitted, since it is for a sick person, and it is not the usual manner of eating.<ref>Opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l quoted in Edos L’Yisroel page 132, opinion of Harav Shachter Shlita as expressed in OU document I-97. He adds that the gel-caps have no taste to them and are nifsal from feeding to a dog. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/894931/rabbi-hershel-schachter/berachos-73-38b-39a-ta-am-matzah-and-maror-non-kosher-pills-kavush-kemevushal-kezayis-beriah/ Rav Schachter (Brachot Shiur 73 min 18-30)] ruled that strictly speaking it is permitted to take non-kosher pills. If kosher ones are available he should get those to avoid the spiritual determinants of non-kosher like Rama about sucking non-kosher milk. He explained that certainly if a person is a choleh shein bo sakana it is permitted since it is shelo kderech achilato. But furthermore, the gelatin pills are permitted since it is nifsal machila and even if it is reconstituted it isn’t considered non-kosher (Chavot Daat YD 103). There's no achshevei since it is eaten in a reconstituted form and not when it is mixed with other ingredients (Rav Chaim Ozer 3:31). That's in Rav Schachter's opinion why Rav Soloveitchik was lenient to take non-kosher pills. Also, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1525&st=&pgnum=295 Rabbi Yitzchak Abadi in Or Yitzchak 1:24] permits all medicines that are bitter or don't have a taste since they aren't food and are considered nifsal machila.
* See Yachava Daat 2:60 who assumes it is shelo kderech achilato if it doesn't taste good and not nifsal machila.
* [https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/many-medications-encased-gelatin-capsules-may-used/?category Rav Belsky] held that hard capsules can be eaten by a choleh and the soft capsules can be eaten in a tissue paper. This is only when there are no alternatives.</ref> However, there are poskim who maintain that swallowing a pill is the regular manner of consumption.<ref>Refer to Nodeh B’Yehuda Y.D. 35, Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 155:6, Har Tzvi Y.D. 97, opinions of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l and Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Medicines and Kashrus page 57:footnote 17, Yeishiv Moshe page 165, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 169, Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]]) 1:page 69. This is the opinion of Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita quoting the opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l, see www.koltorah.org. </ref> Others are lenient and maintain that swallowing a pill is considered an unusual manner.<ref>Halichos Shlomo 1:17:1 (although he is quoted in the footnote above as saying otherwise), see Toras Chaim (Chullin 120) who is lenient</ref> In addition, even those who are stringent by [[gelatin]], it would not apply to medicines. However, according to the stringent opinion above regarding [[gelatin]], one who only has a headache<ref>Refer to Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]]) pages 71-72 who is unsure if this should be permitted with a slight pain. See Minchas Shlomo 1:17:3. </ref> or slight discomfort<ref>This does not apply to one who is bedridden (Halichos Shlomo Moadim [[Pesach]]) pages 71-72:8. The Shach 13 says this heter of the Rama is even for a healthy person. See Mishnah L’melech Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah 5:8 in depth, Zera Emes 2:48. Refer to Pri Megadim M.Z. O.C. 328:11, Shagas Aryeh 74, Binas Adom 52:page 86, Shevet Ha’Levi 7:135 who argue. Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita maintains if one has a headache he should not swallow gel-caps without wrapping it in a tissue. </ref> should take a pill which has no [[gelatin]] or wrap the gel-cap in a tissue.<ref>Refer to Mesora 14:page 92. Others say the custom is to be lenient with one who has even a headache (Chai Ha’Levi 3:111:2). </ref>

==Children's Medication==
# Liquid medicines for children are generally sweet. If it contains glycerin, and one doesn't have information that it is the kosher type of glycerin, one shouldn't use the medicine until one first dilutes it with 12 ml of another food to 1 ml of medicine.<ref>Rabbi Dovid Heber in [https://www.star-k.org/articles/articles/medicine/452/a-kashrus-guide-to-medications-vitamins-and-nutritional-supplements Kosher Kurrents 2005] wrote that glycerin in medicines is a safek deoritta, since much of it is made from animals, even though some of it is made from plants. However, since it is only a safek, it is permitted to be mevatel (nullify) it. One can do so if one dilutes the medicine in 1 to 12 of another food without losing the potency of the medicine. See Mesorah Journal v. 7 pp. 91-97 by Rabbi Dovid Heber for a potential justification of giving medicines to children even if there are non-kosher ingredients. His argument is as follows: Feeding an isur derabbanan to a child is a machloket rashba and rambam (Bet Yosef OC 343). It might only be an isur derabbanan if it is a chatzi shiur in a tarovet. Also the isur is only a safek isur. Therefore, possibly there's a safek safeka, safek if it is a muter glycerin and if it is asur perhaps it is derabbanan (chatzi shiur btarovet). On the rabbinic level it is muter since it is a safek derabbanan. Additionally, a child is a choleh for whom some allow feeding a derabbanan isur. Either way it is a leniency based on complex factors.
*[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/731730/rabbi-daniel-stein/רפואות-שנתערבו-בהם-גליצערי-ן/ Rabbi Daniel Stein] in an article permits children medicines with glycerins for a number of reasons: 1) If the taste is bad even though there's other flavors added and it leaves a bad aftertaste perhaps that's considered nifsal machila. It seems difficult because donkey urine, ear wax, and mucus aren't considered nifsal machila (RSZA in Minchat Shlomo 1:17, Halichot Shlomo Nissan ch. 4 Dvar Halacha 9 p. 72). 2) Though it might be shelo kderech achila since it isn't taste good. Then for a sick person it is muter. 3) They're safek made from plants. 4) Isur Shenishtana since it changed from the taste and look from animal fat. 5) Maybe made inedible in the processing. 6) If its taste is masked by the other flavors you only need bitul brov since it doesn't have any taam and we can use kefilah. 7) It is only chatzi shiur of isur in a taarovet and for a sick person perhaps it is muter. He quotes Rav Schachter and Rav Willig as agreeing with him.</ref> However, the [https://www.star-k.org/resource/list/RR8I4NNG/Pain-Relievers-and-Fever-Reducers Star-K has an updated list] of kosher children's medicines, which as of December 2018 includes Infant and Children's Advil and Tylenol. See [https://www.star-k.org/resources_medicine here] for more brands or medicines.

==Toothpaste and Mouthwash==
# There are ingredients in some toothpaste which are non-kosher animal products such as glycerin. Nonetheless, many poskim are lenient to allow a person to use such toothpastes since the non-kosher ingredients are inedible, mixed with kosher ingredients, and a person doesn't intend to eat the toothpaste but rather to brush with it, which is the halachic equivalent of tasting.<ref>Har Tzvi 95 was lenient with non-kosher toothpastes because the ingredients were processed so that they were inedible, they were mixed with kosher ingredients, and also a person is justing tasting the toothpaste and spitting it out. [http://www.tzohar.org.il/?p=2422 tzohar.org] quotes Ama Dvar p. 155 quoting Rav Mordechai Eliyahu who agreed. They also quote Mishneh Halachot 9:153 who disagreed. [https://oukosher.org/blog/consumer-kosher/kashruth-issues-of-toothpaste/ OU] wrote that some rabbis don't feel one can rely on the Har Tzvi today since the toothpastes have a good taste. But others still rely on the Har Tzvi. They cited Rav Henkin responsa 75 who mostly agreed with the Har Tzvi but wouldn't be lenient with toothpastes with glycerin.</ref>
# Some say that one shouldn't use mouthwash with glycerin in it since one might swallow some and glycerin can be made from teref animals.<ref>Rav Belsky (cited in article "Kashrut Rulings From Rabbi Belsky ZT"L" p. 37) held that since sometimes a person swallows some mouthwash it is forbidden to use it if there's an ingredient in it that isn't kosher such as glycerin (similar to Taz 98:2). He didn't consider mouthwash to be considered inedible.</ref> Others are lenient but still recommend getting a kosher one if available. See [https://www.crcweb.org/OTCMedicineReport.pdf CRC's list] for recommended mouthwashes and toothpastes.<ref> [https://www.ok.org/kosherspirit/fall-2007/students-questions/#:~:text=a%20kosher%20symbol%3F-,Answer%3A,not%20require%20a%20kosher%20symbol. The OK] is lenient on mouthwash and lipstick since they are not consumed. [https://www.crcweb.org/OTCMedicineReport.pdf CRC] quotes Rav Gedalya Dov Schwartz as holding that mouthwash doesn't need a hechsher but it is preferable to get one if it is possible. [https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/do-dental-products-require-a-hechsher-part-ii-the-kashrut-of-toothpaste-and-mouthwash-year-round-and-pesach-by-dr-ephraim-rudolph-98 Rav Jachter] quotes Rav Schachter as holding that mouthwash is considered inedible and therefore permitted even without a hechsher.</ref>

==Credits==
# Special thanks to Rabbi Moishe Dovid Lebovits Rabbinical Administrator for KOF-K Kosher Supervision and author of Halachically Speaking for this article. To reach the author please email mlebovits@kof-k.org.

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Kashrut]]
{{Kashrut}}

Medications

2024-08-23T15:38:28Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

[[Image:Medication.png | right | 100 px]]
Nowadays, when one is not feeling up to par, he takes a few medications and with Hashem's help feels better within a couple of days and then goes back to his regular routine. There are many halachic issues with regard to medications which need to be addressed. Is a beracha recited on pleasant tasting medication such as cough syrup? Does one have to recite a beracha on water when ingesting a pill? Can one walk into the bathroom with medicine? Can one take pills on [[Shabbos]]? Is it permitted to take a gel-cap? Can one take liquid medication which is full of flavors? What about vitamins? These issues will be dealt with at length in the upcoming sections.

==Beracha on Medication==
# A beracha is not recited on food which is eaten to heal if one does not have enjoyment from the food. However, if one does have enjoyment from the food, a beracha rishona and achrona (see below) are recited.<ref>Mesechtas Berochos 38a, Tosfas Mesechtas Berochos 36a “k’von,” Meiri Mesechtas Berochos 35b, Tur 204, Shulchan Aruch 204:8, Shulchan Aruch Harav 204:14, Chesed L’alafim 204-205:5, Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82. </ref> Even if one does not want the good tasting food and is only eating it because he is ill, a beracha is recited because he receives enjoyment from it.<ref>Mishna Brurah 43. </ref> Examples of medicines which require a beracha due to their pleasant taste are herbal teas and cough drops.<ref>V’sein Beracha page 200. Refer to Ateres Shlomo 8:page 110. This is the opinion and custom of Harav Pinchus Bodner Shlita (Personal telephone conversation with Harav Bodner Shlita). </ref>

==Medicine mixed with Sweeteners==
# Some say that even if the medicine itself does not have flavor, but is mixed with other ingredients (sweeteners) that have flavor, one still recites a beracha on the medicine.<ref>Opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita as expressed in Vezos Ha’beracha page 113. </ref> The reason for this opinion is because the mixture tastes pleasant and we do not look at the medicine before the taste was placed into it.<ref>Vezos Ha’beracha Birur Halacha page 310. </ref> This is the opinion of many poskim.<ref>Refer to Da’as Torah 204, Vezos Ha’beracha pages 310-311 in depth, opinion of Harav Ovadia Yosef Shlita quoted in Nishmas Avraham (English) page 89:footnote E. </ref>
# Some say that if one consumes a medicine which contains sweeteners (and if not for the need of the medicine one would not consume the sweeteners), then no beracha is required.<ref>Opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha pages 113-114, and in V’sein Beracha page 201:footnote 15.1. See explanation of this opinion in Vezos Ha’beracha page 312. Refer to Pnei Ha’shulchan page 151-152, Nishmas Avraham 1:204:page 91, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 191, Nishmas Avraham 1:page 90 (English), Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. In the Halichos Shlomo [[Yom Kippur]] 5:footnote 42 it states that Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l retracted his previous position with regard to not reciting a beracha on sweetened medication. Refer to Vezos Ha’beracha page 356:9 notes of Harav Forst Shlita on Vezos Ha’beracha. The opinion of Harav Pinchus Bonder Shlita is that no beracha is recited on pleasant tasting cough syrup based on the pesak he heard from Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l (Personal telephone conversation with Harav Bodner Shlita). </ref> Others say no beracha is recited because such sweetener is only a tafel to the actual medication, and if no beracha is recited on the ikur, then one does not recite a beracha on the tafel.<ref>Opinion of Harav Neuwirth Shlita quoted in Nishmas [[Shabbos]] 4:204, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 191. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:pages 282-284 in depth. However, see Mishna Brurah 174:39 and 212:1 who says the halacha is that a beracha is recited on the tafel. See Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 246 who disputes the claim that the reason why no beracha is recited here is because no beracha is recited on the tafel. Refer to Rivevos Ephraim 4:54:39. </ref> Nonetheless, others disagree with this reasoning and maintain that a beracha should be recited even in this situation.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 114, and in V’sein Beracha page 200:footnote 15, opinion of Harav Ovadia Yosef quoted in Yalkut Yosef 204:10:footnote 10, opinion of Harav Feinhandler Shlita (Avnei Yushfei in a personal e-[[mail]]). Refer to Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82, Pischei Halacha (Berochos page 246). Others say that it could be that Harav Elyashiv Shlita held this only in regard to medicine that is thoroughly enjoyed (Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:page 77:footnote 43).</ref> Since there is a dispute in this regard, one should recite a beracha on a different [[shehakol]] food and have in mind to exempt the medicine.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 75. </ref>
# According to all opinions, medicine for children which is sweet like candy would require a beracha.<ref>Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 68:footnote 39 alef. </ref>

==No Beracha Required ==
# One who is forced to eat or drink something does not recite a beracha, even if it tastes pleasant.<ref>Shulchan Aruch {{ibid}}, Kaf Ha’chaim 49, see Magen Avraham 20 Taz 12, Aruch Ha’shulchan 19. Refer to Mishna Brurah 204:44 who maintains if one is forced to eat bread and he is satisfied, he should bentch since it is d’oraisa. </ref>
# A bad tasting food does not require a beracha before eating it.<ref>Bais Yosef, Magen Avraham 19, Mishna Brurah 43, Kaf Ha’chaim 48. </ref>
==How Much to Eat or Drink? ==
# Some poskim are of the opinion that one does not recite a beracha on a pleasant tasting medicine unless one ate a kezayis or drank a reviis of it. The reason for this is that just as one who tastes food does not recite a beracha unless a kezayis or reviis is consumed (Berachot 14a); the same applies for medications, since one does not have intent for eating.<ref>Refer to Shevet Ha’kehusi 3:84:3. </ref> Nonetheless, the poskim do not make this comparison, and therefore a beracha on pleasant tasting medicine would be required regardless of the amount being consumed, since one's intent is to swallow the medicine, as opposed to the "tasting" case where one does not intend to have enjoyment.<ref>Refer to Mikroei Kodesh [[Pesach]] 2:page 144, Halacha U’[[refuah]] page 278, Pischei Halacha (Berochos page 66:footnote 38), Chazzon Ovadia Berochos page 159:footnote 6. </ref>

==Which Beracha Rishona?==
# The Rama<ref>204:11. Refer to Aruch Ha’shulchan 22. </ref> says that any food which a healthy person does not eat requires a [[shehakol]] if taken as medication, regardless of the food's real beracha.<ref>Aruch Ha’shulchan 22. Refer to Mishna Brurah 54. The Shar Ha’tzyion 45 says this applies to medicine which was made from the five grains as well. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284. </ref> Others say one should recite the appropriate beracha.<ref>Magen Avraham 24, Mishna Brurah 55, Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82. </ref> The Mishna Brurah<ref>212:4-5. </ref> maintains that one should avoid this situation when possible.<ref>Some say one should eat the other food before the medicine and then consume the medicine (Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284). </ref>

==Beracha Achrona==
# One who recited a [[shehakol]] on a medication would be required to recite a beracha achrona if the proper shiur was consumed.<ref>Halacha U’[[refuah]] page 278. </ref>
==Listerine Pocketpaks®==
# For years, people have been erroneously consuming Listerine Pocketpaks® without a hechsher, but obviously this product needs a hechsher,<ref>See www.koltorah.org quoting the opinion of Rabbi Chaim Jachter Shlita. </ref> especially since it is digested in the stomach.<ref>Opinion of Harav Yisroel Belsky as expressed in OU document I-98:page 2. </ref> Recently, this product has become available with a hechsher. The question arises if this product requires a beracha prior to placing it in one's mouth. Many people do not recite a beracha. However, even though this product melts in the mouth, it is swallowed and therefore, according to some poskim, a beracha of [[shehakol]] should be recited before placing it in the mouth.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, opinion of Harav Forscheimer Shlita (personal telephone conversation), and Harav Doniel Neustadt Shlita. </ref> Others maintain that a beracha does not need to be recited.<ref>Opinion of Harav Pinchus Bodner Shlita, Harav Ephraim Greenblatt Shlita (Personal telephone conversations). Harav Forst Shlita says that if one takes it to enjoy the flavor, then a beracha is recited. However, if one takes it remove one's bad breath, then no beracha is recited. The opinions of Rabbi Wikler Shlita, Harav Felder Shlita, Harav Fuerst Shlita (personal telephone conversations with the aforementioned rabbonim). This is the opinion of Harav Yisroel Reisman Shlita (as related by Rabbi Shimon Newmark). </ref>
# The company says that there is nothing unsafe with swallowing it, since there is no alcohol in the product.<ref>Based on a conversation with Lisa at the Johnson and Johnson Company. </ref> If one uses a breath mist (with a hechsher), then one does not recite a beracha on it. Instead, one should make a [[shehakol]] on a different food.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita.</ref>
==Pills which are swallowed==
# If there is no flavor in the coating of a pill, then no beracha is recited, because there is no enjoyment from the pill. Additionally, swallowing medication without chewing it first, is not the normal manner of consumption and is not viewed halachically as eating. Furthermore, it is possible that these pills are not fit to be eaten<ref>Refer to Mesechtas Avodah Zarah 67-68, Mesechtas Pesachim 21b and 45b. In addition see Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 103, and Y.D. 155:3. </ref> and therefore do not require a beracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 202:2, see Chazzon Ovadia Berochos page 158, Piskei Teshuvos 204:18:footnote 70. </ref> Some say that this even applies to a pill which has a sweet coating; since one swallows it, no beracha is recited.<ref>Vezos Ha’beracha page 311, Piskei Teshuvos 204:18, see Nishmas Avraham 4:204:footnote 1. With regards to vitamins, refer to Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 68:footnote 39 alef, Beracha Achrona (Boreh Nefoshos) page 201. Refer to Nishmas Avraham (English) pages 89-90 quoting the opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l that a beracha is required. See Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. The same applies to vitamins (Yalkut Yosef 3:page 436). </ref>
# Some say that if one takes a pill in order to lose weight, and by taking the pill it makes one feel full, then one should recite a beracha on the pill, since it takes the place of food. Nonetheless, the poskim suggest that one should make a beracha on something else instead.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 70. </ref>
==Chewable ==
# According to those who recite a beracha on pleasant tasting medications, a beracha should be recited on a chewable pill which has a pleasant taste.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:18:footnote 74. </ref> One should recite a [[shehakol]] on a different food before consuming flavored Tums® that have a hechsher.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita. The Diamond – K hechsher on Tums may be relied upon (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita). One may not use Tums on [[Pesach]] if they are not certified for [[Pesach]] (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita). </ref>
==Intravenous==
# One who receives food in a liquid form from an intravenous injection does not recite a beracha on the food.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 13:35:3, Vezos Ha’beracha page 113 quoting the opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita. </ref>
==Drinking before a Procedure==
Very often, before a medical procedure is performed, the patient is given something to drink. This drink does not necessarily taste good on its own, but sweeteners are added to it. The status of whether a beracha would be recited is dependent on whether or not a beracha is recited on medicine that had sweetener added to it.<ref>Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:page 74:footnote 36. </ref> One who is given something to eat before a procedure would recite a beracha on the food.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 4:204:pages 7-8 quoting the opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l. </ref>

==Drinking Water for Medical Purposes ==
# When one is taking a pill that does not taste pleasant, and wants to drink water to mask the bad taste, no beracha is recited on the water.<ref>Aruch Ha’shulchan 204:18, Pnei Ha’shulchan page 146, Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 64, Binyan Sholom (old print) page 96, Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. Refer to Sheilas Rav 2:18:5. If one places water in liquid medicine to make it taste better, no beracha is recited on the water (Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76). If one needs to drink water for medical purposes and he is not thirsty, he should recite a beracha on something else and have in mind to exempt the water from a beracha (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Eishel Avraham Butchatch 204:7). </ref> The same is true if one is taking a pill and is not thirsty.<ref>Ben Ish Chai Mattos 1:12, Aruch Ha’shulchan 204:18, Miyum Ha’halacha 22, Rivevos Ephraim 6:76, Pischei Halacha Berochos 4:8, Oz Nedberu 10:22. Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l maintains that one may drink more water than necessary for a pill, and a beracha would not be required on that water (Ve’aleihu Lo Yeibol 1:pages 110-111). </ref>
# Before a woman goes for an ultrasound/sonogram, she is asked to drink water. No beracha is recited on the water.<ref>Refer to Yufei Leleiv 204:10, Sdei Chemed Berochos 33:page 260, Me’am Loez Yisro 247:page 580, Pnei Ha’shulchan page 146, Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76. </ref> It would seem that a nursing woman, who needs to drink a lot of water, would not recite a beracha on the water if she is not thirsty.<ref>Refer to Toras Hayoledes 62:3, Beracha Achrona page 196:5.</ref> However, others maintain that she should take food whose beracha is [[shehakol]] and exempt the beracha on the water.<ref>Toras Hayoledes {{ibid}}. </ref>
# Many times, after one brushes his teeth or rinses with mouthwash, he drinks water to rinse out his mouth. One does not recite a beracha on such water.<ref>Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76.</ref>
# If one has a sore throat and drinks water to clear his throat, it would seem that a beracha is not recited.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita.</ref> (In all the above situations, if one is thirsty, a beracha is recited). One who drinks a tasty beverage to take his pill, would recite a beracha on the beverage.<ref>Chesed L’alafim 204-205:4, Mishna Brurah 204:42, Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111, Yalkut Yosef 204:page 436. </ref>

==Medicine mixed with a food or water==
# It is very common to take a powdered medicine and mix it with a food or water. Some say that since the food which the medicine is mixed into is tafel, no beracha is recited. Nonetheless, others say that one should recite a beracha on the mixture.<ref>Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:pages 78-79. </ref> If the food (not medicine) is not a [[shehakol]],<ref>For example chunky applesauce. </ref> the Rama<ref>212:1. </ref> holds the beracha is a [[shehakol]] regardless of the beracha of the food, while others argue with this ruling.<ref>Refer to Magen Avraham 4, Gr’a, Mishna Brurah 4-5, 10, see Taz 7. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284. </ref> The Mishna Brurah<ref>212:4-5. </ref> maintains that one should avoid this situation when possible.<ref>Some say one should eat the other food before the medicine and then consume the medicine (Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284). </ref>

==Medicine taken during a Meal==
# When one consumes a medicine during a meal, a separate beracha is required since the medicine is not part of the meal.<ref>Shevet Ha’kehusi 3:78. </ref>

==Medicine in Pocket While Sleeping ==
# Food that was in one's pocket while he was sleeping may be eaten.<ref>Salmas Chaim 2:7, Rivevos Ephraim 4:7, Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:242, see Yufei Leleiv Y.D. 3:116:6, Yabia Omer Y.D. 1:9:23.</ref> The same halacha goes for medicine that was in one's pocket.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 17:35, Rivevos Ephraim 6:4, Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:245, Tosfas Orah page 421:3, see Nezer Ha’chaim page 217:165, Doleh U’mashka page 367.</ref>

==Storing food under a bed==
# Since there is ruach ra'ah under a bed, one should not store food under a bed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 116:5. </ref> However, one is allowed to store medicine under a bed and there is no concern of ruach ra'ah.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 17:32. Some say that if it's a medication which one recites a beracha on because of its pleasant taste, then it should not be placed under a bed (Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:245, see 3:229:2). </ref>

==Taking Medicine into the Bathroom ==
# It is permitted for one to walk into the bathroom with a pill etc.<ref>Be’er Moshe 8:41. </ref> Additionally, it is permitted to keep medicines in a medicine cabinet that is in the bathroom,<ref>Rivevos Ephraim 1:8:2, 2:6, Teshuvos V’hanhugos 1:11, Be’er Moshe 8:41. </ref> but one should not take his medicine with water in a bathroom.

==Reciting a Tefilla before taking Medication ==
# Some have a custom before taking medication to recite a yehi ratzon that all should be well.<ref>Refer to Shulchan Aruch 230:4, Magen Avraham 6, Mishna Brurah 6. Some say saying the yihiy ratzon exempts one from the beracha that one would recite on a sweet medication (Refer to Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111, Nishmas Avraham 204:page 91). </ref> This [[tefilla]] may be recited on [[Shabbos]] and is not a concern of asking for personal needs on [[Shabbos]].<ref>Refer to Shar Ha’tzyion 230:8, Bakashas B’[[Shabbos]] page 27:footnote 15. See Betzel Hachuchma 5:41.</ref>

==Taking Medicine on Shabbos ==
see [[Medicine on Shabbat]]

==Taking Pills on a Fast Day ==
# On a fast day, if someone is not feeling well and wants to take a pill, it's permitted to do so. Some say that one should wrap the pill in a tissue before swallowing it.<ref>Halichos Shlomo Moadim 2:13:footnote 8. </ref> Some poskim say that one may not use water to swallow a pill.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 550:4.</ref> (However, if one's doctor instructs him to take a pill on a fast day then even according to this opinion using a little water is permitted).<ref> Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]] etc) 16:3, Nishmas Avraham 5:page 46. </ref> Others say if one cannot take a pill without water then one may use a little water.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Teshuvos V’hanhugos 3:156. </ref> One should avoid this if possible on [[Tisha BeAv]], and on [[Yom Kippur]] since using water in order to swallow a pill is forbidden.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Teshuvos V’hanhugos 3:156.</ref> One is permitted to take a medication before a fast if it will enable him to have an easier fast.<ref>Nechamas Yisroel 27:22. </ref>
# There is a discussion in the poskim if one is allowed to use mouthwash on the morning of a fast day. Some poskim are stringent,<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Kinyan Torah 2:49:2, Modanei Yeshurin page 108, Chai Ha’Levi 5:48, Divrei Chachumim page 166:471 quoting the opinion of Harav Sheinberg Shlita. Some say if there is a need, brushing ones teeth is permitted (Divrei Chachumim Ibid). </ref> while others say if one will have bad breath then it is permitted.<ref>Be’er Moshe 8:94. Refer to Minchas Yitzchok 4:109. </ref>
# Taking Listerine Pocketpaks® (that have a hechsher) is not permitted on a fast day since one swallows the liquid which melts in the mouth.

==Consuming Gelatin and Gel-caps ==
# When one walks down the aisles in a pharmacy he may see many pills which contain a [[gelatin]] coating. This issue involves the discussion of [[gelatin]]. Below we will discuss what [[gelatin]] is and what its kosher status is, and how it applies to ingesting gel-caps.

==What is Gelatin?<ref>Gelatin comes from the Latin word “gelatus” which means stiff or frozen. </ref>==
#[[Gelatin]] is a protein which is derived from a naturally occurring protein known as collagen. Collagen is the component of animal connective tissue, bones, sinews and skin. [[Gelatin]] does not have any taste to it. [[Gelatin]] is widely used in the pharmaceutical industry to coat capsules as well as hold tablets together. In addition, [[gelatin]] is used in marshmallows, yogurt, ice cream, jello,<ref>Refer to [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 10-14. </ref> to remove cloudiness or haze in apple juice,<ref>www.oukosher.org. </ref> in gummy bears, throat lozenges, frostings, protein supplements, and sugar glazes.<ref>Star-K in Kashrus Kurrents in an article by Rabbi Mushell. This article can be seen at http://www.star-k.org/kashrus/kk-palate-gelatin.htm.</ref>

==How is it Manufactured? ==
# The source of [[gelatin]] is almost always the bones or hides of non-kosher animals. To improve the quality of the process, the raw material is pretreated by soaking the hard bones in a mixture of lime and water between 70-120 days. Soft bone and hides are treated with a five percent concentration of mineral acids for ten to thirty hours. [[Gelatin]] is then extracted from the pretreated material in a process which is like [[cooking]]. The bones are warmed in a series of runs at increasing temperatures. Eventually [[gelatin]] liquor is formed, which is then filtered and evaporated to remove the water and concentrate the liquor. The liquor is then cooled to form a gel. The gel is dried and cut into desired shapes.<ref>Refer to Medicines and Kashrus page 16, [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 15-22 in great depth, Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11. See Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 67:footnote 2 who maintains that most [[gelatin]] today is from pig skins. </ref>
# The poskim discuss many reasons why consuming [[gelatin]] may be permitted. Each one will be dealt with below.

==Bones from non-Kosher animals==
# The Toras Kohanim<ref>Parshas Sheminei 2:4. </ref> says the posuk "from non-pure animals one should not eat their flesh"<ref>Vayikra 11:8. </ref> excludes bones, sinews, and hooves. There is a discussion if there is no issur at all, or if there is an issur d'rabanan to consume the above items. The Rambam<ref>Hilchos Machalas Asuros 4:18. Refer to Rashi Vayikra 11:8 “mivsaram.” See Kashrus pages 245-249.</ref> is of the opinion that "one who eats from a non-kosher animal, it's skin, bones, sinews, horns, hooves, or nails, even though they are forbidden, is excused from punishment." It seems from the opinion of the Rambam that bones are forbidden d'rabanan, while others maintain that he does not seem to imply even an issur d'rabanan.<ref>Refer to Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:27 (end) page 44 who says [[gelatin]] is a sofuk issur. </ref> The opinion of Tosfas<ref>Mesechtas Avodah Zarah 69a “ha’hu.” Refer to Rosh Avodah Zarah 5:11. </ref> who talks about permitting bee legs implies that bones are indeed permitted.The opinion of some poskim is that the Rambam when implying that an issur d'rabbanan exists for bones was referring to soft bones which have some moisture to it, but hard and dry bones are permitted even according to the Rambam.<ref>Refer to Achiezer 3:33:5, Introduction of the Tzitz Eliezer volume 4 where he brings the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l. Some say there are no commercially made [[gelatin]] that come from hard bones today (Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 69). </ref>

==The Gelatin has changed ==
# The Mishna Brurah<ref>O.C. 216:7, see Magen Avraham 3. See OU document P-86 who says that fermentations are not considered kitniyos sh’nishtana. </ref> and others<ref>Shiurei Knesses Hagedolah 216:7, Rosh (Teshuvos) klal 24:6, Buei Chai Y.D. 103. </ref> say regarding "musk," which is a byproduct of blood that is found in the neck of a deer, we can consider it "changed," since the blood is turned into a new entity. Many poskim follow this opinion.<ref>Refer to Rosh Mesechtas Berochos 6:38, Mishna Brurah {{ibid}}. Refer to Magen Avraham O.C. 216:3, Taz 2. </ref> Using the same line of reasoning, some poskim permit the use of [[gelatin]] since it is totally changed from it original state.<ref>Refer to Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11:15, Tzitz Eliezer’s opinion expressed in the introduction to volume 4, see Melamed L’hoyel 2:35. </ref> Others are not convinced that one can draw a parallel between musk and [[gelatin]].<ref>Refer to Achi Ezer 3:33:5, Tzitz Eliezer {{ibid}} quoting the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Yeishiv Moshe page 165. </ref>

==Dried out Stomach / Gelatin ==
# The Rama<ref>Y.D. 87:10, see Shach 114:21. Refer to Pischei Teshuva 87:19, 21. </ref> says an animal's stomach lining which was salted and dried out so that it becomes like a piece of wood may be filled with milk since it does not retain any taste of meat.<ref>Refer to Shach 33 who says this applies to other organs as well, but initially this should not be done (Be’er Heitiv 27, see Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham 33). Refer to Achi Ezer 3:33:5 who says the Shach does not apply to hard bones. Some say this does not apply when a product is dried in a modern facility (Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 72:footnote 14). </ref> The same would apply to [[gelatin]] which is completely dried out.<ref>Opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l quoted in Kashrus and Medicines page 53:footnote 20, see Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11 in depth. </ref>
# A question which arises is, if a non-kosher food becomes like wood but is later edible does it change the status or does it retains its previous non-kosher status? Some say that once the product was dried it may not regain its non-kosher status.<ref>Refer o Shach Y.D. 114:21, Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 87:20, Nodeh B’Yehuda Y.D. 26, Aruch Ha’shulchan Y.D. 87:43, Achiezer 2:11, 3:33:5, Har Tzvi Y.D. 83, opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l (Edos L’Yisroel page 132), Orchos Habayis page 29. </ref> Others are stringent in this regard.<ref>Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham Y.D. 87:33, Chasam Sofer Y.D. 81, see Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:37, 2:27, Kovetz Teshuvos 1:73:page 107. See Mishnas Rav Aron 1:17:2. </ref>

==Contemporary Opinions==
# The opinion of the Achiezer<ref>2:11, 3:33:5. </ref> and others<ref>Refer to [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 95-119 in depth, Tzitz Eliezer introduction to volume 4 quoting the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l, Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11 in depth, Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l adds until now (1951) it has been accepted that [[gelatin]] is not permitted. Therefore he is concerned about permitting it. </ref> is to permit the consumption of [[gelatin]]. The opinion of Harav Henkin zt"l<ref>Edos L’Yisroel page 177. </ref> is that since this matter is not decided one should be stringent. This is the opinion of Harav Moshe Feinstein zt"l<ref>Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:27 (end). </ref> and others as well.<ref>Mishnas Rav Aron 17, Kovetz Teshuvos 1:73:page 107, Medicines and Kashrus pages 16-17 quoting other poskim.</ref> The opinion of the Israeli Rabbinate is to permit the consumption of [[gelatin]],<ref>Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 66:footnote 1. One who moves to Eretz Yisroel should ask if he can follow their opinion. </ref> while the Mehadrin kosher certification in Eretz Yisroel do not allow [[gelatin]].<ref>Kashrus page 349. </ref> The major kashrus organizations in the United States do not allow non-certified [[gelatin]].<ref>The Laws of [[Pesach]]: A Digest 2006 page 602. </ref> (The above discussion does not apply to taking gel-caps, as this will be discussed below).

==Status of Kosher Gelatin ==
# [[Gelatin]] made from a kosher source is considered pareve.<ref>Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:37, 2:27, Mishnas Rav Aron 1:16. </ref> Kosher [[gelatin]] is [[gelatin]] made from fish<ref>One may eat this together with meat as well and we are not concerned about the halacha of refraining from eating fish and meat together (Mesechtas Pesachim 76b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 116:2). In addition it is botel b’shishim. Some say maybe the whole concern was flesh of the fish with meat not the skins or bones. Additionally, the [[gelatin]] made from fish (and other sources) does not have a flavor (Star–K Kashrus Kurrents in an article by Rabbi Mushell). </ref> or glatt kosher beef hides.

==Gel Caps - Not in the Normal Manner==
# One who is sick is permitted to eat a non-kosher food (which is normally ossur b'achilah) in an unusual manner.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:3, Shach 14, Mishna Brurah O.C. 466:1. An example of this is giving someone non-kosher food through intravenous. </ref> Based on this, the opinion of some poskim is that swallowing a pill made from a [[gelatin]] coating is permitted, since it is for a sick person and it is not the usual manner of eating.<ref>Opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l quoted in Edos L’Yisroel page 132, opinion of Harav Shachter Shlita as expressed in OU document I-97. He adds that the gel-caps have no taste to them and are nifsal from feeding to a dog. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/894931/rabbi-hershel-schachter/berachos-73-38b-39a-ta-am-matzah-and-maror-non-kosher-pills-kavush-kemevushal-kezayis-beriah/ Rav Schachter (Brachot Shiur 73 min 18-30)] ruled that strictly speaking it is permitted to take non-kosher pills. If kosher ones are available he should get those to avoid the spiritual determinants of non-kosher like Rama about sucking non-kosher milk. He explained that certainly if a person is a choleh shein bo sakana it is permitted since it is shelo kderech achilato. But furthermore, the gelatin pills are permitted since it is nifsal machila and even if it is reconstituted it isn’t considered non-kosher (Chavot Daat YD 103). There's no achshevei since it is eaten in a reconstituted form and not when it is mixed with other ingredients (Rav Chaim Ozer 3:31). That's in Rav Schachter's opinion why Rav Soloveitchik was lenient to take non-kosher pills. Also, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1525&st=&pgnum=295 Rabbi Yitzchak Abadi in Or Yitzchak 1:24] permits all medicines that are bitter or don't have a taste since they aren't food and are considered nifsal machila.
* See Yachava Daat 2:60 who assumes it is shelo kderech achilato if it doesn't taste good and not nifsal machila.
* [https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/many-medications-encased-gelatin-capsules-may-used/?category Rav Belsky] held that hard capsules can be eaten by a choleh and the soft capsules can be eaten in a tissue paper. This is only when there are no alternatives.</ref> However, there are poskim who maintain that swallowing a pill is the regular manner of consumption.<ref>Refer to Nodeh B’Yehuda Y.D. 35, Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 155:6, Har Tzvi Y.D. 97, opinions of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l and Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Medicines and Kashrus page 57:footnote 17, Yeishiv Moshe page 165, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 169, Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]]) 1:page 69. This is the opinion of Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita quoting the opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l, see www.koltorah.org. </ref> Others are lenient and maintain that swallowing a pill is considered an unusual manner.<ref>Halichos Shlomo 1:17:1 (although he is quoted in the footnote above as saying otherwise), see Toras Chaim (Chullin 120) who is lenient</ref> In addition, even those who are stringent by [[gelatin]], it would not apply to medicines. However, according to the stringent opinion above regarding [[gelatin]], one who only has a headache<ref>Refer to Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]]) pages 71-72 who is unsure if this should be permitted with a slight pain. See Minchas Shlomo 1:17:3. </ref> or slight discomfort<ref>This does not apply to one who is bedridden (Halichos Shlomo Moadim [[Pesach]]) pages 71-72:8. The Shach 13 says this heter of the Rama is even for a healthy person. See Mishnah L’melech Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah 5:8 in depth, Zera Emes 2:48. Refer to Pri Megadim M.Z. O.C. 328:11, Shagas Aryeh 74, Binas Adom 52:page 86, Shevet Ha’Levi 7:135 who argue. Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita maintains if one has a headache he should not swallow gel-caps without wrapping it in a tissue. </ref> should take a pill which has no [[gelatin]] or wrap the gel-cap in a tissue.<ref>Refer to Mesora 14:page 92. Others say the custom is to be lenient with one who has even a headache (Chai Ha’Levi 3:111:2). </ref>

==Children's Medication==
# Children's medicine liquid medicine are generally sweet. If it contains glycerin and one doesn't have information that it is the kosher type of glycerin one shouldn't use the medicine until one first dilutes it 12 ml of another food to 1 ml of medicine.<ref>Rabbi Dovid Heber in [https://www.star-k.org/articles/articles/medicine/452/a-kashrus-guide-to-medications-vitamins-and-nutritional-supplements Kosher Kurrents 2005] wrote that glycerin in medicines is a safek deoritta since much of it is made from animals even though some of it is made from plants. However, since it is only a safek it is permitted to mevatel it. One can do so if one dilutes the medicine 1 to 12 of another food without lossing the potency of the medicine. See Mesorah Journal v. 7 pp. 91-97 by Rabbi Dovid Heber for a potential justification of giving medicines to children even if there are non-kosher ingredients. His argument is as follows: Feeding an isur derabbanan to a child is a machloket rashba and rambam (Bet Yosef OC 343). It might only be an isur derabbanan if it is a chatzi shiur in a tarovet. Also the isur is only a safek isur. Therefore, possibly there's a safek safeka, safek if it is a muter glycerin and if it is asur perhaps it is derabbanan (chatzi shiur btarovet). On the rabbinic level it is muter since it is a safek derabbanan. Additionally, a child is a choleh for whom some allow feeding a derabbanan isur. Either way it is a leniency based on complex factors.
* [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/731730/rabbi-daniel-stein/רפואות-שנתערבו-בהם-גליצערי-ן/ Rabbi Daniel Stein] in an article permits children medicines with glycerins for a number of reasons: 1) If the taste is bad even though there's other flavors added and it leaves a bad aftertaste perhaps that's considered nifsal machila. It seems difficult because donkey urine, ear wax, and mucus aren't considered nifsal machila (RSZA in Minchat Shlomo 1:17, Halichot Shlomo Nissan ch. 4 Dvar Halacha 9 p. 72). 2) Though it might be shelo kderech achila since it isn't taste good. Then for a sick person it is muter. 3) They're safek made from plants. 4) Isur Shenishtana since it changed from the taste and look from animal fat. 5) Maybe made inedible in the processing. 6) If its taste is masked by the other flavors you only need bitul brov since it doesn't have any taam and we can use kefilah. 7) It is only chatzi shiur of isur in a taarovet and for a sick person perhaps it is muter. He quotes Rav Schachter and Rav Willig as agreeing with him.</ref> However, the [https://www.star-k.org/resource/list/RR8I4NNG/Pain-Relievers-and-Fever-Reducers Star-K has an updated list] of kosher children's medicines which as of December 2018 includes Infant and Children's Advil and Tylenol. See [https://www.star-k.org/resources_medicine here] for more brands or medicines.

==Toothpaste and Mouthwash==
# There are ingredients in some toothpaste which are non-kosher animal products such as glycerin. Nonetheless, many poskim are lenient to allow a person to use such toothpastes since the non-kosher ingredients are inedible, mixed with kosher ingredients, and a person doesn't intend to eat the toothpaste but rather to brush with it, which is the halachic equivalent of tasting.<ref>Har Tzvi 95 was lenient with non-kosher toothpastes because the ingredients were processed so that they were inedible, they were mixed with kosher ingredients, and also a person is justing tasting the toothpaste and spitting it out. [http://www.tzohar.org.il/?p=2422 tzohar.org] quotes Ama Dvar p. 155 quoting Rav Mordechai Eliyahu who agreed. They also quote Mishneh Halachot 9:153 who disagreed. [https://oukosher.org/blog/consumer-kosher/kashruth-issues-of-toothpaste/ OU] wrote that some rabbis don't feel one can rely on the Har Tzvi today since the toothpastes have a good taste. But others still rely on the Har Tzvi. They cited Rav Henkin responsa 75 who mostly agreed with the Har Tzvi but wouldn't be lenient with toothpastes with glycerin.</ref>
# Some say that one shouldn't use mouthwash with glycerin in it since one might swallow some and glycerin can be made from teref animals.<ref>Rav Belsky (cited in article "Kashrut Rulings From Rabbi Belsky ZT"L" p. 37) held that since sometimes a person swallows some mouthwash it is forbidden to use it if there's an ingredient in it that isn't kosher such as glycerin (similar to Taz 98:2). He didn't consider mouthwash to be considered inedible.</ref> Others are lenient but still recommend getting a kosher one if available. See [https://www.crcweb.org/OTCMedicineReport.pdf CRC's list] for recommended mouthwashes and toothpastes.<ref> [https://www.ok.org/kosherspirit/fall-2007/students-questions/#:~:text=a%20kosher%20symbol%3F-,Answer%3A,not%20require%20a%20kosher%20symbol. The OK] is lenient on mouthwash and lipstick since they are not consumed. [https://www.crcweb.org/OTCMedicineReport.pdf CRC] quotes Rav Gedalya Dov Schwartz as holding that mouthwash doesn't need a hechsher but it is preferable to get one if it is possible. [https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/do-dental-products-require-a-hechsher-part-ii-the-kashrut-of-toothpaste-and-mouthwash-year-round-and-pesach-by-dr-ephraim-rudolph-98 Rav Jachter] quotes Rav Schachter as holding that mouthwash is considered inedible and therefore permitted even without a hechsher.</ref>

==Credits==
# Special thanks to Rabbi Moishe Dovid Lebovits Rabbinical Administrator for KOF-K Kosher Supervision and author of Halachically Speaking for this article. To reach the author please email mlebovits@kof-k.org.

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Kashrut]]
{{Kashrut}}

Medications

2024-08-23T15:27:40Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

[[Image:Medication.png | right | 100 px]]
Nowadays, when one is not feeling up to par, he takes a few medications and with Hashem's help feels better within a couple of days and then goes back to his regular routine. There are many halachic issues with regard to medications which need to be addressed. Is a beracha recited on pleasant tasting medication such as cough syrup? Does one have to recite a beracha on water when ingesting a pill? Can one walk into the bathroom with medicine? Can one take pills on [[Shabbos]]? Is it permitted to take a gel-cap? Can one take liquid medication which is full of flavors? What about vitamins? These issues will be dealt with at length in the upcoming sections.

==Beracha on Medication==
# A beracha is not recited on food which is eaten to heal if one does not have enjoyment from the food. However, if one does have enjoyment from the food, a beracha rishona and achrona (see below) are recited.<ref>Mesechtas Berochos 38a, Tosfas Mesechtas Berochos 36a “k’von,” Meiri Mesechtas Berochos 35b, Tur 204, Shulchan Aruch 204:8, Shulchan Aruch Harav 204:14, Chesed L’alafim 204-205:5, Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82. </ref> Even if one does not want the good tasting food and is only eating it because he is ill, a beracha is recited because he receives enjoyment from it.<ref>Mishna Brurah 43. </ref> Examples of medicines which require a beracha due to their pleasant taste are herbal teas and cough drops.<ref>V’sein Beracha page 200. Refer to Ateres Shlomo 8:page 110. This is the opinion and custom of Harav Pinchus Bodner Shlita (Personal telephone conversation with Harav Bodner Shlita). </ref>

==Medicine mixed with Sweeteners==
# Some say that even if the medicine itself does not have flavor, but is mixed with other ingredients (sweeteners) that have flavor, one still recites a beracha on the medicine.<ref>Opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita as expressed in Vezos Ha’beracha page 113. </ref> The reason for this opinion is because the mixture tastes pleasant and we do not look at the medicine before the taste was placed into it.<ref>Vezos Ha’beracha Birur Halacha page 310. </ref> This is the opinion of many poskim.<ref>Refer to Da’as Torah 204, Vezos Ha’beracha pages 310-311 in depth, opinion of Harav Ovadia Yosef Shlita quoted in Nishmas Avraham (English) page 89:footnote E. </ref>
# Some say that if one consumes a medicine which contains sweeteners (and if not for the need of the medicine one would not consume the sweeteners), then no beracha is required.<ref>Opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha pages 113-114, and in V’sein Beracha page 201:footnote 15.1. See explanation of this opinion in Vezos Ha’beracha page 312. Refer to Pnei Ha’shulchan page 151-152, Nishmas Avraham 1:204:page 91, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 191, Nishmas Avraham 1:page 90 (English), Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. In the Halichos Shlomo [[Yom Kippur]] 5:footnote 42 it states that Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l retracted his previous position with regard to not reciting a beracha on sweetened medication. Refer to Vezos Ha’beracha page 356:9 notes of Harav Forst Shlita on Vezos Ha’beracha. The opinion of Harav Pinchus Bonder Shlita is that no beracha is recited on pleasant tasting cough syrup based on the pesak he heard from Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l (Personal telephone conversation with Harav Bodner Shlita). </ref> Others say no beracha is recited because such sweetener is only a tafel to the actual medication, and if no beracha is recited on the ikur, then one does not recite a beracha on the tafel.<ref>Opinion of Harav Neuwirth Shlita quoted in Nishmas [[Shabbos]] 4:204, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 191. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:pages 282-284 in depth. However, see Mishna Brurah 174:39 and 212:1 who says the halacha is that a beracha is recited on the tafel. See Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 246 who disputes the claim that the reason why no beracha is recited here is because no beracha is recited on the tafel. Refer to Rivevos Ephraim 4:54:39. </ref> Nonetheless, others disagree with this reasoning and maintain that a beracha should be recited even in this situation.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 114, and in V’sein Beracha page 200:footnote 15, opinion of Harav Ovadia Yosef quoted in Yalkut Yosef 204:10:footnote 10, opinion of Harav Feinhandler Shlita (Avnei Yushfei in a personal e-[[mail]]). Refer to Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82, Pischei Halacha (Berochos page 246). Others say that it could be that Harav Elyashiv Shlita held this only in regard to medicine that is thoroughly enjoyed (Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:page 77:footnote 43).</ref> Since there is a dispute in this regard, one should recite a beracha on a different [[shehakol]] food and have in mind to exempt the medicine.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 75. </ref>
# According to all opinions, medicine for children which is sweet like candy would require a beracha.<ref>Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 68:footnote 39 alef. </ref>

==No Beracha Required ==
# One who is forced to eat or drink something does not recite a beracha, even if it tastes pleasant.<ref>Shulchan Aruch {{ibid}}, Kaf Ha’chaim 49, see Magen Avraham 20 Taz 12, Aruch Ha’shulchan 19. Refer to Mishna Brurah 204:44 who maintains if one is forced to eat bread and he is satisfied, he should bentch since it is d’oraisa. </ref>
# A bad tasting food does not require a beracha before eating it.<ref>Bais Yosef, Magen Avraham 19, Mishna Brurah 43, Kaf Ha’chaim 48. </ref>
==How Much to Eat or Drink? ==
# Some poskim are of the opinion that one does not recite a beracha on a pleasant tasting medicine unless one ate a kezayis or drank a reviis of it. The reason for this is that just as one who tastes food does not recite a beracha unless a kezayis or reviis is consumed (Berachot 14a); the same applies for medications, since one does not have intent for eating.<ref>Refer to Shevet Ha’kehusi 3:84:3. </ref> Nonetheless, the poskim do not make this comparison, and therefore a beracha on pleasant tasting medicine would be required regardless of the amount being consumed, since one's intent is to swallow the medicine, as opposed to the "tasting" case where one does not intend to have enjoyment.<ref>Refer to Mikroei Kodesh [[Pesach]] 2:page 144, Halacha U’[[refuah]] page 278, Pischei Halacha (Berochos page 66:footnote 38), Chazzon Ovadia Berochos page 159:footnote 6. </ref>

==Which Beracha Rishona?==
# The Rama<ref>204:11. Refer to Aruch Ha’shulchan 22. </ref> says that any food which a healthy person does not eat requires a [[shehakol]] if taken as medication, regardless of the food's real beracha.<ref>Aruch Ha’shulchan 22. Refer to Mishna Brurah 54. The Shar Ha’tzyion 45 says this applies to medicine which was made from the five grains as well. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284. </ref> Others say one should recite the appropriate beracha.<ref>Magen Avraham 24, Mishna Brurah 55, Igros Moshe O.C. 1:82. </ref> The Mishna Brurah<ref>212:4-5. </ref> maintains that one should avoid this situation when possible.<ref>Some say one should eat the other food before the medicine and then consume the medicine (Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284). </ref>

==Beracha Achrona==
# One who recited a [[shehakol]] on a medication would be required to recite a beracha achrona if the proper shiur was consumed.<ref>Halacha U’[[refuah]] page 278. </ref>
==Listerine Pocketpaks®==
# For years, people have been erroneously consuming Listerine Pocketpaks® without a hechsher, but obviously this product needs a hechsher,<ref>See www.koltorah.org quoting the opinion of Rabbi Chaim Jachter Shlita. </ref> especially since it is digested in the stomach.<ref>Opinion of Harav Yisroel Belsky as expressed in OU document I-98:page 2. </ref> Recently, this product has become available with a hechsher. The question arises if this product requires a beracha prior to placing it in one's mouth. Many people do not recite a beracha. However, even though this product melts in the mouth, it is swallowed and therefore, according to some poskim, a beracha of [[shehakol]] should be recited before placing it in the mouth.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, opinion of Harav Forscheimer Shlita (personal telephone conversation), and Harav Doniel Neustadt Shlita. </ref> Others maintain that a beracha does not need to be recited.<ref>Opinion of Harav Pinchus Bodner Shlita, Harav Ephraim Greenblatt Shlita (Personal telephone conversations). Harav Forst Shlita says that if one takes it to enjoy the flavor, then a beracha is recited. However, if one takes it remove one's bad breath, then no beracha is recited. The opinions of Rabbi Wikler Shlita, Harav Felder Shlita, Harav Fuerst Shlita (personal telephone conversations with the aforementioned rabbonim). This is the opinion of Harav Yisroel Reisman Shlita (as related by Rabbi Shimon Newmark). </ref>
# The company says that there is nothing unsafe with swallowing it, since there is no alcohol in the product.<ref>Based on a conversation with Lisa at the Johnson and Johnson Company. </ref> If one uses a breath mist (with a hechsher), then one does not recite a beracha on it. Instead, one should make a [[shehakol]] on a different food.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita.</ref>
==Pills which are swallowed==
# If there is no flavor in the coating of a pill, then no beracha is recited, because there is no enjoyment from the pill. Additionally, swallowing medication without chewing it first, is not the normal manner of consumption and is not viewed halachically as eating. Furthermore, it is possible that these pills are not fit to be eaten<ref>Refer to Mesechtas Avodah Zarah 67-68, Mesechtas Pesachim 21b and 45b. In addition see Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 103, and Y.D. 155:3. </ref> and therefore do not require a beracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 202:2, see Chazzon Ovadia Berochos page 158, Piskei Teshuvos 204:18:footnote 70. </ref> Some say that this even applies to a pill which has a sweet coating; since one swallows it, no beracha is recited.<ref>Vezos Ha’beracha page 311, Piskei Teshuvos 204:18, see Nishmas Avraham 4:204:footnote 1. With regards to vitamins, refer to Pischei Halacha (Berochos) page 68:footnote 39 alef, Beracha Achrona (Boreh Nefoshos) page 201. Refer to Nishmas Avraham (English) pages 89-90 quoting the opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l that a beracha is required. See Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. The same applies to vitamins (Yalkut Yosef 3:page 436). </ref>
# Some say that if one takes a pill in order to lose weight, and by taking the pill it makes one feel full, then one should recite a beracha on the pill, since it takes the place of food. Nonetheless, the poskim suggest that one should make a beracha on something else instead.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 70. </ref>
==Chewable ==
# According to those who recite a beracha on pleasant tasting medications, a beracha should be recited on a chewable pill which has a pleasant taste.<ref>Piskei Teshuvos 204:18:footnote 74. </ref> One should recite a [[shehakol]] on a different food before consuming flavored Tums® that have a hechsher.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita. The Diamond – K hechsher on Tums may be relied upon (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita). One may not use Tums on [[Pesach]] if they are not certified for [[Pesach]] (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita). </ref>
==Intravenous==
# One who receives food in a liquid form from an intravenous injection does not recite a beracha on the food.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 13:35:3, Vezos Ha’beracha page 113 quoting the opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita. </ref>
==Drinking before a Procedure==
Very often, before a medical procedure is performed, the patient is given something to drink. This drink does not necessarily taste good on its own, but sweeteners are added to it. The status of whether a beracha would be recited is dependent on whether or not a beracha is recited on medicine that had sweetener added to it.<ref>Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:page 74:footnote 36. </ref> One who is given something to eat before a procedure would recite a beracha on the food.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 4:204:pages 7-8 quoting the opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l. </ref>

==Drinking Water for Medical Purposes ==
# When one is taking a pill that does not taste pleasant, and wants to drink water to mask the bad taste, no beracha is recited on the water.<ref>Aruch Ha’shulchan 204:18, Pnei Ha’shulchan page 146, Piskei Teshuvos 204:footnote 64, Binyan Sholom (old print) page 96, Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111. Refer to Sheilas Rav 2:18:5. If one places water in liquid medicine to make it taste better, no beracha is recited on the water (Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76). If one needs to drink water for medical purposes and he is not thirsty, he should recite a beracha on something else and have in mind to exempt the water from a beracha (Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Eishel Avraham Butchatch 204:7). </ref> The same is true if one is taking a pill and is not thirsty.<ref>Ben Ish Chai Mattos 1:12, Aruch Ha’shulchan 204:18, Miyum Ha’halacha 22, Rivevos Ephraim 6:76, Pischei Halacha Berochos 4:8, Oz Nedberu 10:22. Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l maintains that one may drink more water than necessary for a pill, and a beracha would not be required on that water (Ve’aleihu Lo Yeibol 1:pages 110-111). </ref>
# Before a woman goes for an ultrasound/sonogram, she is asked to drink water. No beracha is recited on the water.<ref>Refer to Yufei Leleiv 204:10, Sdei Chemed Berochos 33:page 260, Me’am Loez Yisro 247:page 580, Pnei Ha’shulchan page 146, Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76. </ref> It would seem that a nursing woman, who needs to drink a lot of water, would not recite a beracha on the water if she is not thirsty.<ref>Refer to Toras Hayoledes 62:3, Beracha Achrona page 196:5.</ref> However, others maintain that she should take food whose beracha is [[shehakol]] and exempt the beracha on the water.<ref>Toras Hayoledes {{ibid}}. </ref>
# Many times, after one brushes his teeth or rinses with mouthwash, he drinks water to rinse out his mouth. One does not recite a beracha on such water.<ref>Sharei Ha’beracha 18:footnote 76.</ref>
# If one has a sore throat and drinks water to clear his throat, it would seem that a beracha is not recited.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita.</ref> (In all the above situations, if one is thirsty, a beracha is recited). One who drinks a tasty beverage to take his pill, would recite a beracha on the beverage.<ref>Chesed L’alafim 204-205:4, Mishna Brurah 204:42, Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111, Yalkut Yosef 204:page 436. </ref>

==Medicine mixed with a food or water==
# It is very common to take a powdered medicine and mix it with a food or water. Some say that since the food which the medicine is mixed into is tafel, no beracha is recited. Nonetheless, others say that one should recite a beracha on the mixture.<ref>Refer to Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 53:pages 78-79. </ref> If the food (not medicine) is not a [[shehakol]],<ref>For example chunky applesauce. </ref> the Rama<ref>212:1. </ref> holds the beracha is a [[shehakol]] regardless of the beracha of the food, while others argue with this ruling.<ref>Refer to Magen Avraham 4, Gr’a, Mishna Brurah 4-5, 10, see Taz 7. Refer to Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284. </ref> The Mishna Brurah<ref>212:4-5. </ref> maintains that one should avoid this situation when possible.<ref>Some say one should eat the other food before the medicine and then consume the medicine (Halacha U’[[refuah]] 3:page 284). </ref>

==Medicine taken during a Meal==
# When one consumes a medicine during a meal, a separate beracha is required since the medicine is not part of the meal.<ref>Shevet Ha’kehusi 3:78. </ref>

==Medicine in Pocket While Sleeping ==
# Food that was in one's pocket while he was sleeping may be eaten.<ref>Salmas Chaim 2:7, Rivevos Ephraim 4:7, Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:242, see Yufei Leleiv Y.D. 3:116:6, Yabia Omer Y.D. 1:9:23.</ref> The same halacha goes for medicine that was in one's pocket.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 17:35, Rivevos Ephraim 6:4, Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:245, Tosfas Orah page 421:3, see Nezer Ha’chaim page 217:165, Doleh U’mashka page 367.</ref>

==Storing food under a bed==
# Since there is ruach ra'ah under a bed, one should not store food under a bed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 116:5. </ref> However, one is allowed to store medicine under a bed and there is no concern of ruach ra'ah.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 17:32. Some say that if it's a medication which one recites a beracha on because of its pleasant taste, then it should not be placed under a bed (Shevet Ha’kehusi 2:245, see 3:229:2). </ref>

==Taking Medicine into the Bathroom ==
# It is permitted for one to walk into the bathroom with a pill etc.<ref>Be’er Moshe 8:41. </ref> Additionally, it is permitted to keep medicines in a medicine cabinet that is in the bathroom,<ref>Rivevos Ephraim 1:8:2, 2:6, Teshuvos V’hanhugos 1:11, Be’er Moshe 8:41. </ref> but one should not take his medicine with water in a bathroom.

==Reciting a Tefilla before taking Medication ==
# Some have a custom before taking medication to recite a yehi ratzon that all should be well.<ref>Refer to Shulchan Aruch 230:4, Magen Avraham 6, Mishna Brurah 6. Some say saying the yihiy ratzon exempts one from the beracha that one would recite on a sweet medication (Refer to Ateres Shlomo 8:page 111, Nishmas Avraham 204:page 91). </ref> This [[tefilla]] may be recited on [[Shabbos]] and is not a concern of asking for personal needs on [[Shabbos]].<ref>Refer to Shar Ha’tzyion 230:8, Bakashas B’[[Shabbos]] page 27:footnote 15. See Betzel Hachuchma 5:41.</ref>

==Taking Medicine on Shabbos ==
see [[Medicine on Shabbat]]

==Taking Pills on a Fast Day ==
# On a fast day one that is not feeling well and wants to take a pill is permitted to do so. Some say one should wrap the pill in a tissue before swallowing it.<ref>Halichos Shlomo Moadim 2:13:footnote 8. </ref> Some poskim say that one may not use water to swallow a pill.<ref>Nishmas Avraham 550:4.</ref> (However, if one's doctor instructs him to take a pill on a fast day then even according to this opinion using a little water is permitted).<ref> Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]] etc) 16:3, Nishmas Avraham 5:page 46. </ref> Others say if one cannot take a pill without water then one may use a little water.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Teshuvos V’hanhugos 3:156. </ref> One should avoid this if possible on [[Tisha BeAv]], and on [[Yom Kippur]] since using water in order to swallow a pill is forbidden.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Teshuvos V’hanhugos 3:156.</ref> One is permitted to take a medication before a fast if it will enable him to have an easier fast.<ref>Nechamas Yisroel 27:22. </ref>
# There is a discussion in the poskim if one is allowed to use mouthwash on the morning of a fast day. Some poskim are stringent,<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Kinyan Torah 2:49:2, Modanei Yeshurin page 108, Chai Ha’Levi 5:48, Divrei Chachumim page 166:471 quoting the opinion of Harav Sheinberg Shlita. Some say if there is a need, brushing ones teeth is permitted (Divrei Chachumim Ibid). </ref> while others say if one will have bad breath then it is permitted.<ref>Be’er Moshe 8:94. Refer to Minchas Yitzchok 4:109. </ref>
# Taking Listerine Pocketpaks® (that have a hechsher) is not permitted on a fast day since one swallows the liquid which melts in the mouth.

==Consuming Gelatin and Gel-caps ==
# When one walks down the aisles in a pharmacy he may see many pills which contain a [[gelatin]] coating. This issue involves the discussion of [[gelatin]]. Below we will discuss what [[gelatin]] is and what its kosher status is, and how it applies to ingesting gel-caps.

==What is Gelatin?<ref>Gelatin comes from the Latin word “gelatus” which means stiff or frozen. </ref>==
#[[Gelatin]] is a protein which is derived from a naturally occurring protein known as collagen. Collagen is the component of animal connective tissue, bones, sinews and skin. [[Gelatin]] does not have any taste to it. [[Gelatin]] is widely used in the pharmaceutical industry to coat capsules as well as hold tablets together. In addition, [[gelatin]] is used in marshmallows, yogurt, ice cream, jello,<ref>Refer to [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 10-14. </ref> to remove cloudiness or haze in apple juice,<ref>www.oukosher.org. </ref> in gummy bears, throat lozenges, frostings, protein supplements, and sugar glazes.<ref>Star-K in Kashrus Kurrents in an article by Rabbi Mushell. This article can be seen at http://www.star-k.org/kashrus/kk-palate-gelatin.htm.</ref>

==How is it Manufactured? ==
# The source of [[gelatin]] is almost always the bones or hides of non-kosher animals. To improve the quality of the process, the raw material is pretreated by soaking the hard bones in a mixture of lime and water between 70-120 days. Soft bone and hides are treated with a five percent concentration of mineral acids for ten to thirty hours. [[Gelatin]] is then extracted from the pretreated material in a process which is like [[cooking]]. The bones are warmed in a series of runs at increasing temperatures. Eventually [[gelatin]] liquor is formed, which is then filtered and evaporated to remove the water and concentrate the liquor. The liquor is then cooled to form a gel. The gel is dried and cut into desired shapes.<ref>Refer to Medicines and Kashrus page 16, [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 15-22 in great depth, Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11. See Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 67:footnote 2 who maintains that most [[gelatin]] today is from pig skins. </ref>
# The poskim discuss many reasons why consuming [[gelatin]] may be permitted. Each one will be dealt with below.

==Bones from non-Kosher animals==
# The Toras Kohanim<ref>Parshas Sheminei 2:4. </ref> says the posuk "from non-pure animals one should not eat their flesh"<ref>Vayikra 11:8. </ref> excludes bones, sinews, and hooves. There is a discussion if there is no issur at all, or if there is an issur d'rabanan to consume the above items. The Rambam<ref>Hilchos Machalas Asuros 4:18. Refer to Rashi Vayikra 11:8 “mivsaram.” See Kashrus pages 245-249.</ref> is of the opinion that "one who eats from a non-kosher animal, it's skin, bones, sinews, horns, hooves, or nails, even though they are forbidden, is excused from punishment." It seems from the opinion of the Rambam that bones are forbidden d'rabanan, while others maintain that he does not seem to imply even an issur d'rabanan.<ref>Refer to Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:27 (end) page 44 who says [[gelatin]] is a sofuk issur. </ref> The opinion of Tosfas<ref>Mesechtas Avodah Zarah 69a “ha’hu.” Refer to Rosh Avodah Zarah 5:11. </ref> who talks about permitting bee legs implies that bones are indeed permitted.The opinion of some poskim is that the Rambam when implying that an issur d'rabbanan exists for bones was referring to soft bones which have some moisture to it, but hard and dry bones are permitted even according to the Rambam.<ref>Refer to Achiezer 3:33:5, Introduction of the Tzitz Eliezer volume 4 where he brings the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l. Some say there are no commercially made [[gelatin]] that come from hard bones today (Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 69). </ref>

==The Gelatin has changed ==
# The Mishna Brurah<ref>O.C. 216:7, see Magen Avraham 3. See OU document P-86 who says that fermentations are not considered kitniyos sh’nishtana. </ref> and others<ref>Shiurei Knesses Hagedolah 216:7, Rosh (Teshuvos) klal 24:6, Buei Chai Y.D. 103. </ref> say regarding "musk," which is a byproduct of blood that is found in the neck of a deer, we can consider it "changed," since the blood is turned into a new entity. Many poskim follow this opinion.<ref>Refer to Rosh Mesechtas Berochos 6:38, Mishna Brurah {{ibid}}. Refer to Magen Avraham O.C. 216:3, Taz 2. </ref> Using the same line of reasoning, some poskim permit the use of [[gelatin]] since it is totally changed from it original state.<ref>Refer to Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11:15, Tzitz Eliezer’s opinion expressed in the introduction to volume 4, see Melamed L’hoyel 2:35. </ref> Others are not convinced that one can draw a parallel between musk and [[gelatin]].<ref>Refer to Achi Ezer 3:33:5, Tzitz Eliezer {{ibid}} quoting the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Yeishiv Moshe page 165. </ref>

==Dried out Stomach / Gelatin ==
# The Rama<ref>Y.D. 87:10, see Shach 114:21. Refer to Pischei Teshuva 87:19, 21. </ref> says an animal's stomach lining which was salted and dried out so that it becomes like a piece of wood may be filled with milk since it does not retain any taste of meat.<ref>Refer to Shach 33 who says this applies to other organs as well, but initially this should not be done (Be’er Heitiv 27, see Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham 33). Refer to Achi Ezer 3:33:5 who says the Shach does not apply to hard bones. Some say this does not apply when a product is dried in a modern facility (Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 72:footnote 14). </ref> The same would apply to [[gelatin]] which is completely dried out.<ref>Opinion of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l quoted in Kashrus and Medicines page 53:footnote 20, see Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11 in depth. </ref>
# A question which arises is, if a non-kosher food becomes like wood but is later edible does it change the status or does it retains its previous non-kosher status? Some say that once the product was dried it may not regain its non-kosher status.<ref>Refer o Shach Y.D. 114:21, Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 87:20, Nodeh B’Yehuda Y.D. 26, Aruch Ha’shulchan Y.D. 87:43, Achiezer 2:11, 3:33:5, Har Tzvi Y.D. 83, opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l (Edos L’Yisroel page 132), Orchos Habayis page 29. </ref> Others are stringent in this regard.<ref>Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham Y.D. 87:33, Chasam Sofer Y.D. 81, see Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:37, 2:27, Kovetz Teshuvos 1:73:page 107. See Mishnas Rav Aron 1:17:2. </ref>

==Contemporary Opinions==
# The opinion of the Achiezer<ref>2:11, 3:33:5. </ref> and others<ref>Refer to [[Gelatin]] in Jewish Law pages 95-119 in depth, Tzitz Eliezer introduction to volume 4 quoting the opinion of Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l, Yabia Omer Y.D. 8:11 in depth, Harav Yecheskel Abramsky zt”l adds until now (1951) it has been accepted that [[gelatin]] is not permitted. Therefore he is concerned about permitting it. </ref> is to permit the consumption of [[gelatin]]. The opinion of Harav Henkin zt"l<ref>Edos L’Yisroel page 177. </ref> is that since this matter is not decided one should be stringent. This is the opinion of Harav Moshe Feinstein zt"l<ref>Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:27 (end). </ref> and others as well.<ref>Mishnas Rav Aron 17, Kovetz Teshuvos 1:73:page 107, Medicines and Kashrus pages 16-17 quoting other poskim.</ref> The opinion of the Israeli Rabbinate is to permit the consumption of [[gelatin]],<ref>Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society 30:page 66:footnote 1. One who moves to Eretz Yisroel should ask if he can follow their opinion. </ref> while the Mehadrin kosher certification in Eretz Yisroel do not allow [[gelatin]].<ref>Kashrus page 349. </ref> The major kashrus organizations in the United States do not allow non-certified [[gelatin]].<ref>The Laws of [[Pesach]]: A Digest 2006 page 602. </ref> (The above discussion does not apply to taking gel-caps, as this will be discussed below).

==Status of Kosher Gelatin ==
# [[Gelatin]] made from a kosher source is considered pareve.<ref>Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:37, 2:27, Mishnas Rav Aron 1:16. </ref> Kosher [[gelatin]] is [[gelatin]] made from fish<ref>One may eat this together with meat as well and we are not concerned about the halacha of refraining from eating fish and meat together (Mesechtas Pesachim 76b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 116:2). In addition it is botel b’shishim. Some say maybe the whole concern was flesh of the fish with meat not the skins or bones. Additionally, the [[gelatin]] made from fish (and other sources) does not have a flavor (Star–K Kashrus Kurrents in an article by Rabbi Mushell). </ref> or glatt kosher beef hides.

==Gel Caps - Not in the Normal Manner==
# One who is sick is permitted to eat a non-kosher food (which is normally ossur b'achilah) in an unusual manner.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 155:3, Shach 14, Mishna Brurah O.C. 466:1. An example of this is giving someone non-kosher food through intravenous. </ref> Based on this, the opinion of some poskim is that swallowing a pill made from a [[gelatin]] coating is permitted, since it is for a sick person and it is not the usual manner of eating.<ref>Opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l quoted in Edos L’Yisroel page 132, opinion of Harav Shachter Shlita as expressed in OU document I-97. He adds that the gel-caps have no taste to them and are nifsal from feeding to a dog. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/894931/rabbi-hershel-schachter/berachos-73-38b-39a-ta-am-matzah-and-maror-non-kosher-pills-kavush-kemevushal-kezayis-beriah/ Rav Schachter (Brachot Shiur 73 min 18-30)] ruled that strictly speaking it is permitted to take non-kosher pills. If kosher ones are available he should get those to avoid the spiritual determinants of non-kosher like Rama about sucking non-kosher milk. He explained that certainly if a person is a choleh shein bo sakana it is permitted since it is shelo kderech achilato. But furthermore, the gelatin pills are permitted since it is nifsal machila and even if it is reconstituted it isn’t considered non-kosher (Chavot Daat YD 103). There's no achshevei since it is eaten in a reconstituted form and not when it is mixed with other ingredients (Rav Chaim Ozer 3:31). That's in Rav Schachter's opinion why Rav Soloveitchik was lenient to take non-kosher pills. Also, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1525&st=&pgnum=295 Rabbi Yitzchak Abadi in Or Yitzchak 1:24] permits all medicines that are bitter or don't have a taste since they aren't food and are considered nifsal machila.
* See Yachava Daat 2:60 who assumes it is shelo kderech achilato if it doesn't taste good and not nifsal machila.
* [https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/many-medications-encased-gelatin-capsules-may-used/?category Rav Belsky] held that hard capsules can be eaten by a choleh and the soft capsules can be eaten in a tissue paper. This is only when there are no alternatives.</ref> However, there are poskim who maintain that swallowing a pill is the regular manner of consumption.<ref>Refer to Nodeh B’Yehuda Y.D. 35, Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 155:6, Har Tzvi Y.D. 97, opinions of Harav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach zt”l and Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in Medicines and Kashrus page 57:footnote 17, Yeishiv Moshe page 165, Shemiras [[Shabbos]] K’hilchoso 40:footnote 169, Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]]) 1:page 69. This is the opinion of Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita quoting the opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l, see www.koltorah.org. </ref> Others are lenient and maintain that swallowing a pill is considered an unusual manner.<ref>Halichos Shlomo 1:17:1 (although he is quoted in the footnote above as saying otherwise), see Toras Chaim (Chullin 120) who is lenient</ref> In addition, even those who are stringent by [[gelatin]], it would not apply to medicines. However, according to the stringent opinion above regarding [[gelatin]], one who only has a headache<ref>Refer to Halichos Shlomo Moadim ([[Pesach]]) pages 71-72 who is unsure if this should be permitted with a slight pain. See Minchas Shlomo 1:17:3. </ref> or slight discomfort<ref>This does not apply to one who is bedridden (Halichos Shlomo Moadim [[Pesach]]) pages 71-72:8. The Shach 13 says this heter of the Rama is even for a healthy person. See Mishnah L’melech Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah 5:8 in depth, Zera Emes 2:48. Refer to Pri Megadim M.Z. O.C. 328:11, Shagas Aryeh 74, Binas Adom 52:page 86, Shevet Ha’Levi 7:135 who argue. Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita maintains if one has a headache he should not swallow gel-caps without wrapping it in a tissue. </ref> should take a pill which has no [[gelatin]] or wrap the gel-cap in a tissue.<ref>Refer to Mesora 14:page 92. Others say the custom is to be lenient with one who has even a headache (Chai Ha’Levi 3:111:2). </ref>

==Children's Medication==
# Children's medicine liquid medicine are generally sweet. If it contains glycerin and one doesn't have information that it is the kosher type of glycerin one shouldn't use the medicine until one first dilutes it 12 ml of another food to 1 ml of medicine.<ref>Rabbi Dovid Heber in [https://www.star-k.org/articles/articles/medicine/452/a-kashrus-guide-to-medications-vitamins-and-nutritional-supplements Kosher Kurrents 2005] wrote that glycerin in medicines is a safek deoritta since much of it is made from animals even though some of it is made from plants. However, since it is only a safek it is permitted to mevatel it. One can do so if one dilutes the medicine 1 to 12 of another food without lossing the potency of the medicine. See Mesorah Journal v. 7 pp. 91-97 by Rabbi Dovid Heber for a potential justification of giving medicines to children even if there are non-kosher ingredients. His argument is as follows: Feeding an isur derabbanan to a child is a machloket rashba and rambam (Bet Yosef OC 343). It might only be an isur derabbanan if it is a chatzi shiur in a tarovet. Also the isur is only a safek isur. Therefore, possibly there's a safek safeka, safek if it is a muter glycerin and if it is asur perhaps it is derabbanan (chatzi shiur btarovet). On the rabbinic level it is muter since it is a safek derabbanan. Additionally, a child is a choleh for whom some allow feeding a derabbanan isur. Either way it is a leniency based on complex factors.
* [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/731730/rabbi-daniel-stein/רפואות-שנתערבו-בהם-גליצערי-ן/ Rabbi Daniel Stein] in an article permits children medicines with glycerins for a number of reasons: 1) If the taste is bad even though there's other flavors added and it leaves a bad aftertaste perhaps that's considered nifsal machila. It seems difficult because donkey urine, ear wax, and mucus aren't considered nifsal machila (RSZA in Minchat Shlomo 1:17, Halichot Shlomo Nissan ch. 4 Dvar Halacha 9 p. 72). 2) Though it might be shelo kderech achila since it isn't taste good. Then for a sick person it is muter. 3) They're safek made from plants. 4) Isur Shenishtana since it changed from the taste and look from animal fat. 5) Maybe made inedible in the processing. 6) If its taste is masked by the other flavors you only need bitul brov since it doesn't have any taam and we can use kefilah. 7) It is only chatzi shiur of isur in a taarovet and for a sick person perhaps it is muter. He quotes Rav Schachter and Rav Willig as agreeing with him.</ref> However, the [https://www.star-k.org/resource/list/RR8I4NNG/Pain-Relievers-and-Fever-Reducers Star-K has an updated list] of kosher children's medicines which as of December 2018 includes Infant and Children's Advil and Tylenol. See [https://www.star-k.org/resources_medicine here] for more brands or medicines.

==Toothpaste and Mouthwash==
# There are ingredients in some toothpaste which are non-kosher animal products such as glycerin. Nonetheless, many poskim are lenient to allow a person to use such toothpastes since the non-kosher ingredients are inedible, mixed with kosher ingredients, and a person doesn't intend to eat the toothpaste but rather to brush with it, which is the halachic equivalent of tasting.<ref>Har Tzvi 95 was lenient with non-kosher toothpastes because the ingredients were processed so that they were inedible, they were mixed with kosher ingredients, and also a person is justing tasting the toothpaste and spitting it out. [http://www.tzohar.org.il/?p=2422 tzohar.org] quotes Ama Dvar p. 155 quoting Rav Mordechai Eliyahu who agreed. They also quote Mishneh Halachot 9:153 who disagreed. [https://oukosher.org/blog/consumer-kosher/kashruth-issues-of-toothpaste/ OU] wrote that some rabbis don't feel one can rely on the Har Tzvi today since the toothpastes have a good taste. But others still rely on the Har Tzvi. They cited Rav Henkin responsa 75 who mostly agreed with the Har Tzvi but wouldn't be lenient with toothpastes with glycerin.</ref>
# Some say that one shouldn't use mouthwash with glycerin in it since one might swallow some and glycerin can be made from teref animals.<ref>Rav Belsky (cited in article "Kashrut Rulings From Rabbi Belsky ZT"L" p. 37) held that since sometimes a person swallows some mouthwash it is forbidden to use it if there's an ingredient in it that isn't kosher such as glycerin (similar to Taz 98:2). He didn't consider mouthwash to be considered inedible.</ref> Others are lenient but still recommend getting a kosher one if available. See [https://www.crcweb.org/OTCMedicineReport.pdf CRC's list] for recommended mouthwashes and toothpastes.<ref> [https://www.ok.org/kosherspirit/fall-2007/students-questions/#:~:text=a%20kosher%20symbol%3F-,Answer%3A,not%20require%20a%20kosher%20symbol. The OK] is lenient on mouthwash and lipstick since they are not consumed. [https://www.crcweb.org/OTCMedicineReport.pdf CRC] quotes Rav Gedalya Dov Schwartz as holding that mouthwash doesn't need a hechsher but it is preferable to get one if it is possible. [https://www.koltorah.org/halachah/do-dental-products-require-a-hechsher-part-ii-the-kashrut-of-toothpaste-and-mouthwash-year-round-and-pesach-by-dr-ephraim-rudolph-98 Rav Jachter] quotes Rav Schachter as holding that mouthwash is considered inedible and therefore permitted even without a hechsher.</ref>

==Credits==
# Special thanks to Rabbi Moishe Dovid Lebovits Rabbinical Administrator for KOF-K Kosher Supervision and author of Halachically Speaking for this article. To reach the author please email mlebovits@kof-k.org.

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Kashrut]]
{{Kashrut}}

Glatt Kosher Meat

2024-08-23T14:40:09Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

==Kosher vs Glatt==
#The Ashkenazic minhag for centuries was to allow the bodek to check the lungs for adhesions and peel or rub them off. If they come off cleanly, then Rama holds that it is permitted.<ref>Most of these mekorot are found in the Bet Yosef and Darkei Moshe 39:10-17.
*The Tur 39:10 writes that the minhag in some places is that they shake the lungs to remove any adhesions. The reason for this practice is because a real adhesion would not come off, even if rubbed the entire day. If an adhesion easily comes off, then it's not halakhically problematic.
*The minhag cited by the Rama is that one should crush, rub, and peel off the adhesions, and if they come off completely, then it is kosher.
*Rishonim who allow mishmush (rubbing): Minhag of some places (Tur 39:10), Ri Halavan (Kol Bo 101, cited by Bet Yosef 39:11-2), Kol Bo (cited by Darkei Moshe 39:20), Mahari Vayil (cited by Darkei Moshe 39:20), Maharash (cited by Darkei Moshe 39:20), Rosh (according to Maharshal cited by Shach 39:33), Rama 39:13. See also Rabbenu Yerucham (cited by end of Bet Yosef 39:10:2) quoting the lenient position of Chachmei Lunil and Narvona.</ref> While some limit this minhag to adhesions in certain places, and limit the leniency to rubbing and scraping, others expand the minhag to include adhesions of all kinds,<ref>Rama is only lenient if the adhesions are ksidran, but for shelo ksidran he says not to do mishmush (scraping) unless it is a hefsed merubeh (great financial loss). Bach 39:15 writes that the minhag is to do mishmush in all cases, even shelo ksidran and even if there's no hefsed, and it isn't necessary to protest. Shach 39:37 agrees.
</ref> and even allow scraping.<ref>Pri Megadim M"Z 39:17 (cited by Pitchei Teshuva 39:14) forbids scrapping off a adhesion, and if the bodek does so the animal is teref. This is implied by Taz 39:17. However, Tiferet Tzvi and Chatom Sofer cited by Pitchei Teshuva 39:14 say that the minhag of scraping off the sirchot (adhesions) has what to rely upon. Aruch Hashulchan 39:109 agrees.</ref> The mainstay of Ashkenazic poskim accept and support this minhag.<ref>Rama 39:13, Maharshal (cited by Shach 39:33), and Taz 39:17 all accept the minhag of rubbing off adhesions. Gra 39:26 seems to be strict. Rav Ovadia (Yachava Daat 3:56, Yabia Omer YD 5:3) also quotes the Shlah and Chayei Adam who are strict.</ref> The term ''glatt'' refers to a higher standard in removing adhesions that today has become accepted as the proper standard for Orthodox Jews.<ref>The [https://oukosher.org/blog/feature/what-exactly-is-glatt-kosher/ OU] describes that the practice of gently peeling off adhesions is better than the practice recorded by Rama of mashing and massaging the adhesions. They say that this practice, which started in the 1890s, is considered glatt. Similarly, [https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/3473/making-the-cut-assuring-that-glatt-really-means-kosher/ Rav Moshe Heinemann] defines "Glatt kosher" as lungs with adhesions that were exceptionally thin and the adhesions peeled off easily, while "kosher" means the adhesions were thicker and wider. Hakashrut Lmaaseh p. 76 writes that up to three adhesions that are removed easily is considered glatt. Yeshurun v. 28 p. 374 has a letter from Rav Yekutiel Efrati that Rav Elyashiv held that adhesions that are removed very easily with passing a hand gently like spiderwebs (קורי עכביש) and not rubbing, should still be labled chalak but not chalak bet yosef. [http://podcast.headlinesbook.com/e/6918/ Rav Shein] said that Rav Machpud's standard of bet yosef is that the lung is smooth like marble and not sticky paper or spiderwebs (קורי עכביש). </ref>

==Bet Yosef vs Glatt==
#Unlike Ashkenazic practice, Sephardim are strict not to allow any adhesions on the lungs.<ref>The Tur 39:10 writes that the Rashba (Torat Habayit 2:3 34b, responsa 1:304) wrote vehemently against the practice of rubbing off adhesions, and held that anyone who does so is feeding terefot to the Jewish people. Rabbenu Tam (as cited by Rabbenu Yerucham in beginning of Bet Yosef 39:10:2), and Rambam (Shechita 11:7-8) as understood by Rav Dovid Ibn Yichya (Terefot n. 14, cited by Bet Yosef 39:10:1), agree with the Rashba. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 39:10 codifies the opinion of the Rashba. Rav Ovadia (Yachava Daat 3:56, Yabia Omer YD 5:3) quotes many other Sephardi poskim who accept the opinion of the Rashba.</ref> Even according to Sephardim, an adhesion that is easily removed by passing one's hand gently is permitted.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 39:13 quotes Rabbenu Simcha Mvitri who allows an adhesion which was removed by the passing of the hand of a bodek. The Shulchan Aruch is lenient and even permits it if one's hands passed by briskly. However, the Taz 39:16 quotes the Maharshal who only allows the passing of the hand gently. This is language of the [https://oukosher.org/blog/feature/what-exactly-is-glatt-kosher/ OU]: "even the Beis Yosef would agree that adhesions that are so tenuous as to separate with ease, via the simple passing-through of the hands of the bodek, are likewise acceptable, and are considered ‘ririn.’"
*Another practice that isn't as serious as rubbing is shaking the lungs to remove any parts of the lungs that are stuck. Rishonim who allow shaking:
Mar Yakov Goan (Tur 39:10), Rosh (Chullin 3:14, cited by Bet Yosef 39:10:1), Rabbenu Yerucham (15:5:6 124a, cited by Bet Yosef 39:10:1). Beit Yosef 39:10:2 writes that it seems that Rabbenu Yerucham understands that the Rashba would forbid shaking, but Rav Dovid Ibn Yichiya understands that the Rashba would allow it. Discussion in Beit Yosef if shaking only works for a sircha between the lungs and other places, or even within the lungs. The Bet Yosef 39:10:2 writes that we don't shake the lungs today because we're not experts in how to do it. Taz 39:15 and Shach 39:31 agree.</ref><ref>[https://oukosher.org/blog/feature/what-exactly-is-glatt-kosher/ OU] writes "Rabbi Yosef Karo said that NO adhesions are permitted: one cannot risk their removal, for adhesions do not cover an existing hole. Rather, they develop, and afterwards can detach, and create a hole. We dare not toy with these adhesions, lest we give the animal the appearance of kosher status. This is the (aforementioned) view of the Rashba. “Those authorities require only ‘chalak,’ or totally smooth lungs. This standard is known as ‘Chalak Beit Yosef,’ smooth, as per the Beis Yosef,” Rabbi Klarberg said." This is also the view of [https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/3473/making-the-cut-assuring-that-glatt-really-means-kosher/ Rav Moshe Heinemann] that Bet Yosef means that there are no adhesions at all. This seems to be the opinion of [http://halachayomit.co.il/he/Default.aspx?HalachaID=177 Rav Ovadia Yosef] as well.</ref>
# Sephardim need to be careful to only eat "Bet Yosef" meat, because according to Shulchan Aruch, even "Glatt Kosher" meat isn't kosher.<ref>Yabia Omer YD 5:3. Some claim that there are slaughterhouses in America that market their meat as Bet Yosef, but it's in fact [http://podcast.headlinesbook.com/e/6918/ not Bet Yosef]. Rather, it's just meat from South America or labeled such using a lenient definition of what is considered Bet Yosef. One should consult with a rabbi who has extensive knowledge of the Kashrut industry ''and'' Sephardic Halacha to determine which brands are acceptable.</ref>
# If a Sephardi is traveling and is invited to a place where they eat "Glatt Kosher" but not "Bet Yosef", it is permitted for him to eat with them, especially if it is a seudat mitzvah.<ref>Yabia Omer YD 5:3 quotes the Dvar Shmuel Avuhav 320 who is lenient for a Sephardi who is traveling to eat regular kosher meat since there's a safek safeka. 1) The meat might be completely kosher, even according to the Bet Yosef. 2) Maybe the Rama is correct. Even though the general assumption is that we need to check out a safek safeka if possible (efshar livarer), the Bach 437 holds that this is limited to checking if an action was done properly, but doesn't apply to checking if something naturally occurred. Also, the Bet Yosef 437 holds that clarifying a sfek sfeka is limited to when there is a chezkat isur (presumption that something is forbidden), and over here, that you don't have this, there's no need to check. (See Magen Avraham 437 and Shach YD 187:19 who agree with Bet Yosef.) Therefore, after the lungs were checked to be Glatt, there's a chazaka the animal is kosher, and the chance of it being non-Bet-Yosef is considered something that one doesn't have to be concerned about. In conclusion, the Rashba (Chullin 53b) and Shach (Klalei Safek Safeka 110:35) seem to hold that one does need to check the facts of a safek safeka if possible, yet the Shaar Hamelech (Mikvaot Klalim n. 3) argues. Also, since the host might not know, it could be embarrassing to ask and it might cause a fight; one can therefore rely on the opinions that one doesn't need to check into a safek safeka.</ref>
# There is no concern of eating at the house of someone who keeps Kosher but isn't careful about Bet Yosef meat, if it is possible that their dishes weren't used within 24 hours.<ref> Yabia Omer YD 5:3:2 is lenient based on the concept of stam kelim sheinan bnei yoman. Tosfot A"Z 38b explains that the reason to be lenient is that their pots probably weren't used in the last 24 hours and even if they did they might not have been used for a taste that would impart a good taste into the food being cooked. He quotes the Bayi Chayey YD 8 who agrees with his ruling.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>

Bishul Akum

2024-08-23T14:00:06Z

Bchernigoff: edited some grammar

[[File:Mashgiach.png|thumb|From https://www.ekollel.com/what-is-mashgiach/ (reproduced with permission)]]
Bishul Akum (Hebrew: בשול עכו"ם, tran. ''cooking of a non-Jew'') is a rabbinic restriction that forbids a Jew from eating many foods that a non-Jew cooked. The reason for the restriction is to prevent intermarriage and to avoid eating non-kosher ingredients that may have been mixed in. There are many leniencies that relate to the quality of the food as well as the significance of the cooking for the particular food in question. Additionally, if a Jew is partially involved in the cooking process, this can alleviate the issue of ''bishul akum''. This is a key reason for the need to have a hashgacha on many foods even though all of the ingredients are kosher.

==The Restriction==

#The rabbis<ref>This gezeirah is d’rabanan in nature (Meseches Avodah Zarah 38b, Yerushalmi Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:8, Ran Meseches Avodah Zarah page 28 “rebbe,” Rosh Meseches Chullin 3:61, Issur V’heter 43:1, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:9, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 113:16, Aruch Hashulchan 113:1, Sdei Chemed mareches bais page 133:69, see Teshuvos V’hanhagos 3:247 who seems to say there is a semach to a d’oraisa and therefore one should be very careful with these halachos). Refer to Kav Hayosher 75:5. </ref> enacted a decree forbidding food that was cooked by a non-Jew, even if the food is totally made from Kosher ingredients.<ref>Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b.</ref> However, it is permitted to derive benefit from food cooked by a non-Jew.<ref>Meseches Avodah Zarah 38b. </ref>

===Reasons===

#There are a number of reasons for this restriction. Some early commentators<ref>Rashi (Beitzah 16a s.v. ein and Avodah Zarah 35b s.v. v’hashlakos) and Tosfot (Avoda Zara 38a). Refer to Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:15, Tur Y.D. 113, Ramban Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b.</ref> explain that the rabbis wanted to prevent socializing with non-Jews, which might lead to intermarriage<ref>Devarim 7:3. </ref><ref>Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:15, Issur V’heter 43:1, Tur Y.D. 112. Refer to Pardes Yosef Vayeichi 49:page 838 (new). The issur applies even if one may not come to intermarriage (Refer to Rashba 1:248, Ramban Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b, Levush Y.D. 113:1, Shevet Hakehasi 6:273). This halacha even applies to non-Jews who aren't idolaters. (See Pri Tohar 112:3, Matei Yehonosson 112, Rav Poalim Y.D. 4:17, Yechaveh Daas 5:54, see Rav Poalim Y.D. 4:17, Shema Shlomo Y.D. 2:67, Shulchan Melachim pages 194-198). Regarding whether an issue of bishul akum exists if there will be animosity, see Taz Y.D. 152:1, Shach on Taz Y.D. 152:1, Chavos Yuer 66, Shulchan Melachim pages 189-194 in depth. </ref>. Others<ref>Rashi a"z 38a s.v. m’d’rabanan.” Refer to Tur 113, Ha’go’es Ashri Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:28, Levush 113:1, Chochmas Adom 66:1. </ref> think that the motivation for this restriction is that we are concerned that if the Jew often eats the non-Jew's food, the non-Jew might later serve a non-kosher food item to the Jew.<ref>Refer to Bishul Yisroel page 3:footnote 1 on the two views of Rashi. </ref> Most rabbis agree with the first reason.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:9, 15, Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “ela”, Issur V’heter 43:1, Tosfas Harid Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b, Ohr Zeruah Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:190:page 53, Tur 113, Bais Yosef 113, Bach, Levush 113:1, Taz 1, Shach 1, Prisha 3, Chochmas Adom 66:1, Pischei Teshuva 113:1, Aruch Hashulchan 2, 6, Kaf Hachaim 1, Chelkes Binyomin 113:1. The Halichos Shlomo Moadim 2:3:footnote 11 says the reason for the increase in intermarriage today is because of the many leniencies we accept for bishul akum. </ref>
#The rabbis were more stringent with these laws of ''bishul'' (cooking) than with [[Pat Akum|bread of a non-Jew]].<ref>Shach 112:17, Aruch Hashulchan 113:1-2, see Mesora 1:pages 84-85. Refer to Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, Noam Halacha page 64:footnote 3 in depth.</ref>

===Exceptions===

#There are two basic exceptions to the restrictions. A food that falls into either of these two categories<ref>This is expressed in Tosfas in Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “ika”, and “dagim”, and codified by the poskim. Refer to Rosh Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:28:page 83, Ran page 15, Rashba Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Ramban Meseches Avodah Zarah 37b, Toras Habayis 3:7, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:14-15, Bais Yosef 113, Bach, Shulchan Aruch 113:1, Levush 2, Aruch Hashulchan 5. Refer to Mordechai Meseches Avodah Zarah 830:page 42.</ref> is not subject to the laws of [[bishul]] akum and may be eaten by a Jew.<ref>Chelkes Binyomin 113:3.</ref>
#A food that can be eaten raw (ne'echal k'mo she'hu chay) may be cooked by a non-Jew. There are two reasons for this. First, the [[cooking]] does not really improve the food<ref>Rashi Meseches Beitzah 16a “ein”, Chochmas Adom 66:1, Bais Yitzchok 33:pages 565-566, Chelkes Binyomin 113:3, 5.</ref> because it can be eaten raw<ref>Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a, Avodah Zarah 38a, Ran Beitzah page 8b “im tzolon”, Rosh Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:28, Rif page 14, Issur V’heter 43:2, Tur 113, Shulchan Aruch 113:1, Toras Chatos 75:16, Levush 2, Chochmas Adom 66:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:6. Refer to Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “dagim”.</ref> (and it's not considered cooked).<ref>Rashi Meseches Beitzah 16a “ein buhem”, Levush 113:2.</ref> Second, food which is edible raw is not an important food, and one would not invite someone to his home to eat such foods.<ref>Ran Meseches Beitzah 8b “im tzolon”, Taz 113:1.</ref> Examples of such foods are beets,<ref>OU document A-110. Refer to the opinion of the Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 119:12 regarding borscht.</ref> cheese,<ref>Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “ika”, Darchei Teshuva 113:5, Kaf Hachaim 15. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 576-557 regarding processed cheeses.</ref> fruits,<ref>Refer to Shevet Ha’Levi 6:108:5. This is even if they are fried in sugar or honey (Aruch Hashulchan 13).</ref> honey,<ref>Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “ika”, Rosh 2:28, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:23, Issur V’heter 43:5, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 114:7, Aruch Hashulchan 113:13, Yalkut Yosef Y.D. 2:page 149, Shevet Ha’Levi 6:109.</ref> juice, ice cream, milk, (this will be discussed in a later issue), sugar cane,<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 23.</ref> zucchini and other vegetables,<ref>Refer to Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:14, Shulchan Aruch 113:3. This is only if the vegetable is not cooked with meat that is [[bishul]] akum since the fat from the meat gets absorbed into the vegetable (Shulchan Aruch 113:3, see G’ra 3, Darchei Teshuva 33-34, Chelkes Binyomin 33).</ref> and water.<ref>OU document A-110.</ref> Examples of foods that are not edible raw are asparagus, cauliflower, chicken, meat, potatoes, (this will be discussed in a later issue) and pumpkin.<ref>OU document A-110 </ref>
#The prohibition of [[bishul]] akum is limited to foods which are served on a king's table<ref>Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Rosh 2:28, Ran page 15, Rashba Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:15, Tur 113, Shulchan Aruch 113:1, Levush 3, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:6, Chochmas Adom 66:1, see Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a. </ref> (''oleh al shulchan melachim'') and accompany bread (such as meat,<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 10. </ref> eggs, or fish)<ref>Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:15, Ritvah Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 35a. </ref> or as an appetizer.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:18, Issur V’heter 43:2, Tur 113, Bais Yosef, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 113:1, Toras Chatos 75:16, Shach 112:5, Chochmas Adom 66:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:6, Chelkes Binyomin 113:12, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 180-181. Others say a dessert which is not eaten with bread is not a concern (Pri [[Chadash]] 114:6, Chasam Sofer 113:2, Kaf Hachaim 7), while others disagree (Refer to Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 113:1, Aruch Hashulchan 7, Darchei Teshuva 12). </ref> Only these types of foods are served at social gatherings, and only then is there the concern of intermarriage.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7. </ref> When there is no invitation, there is also no concern that the Jew will become used to eating the non-Jew's food, and therefore, there is no concern that the non-Jew might later serve the Jew non-Kosher.<ref>Chachmas Adam 66:1. See Chelkas Binyomin 113:3, and [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 130-131. </ref>
#Many say that any food that is fit to be served on a king's table is subject to [[bishul]] akum, even if it is not eaten with bread.<ref>Rashba Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Toras Habayis 3:7, Levush 3, Pri Tohar 3, Tiferes Yisroel Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:52, Aruch Hashulchan YD 113:7, Darchei Teshuva 12, Shevet Ha’Levi 2:43, 10:124, [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 148:footnote 15 quoting the opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita.</ref> Others say that the above stipulation is to be taken literally, and even an important food is only prohibited if it is eaten with bread.<ref>Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Issur V’heter 43:2, Zer Zahav 2, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Pri [[Chadash]] 113:3, 22, opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l quoted in Shearim Metzuyanim B’halacha 38:4, Hamesivta 5754:pages 83-84, Teharas Hamayim page 328:footnote*. Such an example would be a fancy spread ([[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 170-172). </ref> The accepted custom follows the stringent opinion.
#There is a third, somewhat obscure exception, which permits food which does not change when it is cooked.<ref>The Shevet Ha’Levi 6:108:2 says this reason and the reason of edible raw is the same reason. Refer to the Pri [[Chadash]] 113:1. See Meseches Avodah Zarah 37b (bottom), Ohr Zeruah Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:191:page 53, Ha’go’es Ashri Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:28, Ran Meseches Avodah Zarah page 28 “rebbe”, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Toras Chatos 75:16, Minchas Yaakov 75:32, Aruch Hashulchan 8. The Ran on page 15 (Meseches Avodah Zarah) says this third exception is not found in other Rishonim. See Darchei Moshe 113:3, Shach 113:1. </ref> However, most poskim maintain that this may not be relied upon to permit [[bishul]] akum.<ref>Issur V’heter 43:1, Shach 1, Be’er Heitiv 1, Pri [[Chadash]] 1, Pri Tohar 1, Aruch Hashulchan 9, Darchei Teshuva 14, Zivchei Tzedek 113:1, Kaf Hachaim 3, Chelkes Binyomin Biurim “davar” pages 60-61, Shevet Ha’Levi 2:43, Hamesivta 5754:pages 78-80. Refer to Avnei Nezer Y.D. 96:1. </ref>
# A bakery's food is permissible, even if the baker is not Jewish, as long as the ingredients are kosher. <ref> Yehave Daat, 5, 53 </ref>

====What Does "Eaten Raw" Mean?====

#The poskim debate the definition of "eaten raw. Some say that it depends on each individual's eating habits.<ref>Pri [[Chadash]] 113:2-3, Aruch Hashulchan 112:12, Darchei Teshuva 113:3 quoting the opinion of the Bnei Chai.</ref> However, many say that it follows the custom of most people.<ref>Rashi Meseches Avodah Zarah 38b “l’inyun”, Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7. Refer to Chochmas Adom 66:3. Refer to Shiurei Beracha 113:1, Darchei Teshuva 3, Chochmas Adom 66:4, Aruch Hashulchan 113:12, Kaf Hachaim 10, Shevet Ha’Levi 5:93:page 97, Chelkes Binyomin 113:6, Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 116:16. Refer to Chelkes Yaakov 113:5. </ref> Accordingly, if most people eat a certain food raw, even if one personally doesn't eat such a food, then one may eat it if a non-Jew cooked it. .<ref>Chelkes Binyomin 113:6, see Biurim “nechal.”</ref>
#A food which can only be eaten raw in difficult circumstances (al yedai ha'dechak) is not halachically considered edible raw.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis (hakutzer) 3:7:page 213 (new), Ran Meseches Avodah Zarah 16b s.v. beitzah, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Tur 113, Shulchan Aruch 113:12. Refer to Pri [[Chadash]] 113:21, Chochmas Adom 66:3, Ben Ish Chai Chukas 2:22, Aruch Hashulchan 26, Kaf Hachaim 71, Shevet Ha’Levi 9:162, Chelkes Binyomin 113:117, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 85-87. Refer to Bach 113 “umeiy shnu” who explains why if a food is cooked is it permitted even if it can be eaten if one pushes himself. </ref> However, others disagree and hold that this is halachically considered edible raw.<ref>Rama 113:12. Refer to Ramban and Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38b. </ref>
#If it is common to eat the item raw with other ingredients, then the raw item is still considered edible raw.<ref>Gilyon Maharsha Y.D. 113, Magen Avraham O.C. 203:4, Mishna Brurah 203:11, M’Bais Levi 8:page 26:1, Chelkes Binyomin 113:6-7. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 102, OU Document A-59 quoting the opinion of Rav Schachter Shlita, OU madrich pages 100-101. See Darchei Teshuva 113:4, [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 102 quoting the opinion of Harav Shmuel Felder Shlita. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 463 who is not sure what status sushi has in this regard.</ref> A food which was edible raw while fresh, is not considered edible raw after it dries out.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 15. See Dugel Mervuva Y.D. 113. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 88-90. </ref>
#Some say that [[bishul]] akum doesn't apply to corn because it's normal to eat corn raw, it's just not commonly done. On the other hand, others hold that [[bishul]] akum does apply to corn since it isn't eaten raw.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/788653/Rabbi_Mordechai_I_Willig/Yoreh_De'ah_Shiur_06_Bishul_Akum Rabbi Mordechai Willig in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 55-57)] quotes Rav Yisrael Belsky as saying that [[bishul]] akum doesn't apply to corn since it would be normal to eat it raw, it is just that we are picky. However, Rav Hershel Schachter held that [[bishul]] akum does apply unless a majority of people eat it raw.</ref>
#Eggs are considered inedible raw and are therefore subject to the laws of bishul akum.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 113:14</ref>

===="Fit to be Served on a King's Table"====

#We mentioned earlier that food which is fit to be served on a king's table is subject to the halachos of [[bishul]] akum.<ref>Refer to Darchei Teshuva 113:10 if this applies to a Jewish king or non-Jewish king. Additionally, refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 187-188 if this applies to something which is fit for a king’s table sometimes. See Tosfas Meseches Beitzah 16b “dagim”, Avodah Zarah 38a “dagim”.</ref> This term requires clarification. What if a king eats a certain food for breakfast, but would not eat it for supper? Would this be considered "fit to be served on a king's table"? Some say that "fit to be served on a king's table" refers to food that would be served at a royal dinner.<ref>Based on the Gemorah in Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a. Refer to Shevet Hakehasi 6:274:4. </ref> The prevailing opinion is that this term is not limited to a king, but instead refers to anyone of stature.<ref>Issur V’heter 43:2, Shiurei Beracha Y.D. 113:2, Ben Ish Chai Chukas 2:9, Zivchei Tzedek 113:2, Kaf Hachaim 13:2. Refer to Aruch Hashulchan 18 who seems to hold this way as well. See Chelkes Binyomin 113:10, [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 133. See Shulchan Melachim 2:pages 1164-1165. </ref> Others say it means food which would be served at a state dinner,<ref>Refer to Kashrus Kurrents from the Star-K “Food Fit For A King”.</ref> while some apply it even if a food is eaten by a king at breakfast<ref>Refer to Mesora 1:page 86:2, Shulchan Melachim 2:page 1209:3. </ref> (this is not the halacha). Others are of the opinion that it refers to a food that one would serve on [[Shabbos]] to invites guests,<ref>Based on the opinion of the Rambam in Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:15, Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 116:18, opinion of Harav Falk Shlita in [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) page 28:3. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 134-135 who says this clause is not mentioned in Shulchan Aruch, but it seems to be l’halacha anyways. </ref> or food served at a fancy meal in honor of a mitzvah.<ref>Shevet Ha’kehusi 6:274:4, see Dinei Machalei Nuchrim pages 18-19. </ref> Harav Yisroel Belsky (this is the OU policy) holds that it refers to food served at a wedding smorgasbord.<ref>Based on a personal conversation. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) page 28:3 who does not seem to agree with this. </ref> Examples of foods which do not fit into the above categories and are permitted are: chickpeas,<ref>Refer to Darchei Moshe 113:3, Rama 113:2, Aruch Hashulchan 13, 15-16, Halichos Olom 7:pages 102-103, Opinion of the Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 119:14, Halichos Olom 7:page 102, OU Documents A-64:1, A-130, M-7. Refer to Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:17, Ben Ish Chai Chukas 2:12. See Minchas Yaakov 75:31 who says (in his days) cooked chickpeas were fit to be served on a king’s table.</ref> corn, snacks,<ref>Toras Chaim Avodah Zarah 38a, Zechor L’Avraham 5762-5763:page 749, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 1:438, Noam Halacha page 190, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 169:footnote 3, Kitzur Hilchos [[Bishul]] Akum (Sharf) 11. </ref> Rice Krispies,<ref>Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 117:21, Star-K article entitled “Food Fit For A King”.</ref> and popcorn.<ref>Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 118:2, Rivevos Ephraim 7:page 450, Noam Halacha page 193, Chai Ha’Levi 4:50:10. </ref>
#Is "Fit to be Served on a King's Table" defined by the category of food, or by the specific type of food? Some poskim hold that if a certain type of food can be prepared in a way that could be served at a king's table, then any dish prepared from this food falls under the problem of [[bishul]] akum, even if this particular dish would not be served at the king's table.<ref>Refer to Aruch Hashulchan 113:10, Emes L’Yaakov Y.D. 112:footnote 42, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 1:438, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 146:14, Igros Moshe Y.D. 5:48:5, Dinei Machalei Nuchrim pages 23-24, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 139-144, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 1:438, Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 116:17. Refer to Tiferes Yisroel Avodah Zarah 2:52.</ref> However, most poskim disagree with this position and maintain that each dish must be evaluated individually.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see OU documents A-21, A-23, and A-106, Maharsham 2:262, Gan Shoshanim 2:page 202. Refer to Chelkes Binyomin 113:6, 8, biurim page 96, Shevet Ha’kehasi 6:274, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 3:249, [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 143, Kerem Ephraim pages 64-65. </ref> Accordingly, if a specific potato is prepared in a way that it is fit for a king's table, then only that type of potato is a problem of [[bishul]] akum. This opinion is followed by most kashrus agencies.<ref>Tiferet Yisrael (Avoda Zara Yachin. 2:52) writes that when judging whether something is fit for a king we judge the type of food. Teshuvot Vhanhagot 1:438 agrees and forbids potato chips.

*One proof is that the Iser Vheter that is cited and accepted by the Shach (113:2) writes that intestines are forbidden because of Bishul Akum even though they aren’t fit to serve a guest (S”A YD 101:5). Since meat is important we judge all meat as fit for a king’s table even the parts which are very low quality. This is echoed by the Pri Chadash 113:2 and Aruch Hashulchan 113:10. Rav Pesach Falk (author of Machazeh Eliyahu, in Am Hatorah 5754 p. 75) argues with the Tiferet Yisrael based on a number of proofs.</ref><ref>Another factor to use to permit potato chips is that usually they aren’t eaten with bread and some poskim hold that any food which isn’t eaten with bread isn’t included in Bishul Akum. Pri Chadash 113:3 is lenient. See Darkei Teshuva 113:12 for those who are lenient. Chayei Adam 66:1 and Yechava Daat 4:42 don’t hold of this Pri Chadash. [https://www.star-k.org/articles/articles/1182/food-fit-for-a-king-reviewing-the-laws-of-bishul-akum-bishul-yisroel/ Rav Heinemann] is lenient for potato chips since they are not eaten for a meal at all. Rav Shlomo Machpud (Daat Kashrut 5762 p. 136) agrees.</ref>
#If a food would only be fit for the king's table after certain spices and seasoning were added, it is still considered fit for the king's table even without the spices.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 113:9, Chelkes Binyomin 113:8. Refer to OU document A-41. </ref>
#[[Bishul]] Akum applies to instant rice which was cooked by the non-Jewish manufacturer. Parboiled rice, however, which requires further [[cooking]] to be edible is not [[Bishul]] Akum at the time of manufacturing and need to be finished [[cooking]] by a Jew.<ref>[http://www.star-k.org/kashrus/kk-issues-bishul.htm Article on star-k.org]</ref>
#Many hold that [[Bishul]] Akum does not apply to potato chips since in that particular way of preparing a potato it isn't fit to be served on a king's table.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/788653/Rabbi_Mordechai_I_Willig/Yoreh_De'ah_Shiur_06_Bishul_Akum Rabbi Mordechai Willig in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 55-57)] quoting Rabbi Belsky from the OU Papers on [[Bishul]] Akum</ref> Some are strict about this and won't eat pringles with an OU because of the bishul akum issue.<ref>[https://kavhalacha.co.il/index.php/parashathashavoa-dafyomi-halachayomit-lectures-9/harav-david-yosef-17/3459-2017-05-30-05-42-83 Rav Eliyahu Pinchasi] based on Rav Elyashiv and the Badatz Edah Charedit.</ref>

#Many hold that the definition of fit for a king's tables depends on the current custom and not a previous custom.<ref>This is the opinion of the Chochmas Adam 66:4 as well as Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:18, Pri Tohar 7, Shiurei Beracha 113:9, Kaf Hachaim 6 and 11, Chelkes Binyomin 113:6, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 198-199. The Pri [[Chadash]] 113:5 argues (see Sdei Chemed mareches [[bishul]] akum u’pitan 5:page 287, Darchei Teshuva 113:7). </ref>

===Product Shipped From one Place to Another===

#If a non-Jew cooks a food which ''is'' edible raw then it is permitted even if it is shipped to a country where it is not eaten raw.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita as expressed in OU document A-88, see Pri [[Chadash]] Y.D. 113:22, Shiurei Beracha 113:1, Kaf Hachaim 113:11. Refer to Shevet Ha’Levi 9:163. The reason for this is since the food is edible raw in one place there is no certainty that it will not be edible raw in the place where it is shipped since it is many days from when the food is made and the food may be dry. </ref> This is not a common issue as a food which is edible in one country is usually edible in a different country as well.<ref>OU document A-88 </ref>
#If a non-Jew prepared a food which ''is not'' edible raw in a country where it is not served on a king's table, and shipped it to a country where the food is fit to be served on a king's table, the food is forbidden because of [[bishul]] akum.<ref>Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) pages 31-32. See OU document A-131.</ref> If the situation is reversed, and a non-Jew prepared a food which is not edible raw and it is fit to be served on a king's table in that country, then the food is forbidden even if it is shipped to a country where it is not eaten on a king's table.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita as expressed in OU document A-88, opinion of Harav Falk Shlita as expressed in [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) pages 31-34 in depth. Refer to Shiurei Beracha 113:7, Ben Ish Chai Chukas 2:12, Chaim Shaul 1:74:6, Kaf Hachaim 113:20, Kerem Ephraim pages 62-63, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 61-62. In regard to tortillas see Dinei Machalei Nuchrim pages 93-101 in depth. </ref>

===Important Person===

#There is a discussion in the poskim if an important person (Adam Chashuv, i.e. a Torah scholar) should go beyond the letter of the law regarding the laws of [[bishul]] akum. Some poskim say that such a person should refrain from any food cooked by a non-Jew even if it can be eaten raw, if it is fit to be served on a king's table.<ref>Refer to Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a, Meiri [[Shabbos]] 51a, Ritvah 51a, Shach Y.D. 152:2, Bach Y.D. 113, Shiurei Beracha 113:4-5, Tosfas [[Shabbos]] O.C. 257:17 in depth, Kaf Hachaim 12, Shevet Ha’kehasi 4:200, M’Bais Levi 8:page 31:13, Shevet Ha’Levi 6:108:3, Minchas Yaakov 75:30, Dinei Machalei Nuchrim page 9:footnote 4, see Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham 257:15. The Taz 3 says it is a pious act. Some even says this applies to water (Kaf Hachaim 13 quoting the opinion of the Arizal). </ref> The reason is that if one sees an important person being lenient even though it is permitted strictly speaking, the onlooker will potentially be more lenient in a circumstance where it can be forbidden.<ref>Rashi Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a s.v. adom, Meiri Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a </ref>
#If it is eaten raw and fit to be served on a king's table, one should be stringent.<ref>Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 385-386. </ref> However, others disregard this concern,<ref>Dugel Mirvuva Y.D. 113, Zivchei Tzedek 113:10, Machzik Beracha O.C. 257:2, Kaf Hachaim 113:12, Hamesivta 5754:page 82, see Chelkes Binyomin 113:4. </ref> and the custom seems to follow the latter opinion.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Pri [[Chadash]] 113:3, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 113:11, Chai Ha’Levi 4:51:6.</ref> Even the stringent opinion makes allowances for health reasons (see below).<ref>Tashbatz 1:89, Maharsham 5:36:page 35. </ref>

===Health Reasons===

#A food which is fit to be served on a king's table and is not eaten raw, is still not a concern of [[bishul]] akum if it is eaten for health reasons. It is not a "chashuva" food, and sharing it will not lead to closeness with a non-Jew.<ref>Radvaz 3:637, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Maharsham 2:262, Noam Halacha page 75, Chelkes Binyomin 113:page 11 (biurim). </ref>

==Types of Food==
===Beverages===

#The consensus of the poskim is that there is a concern of [[bishul]] akum with beverages (i.e. soup) if one cannot drink it without [[cooking]] it or it is fit to be served on a king's table.<ref>Refer to Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 31b “v’travaihu,” Rosh 2:15, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:14, Orchos Habayis 8:14:footnote 41, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 185-186. Refer to Pri [[Chadash]] 113:3, 114:6 who seems to argue. See Sdei Chemed mareches “[[bishul]] eino yehudi u’pitan” page 349:10. </ref>

===Frozen===

#A food that is forbidden because of [[bishul]] akum and placed into the freezer is still forbidden even though it is inedible while it is frozen.<ref>Dinei Machalei Nuchrim page 48:6, Noam Halacha page 71:16:footnote 28, Kitzur Hilchos [[Bishul]] Akum (Berger) page 27. </ref> By the same token, if a Jew cooked food and froze it, there is no concern if a non-Jew heats up the food.<ref>Kitzur Hilchos [[Bishul]] Akum (Berger) page 26-27.</ref>

===Dried===

#Potatoes which were milled or pureed and then dehydrated to be used for producing other foods, are subject to Bishul Akum since they are edible without further cooking such as adding lukewarm water.<ref>Rav Shlomo Machpud in Daat Kashrut 5762 p. 136 writes that since the potatoes were steamed and then pureed they are ready to be eaten with simply adding lukewarm water and therefore forbidden. He cites Rav Masas in Shemesh Umagen 2:44 who is lenient but also cites Rav Mordechai Eliyahu who was strict. Rav Masas argued that since the pureed needed further processing it is like the original cooking wasn't ineffective.</ref>

===Canned Foods===

#There is a discussion among the poskim if canned food is subject to the halachos of [[bishul]] akum. Food which is cooked before it is canned and is just put in a can for storage would be forbidden.<ref>[[Bishul]] Yisroel page 34, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 3:247. </ref> However, one could argue that food cooked in a can is not fit to be served on a king's table.<ref>Refer to Mesora 1:page 86 (bottom), Mesora 2:pages 74-75, OU document A-64:4, Star-K article entitled “Food Fit For A King” page 2, opinion of Harav Pinchus Sheinberg Shlita quoted in Divrei Chachamim pages 182-183:22. </ref> The custom seems to treat canned goods as a concern of [[bishul]] akum (if the food is not edible raw) even if it is cooked with indirect steam.<ref>Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) pages 46-47, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 3:247. Also see [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 34-36. Some are lenient because many products do not get changed when cooked in a can (Aleh Ezra Y.D. 5). </ref> However, this can be used as an additional factor to be lenient in certain cases.

===Fried Foods===

# Sufganiyot fried in oil by non-Jews are permitted. <ref> Halichot Olam, 7, Page 106</ref>

==Utensils==

#There is a discussion in the poskim if food cooked by a non-Jew<ref>The Shach 113:20 discusses the view of Rama in Torat Chatat. In one place, Rama writes that if a person's maidservant cooks for herself in one's home, then you have an issue of Bishul Akum. In another place, Rama writes that we are bdiavad (after the fact) lenient if a maidservant cooked in a Jew's home. Shach's answer is hat we are more strict on a case where she cooked for her own needs in a Jew's home, as it's unlikely that one of the members of the household intervened in the cooking process. Refer to Prisha 113:17, Chochmas Adom 66:11. See Shulchan Melachim 2:pages 959-957.</ref> renders the pot treif.<ref>Some say that if the [[cooking]] was not done in front of us, then there is a concern that the non-Jew cooked treif in the pot, and all would agree that hagalah is required (Chelkes Binyomin 113:134). </ref> Some poskim say that no hagalah (kashering) is required.<ref>Tosfot Harosh Avoda Zara 40a s.v. vani, Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Issur V’heter 43:8, Shulchan Aruch 113:16, Levush 16, Shiurei Beracha 18. Refer to Hamesivta 5754:pages 123-125 who says most poskim hold no hagalah is required. </ref> Some explain that the main reason for the issur of [[bishul]] akum is because of intermarriage, and using a pot with bishul akum absorption will not lead to socializing with non-Jews.<ref>Bedek Habayis 3:7:page 209 (new), G’ra 40, 42, See Aruch Hashulchan 113:50. </ref> However, many poskim maintain that hagalah is in fact required,<ref>Rashba in Toras Habayis 3:7 (end), Rashba Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Ran (teshuvos) 5:11, Toras Chatos 75:14, Tur, Bais Yosef, Shulchan Aruch 113:16, Levush 16, Shiurei Beracha 18-19, Chochmas Adom 66:11, Mishna Brurah O.C. 328:63, Aruch Hashulchan 113:50, Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 113:89, Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:41, Kitzur Hilchos [[Bishul]] Akum (Berger) page 45:67. Refer to Matei Yehonosson 113:16, Pri [[Chadash]] 25, Kashrus 2:pages 13-20 in depth. See Shulchan Melachim 2:pages 943-951.</ref> and this is the overwhelming custom.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 113:16, Aruch Hashulchan 113:50, Chai Ha’Levi 5:54:1. Some say that if the [[cooking]] was done in a Jewish home or Jewish establishment , then no hagalah is required, since there are two sefikos (doubts). One doubt is if utensils that have bishul akum absorption require hagalah, and the other doubt is if there is [[bishul]] akum in a Jew’s home (Halichos Olom 7:page 104:footnote). </ref> The reason is that the food itself becomes forbidden, and the blios (absorption) from the food are considered as forbidden foods.<ref>Toras Habayis 3:7:page 214 (new), Aruch Hashulchan 113:50. See Gr’a 113:40, 42. Refer to Tzitz Eliezer 22:44 in depth on this dispute. </ref> This applies even if the utensils were not used within twenty-four hours (eino ben-yomo), in which case the taste of the food is pogem (ill tasting).<ref>Ben Ish Chai Chukas 2:24, Kaf Hachaim 113:89-90, Chelkes Binyomin 113:138, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 373-374, opinion of Harav Falk Shlita stated in [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) page 67. Refer to Chochmas Adom 66:12. See Darchei Teshuva 113:92 who brings a lenient opinion. See Rama O.C. 452:2, Mishna Brurah 20. The opinion of Harav Falk Shlita stated in [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) pages 78-79 is that in time of need one can be lenient and do hagalah even within twenty-four hours. Refer to Chochmas Adom 66:12. </ref> Nonetheless, one can do ''[[Koshering a Kitchen|hagalah]]'' (after waiting twenty-four hours)<ref>Kaf Hachaim 113:90, Chelkes Binyomin 113:142. </ref> for an earthenware utensil (which we normally do not kasher)<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 451:22. </ref> three times and use it for kosher food.<ref>Bais Yosef 113, Shulchan Aruch 113:16, Toras Chatos 75:14, Levush 16, Chochmas Adom 66:11, Mishna Brurah O.C. 328:63, Aruch Hashulchan 113:50, Kaf Hachaim 95, see Gilyon Maharsha 113, Mishna Brurah 328:63, Shevet Ha’Levi 9:162:16. Refer to Shevet Ha’Levi 6:108:8, Kashrus 2:pages 237-238. </ref> This is common if a non-Jew used a crock-pot to cook food.<ref>Kitzur Hilchos [[Bishul]] Akum (Berger) page 46:70. </ref>
#An interesting question arises regarding kashering the utensils of a convert which were only used for kosher food. It would seem from the language of the Shulchan Aruch<ref>Y.D. 113:16. </ref> (when he discusses the obligation to kasher from [[bishul]] akum) that he does not require kashering.<ref>Opinion of Harav Herschel Schachter Shlita and Rabbi Ari Senter Shlita. Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita added that the non-Jew before he converted did nothing wrong when [[cooking]] for himself, so his utensils are not [[bishul]] akum (if they were used for kosher food). </ref> However, when the question arises one should discuss it with a competent Rav.

==Doubts and Mixtures==
===Doubt===

#The halacha is that anytime<ref>Rama 113:11, Chochmas Adom 66:9, Aruch Hashulchan 48. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel 304-310.</ref> one has a doubt<ref>Even if the doubt is if a Jew was involved in the [[cooking]] of the food (Chelkes Binymon biurim “v’chein” page 100). </ref> whether a Jew stoked the coals<ref>Taz 11. This would not be valid according to the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch since stoking the coals is not [[bishul]] yisroel (Kaf Hachaim 68). </ref>, or if a food was cooked 1/3 by a Jew<ref>Chochmas Adom 66:9 </ref>, then we can be lenient. Some say that even if one is unsure whether a particular food is subject to the laws of [[bishul]] akum, he may be lenient since the entire prohibition is rabbinic ([[Klalei_Halacha#Safek_Derabbanan_Lkula]]).<ref>Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “ika”, Issur V’heter 43:10, Tur 113, Rama 113:11, Toras Chatos 75:7, Chochmas Adom 66:9, Aruch Hashulchan 48. Refer to Darchei Teshuva 70. </ref> There is a discussion if we can be lenient if one is unsure if a food is fit to be served on a king's table. Some poskim are lenient even if one can verify the status,<ref>Opinion of the Shevet Ha’Levi quoted in Kerem Ephraim page 48:15:1. Refer to Pri Megadim Sifsei Da’as Y.D. 110:34. </ref> but the custom is to be stringent.<ref>Shach 110:34 (dinei sfek sfeika), [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 490-491, opinion of Harav Falk Shlita quoted in [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 52 (teshuvos) 5:16. </ref>

===Rov or Shishim===

#Most poskim are of the opinion that [[bishul]] akum is nullified in a simple majority ([[Nullification|botel b'rov]])<ref>Toras Chatos 75:9, Shach 112:23, 113:21, Be’er Heitiv 18, Shiurei Beracha 113:10, Chochmas Adom 66:11, Aruch Hashulchan 53, Darchei Teshuva 90, Kaf Hachaim 91, see Mishna Brurah 328:63. Refer to Darchei Teshuva 113:91 if one is permitted to be mevatel [[bishul]] akum with his hands. Refer to Yeshoshua Yaakov Y.D. 113:3 in depth why one is permitted to mix a [[bishul]] akum food with a non-[[bishul]] akum food.</ref> while some maintain you need shishim (60 times).<ref>Refer to Hagalas Keilim 10:footnote 11, Chelkes Binyomin 113:136. </ref> Sephardim hold you need 60 times, but if you have a majority and not sixty, then you can add more permitted ingredients in order to nullify it.<ref>Divrei Dovid 2:20 proves the Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 113:3 holds that bishul akum isn't nullified by a majority. He cites this approach from the Bear Sheva 19, Minchat Cohen 1:1, Pri Chadash 99:17, Maharashdam 41, Kahal Yehuda 113:2, Misgeret Hashulchan 113:2, Ayin Hamayim 112:11, Kiseh Eliyahu 113:2, Maharam Shik 134, and Yeshuot Yakov 113:3. [http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/online/f_01598.html#HtmpReportNum0002_L3 Patbag Hamelch 2:23] agrees.</ref>

===Mixing Food which can be eaten raw with Non-Edible Raw Food===

#If food which can be eaten raw is mixed<ref>There is no concern of being mevatel an issur here (Darchei Teshuva 113:18). </ref> with food that is not edible raw, if the majority the mixture can be eaten raw, then the mixture is not subject to the halachos of [[bishul]] akum.<ref>Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1381&st=&pgnum=77 Tashbetz 1:89], Shulchan Aruch 113:2, Toras Chatos 75:12, Levush 15, Chochmas Adom 66:6, Aruch Hashulchan 14. See Mishna Brurah 203:11. Refer to Meseches Beitzah 16a-16b, Avodah Zarah 38a, Rashi Meseches Beitzah 16a “asirei,” Avodah Zarah 38a “ku mashma lon”, Ran page 15. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 330-333.</ref> Some are lenient even if the mixture is half-and-half<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 14, Darchei Teshuva 19. Some say that if one of the five grains is mixed in, then it's considered the main ingredient with regards to bishul akum, as we find by hilchos berochos (Darchei Teshuva 113:20, Chelkes Binyomin 113:21, see Hamesivta 5754:pages 88-89 where he asks on the Aruch Hashulchan). Thus, if the grain that's mixed in cannot be eaten raw, even if it's a minority of the mixture, then the whole mixture is forbidden because of bishul akum. </ref> (this will be discussed in a later issue). Some say that the five grains are considered the main ingredient as is the case in hilchos [[berachos]].
#In a case where a majority of the mixture can be eaten raw, some say that we are only lenient if the food which is inedible raw is not recognizable in the mixture.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 113:22, Divrei Dovid 2:20. See Kaf Hachaim 17</ref>

===Tafel===

#Sometimes, a food may be eaten raw, but is a tafel to the main food which has a concern of [[bishul]] akum (not eaten raw). The question is if the food eaten as a tafel is subject to the halachos of [[bishul]] akum. The rules here follow the same rules as [[berachos]]. A food which is mixed to the same degree where it is considered mixed with regards to the halachos of [[berachos]], would be forbidden because of [[bishul]] akum. For example, if peas (edible raw) are mixed with other food, then there would be a [[bishul]] akum concern for the peas as well.<ref>Gemara Avoda Zara 38a, Shulchan Aruch YD 113:2, Refer to OU document A-131. </ref>

==Forms of Cooking==

#Some poskim hold that there is no prohibition of bishul akum when cooking in a microwave, while others disagree.<ref>[https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/2168/food-fit-for-a-king-reviewing-the-laws-of-bishul-akum-and-bishul-yisroel/ Rav Heinemann at Star K] holds that there is no bishul akum on a microwave. [https://halachablog.com/2016/01/18/bishul-akum-and-microwaves/] quotes Rav Asher Weiss (Minchat Asher Devarim) as being lenient in a case of need. See Chelkas Binyamin p. 106, Lehorot Natan 7:64 and Rivevot Efraim 8:111 for more lenient opinions.

*[https://halachablog.com/2016/01/18/bishul-akum-and-microwaves/] writes that Shevet Halevi 8:185, Shraga Hameir 6:52:3, and Rav Elyashiv (Shvut Yitzchak v. 6 p. 61) hold that there is bishul akum for microwaves.
*The [https://oukosher.org/faqs/are-there-kosher-concerns-of-bishul-akum-if-the-food-is-cooked-in-a-microwave-by-a-gentile/ OU] writes that it is a dispute whether there is bishul akum when cooking in a microwave. On the one hand, it's a new development and the prohibition might not apply to it. Alternatively, it might be considered a normal form of cooking today.</ref>

===Jew Watching non-Jew===

#Even if a Jew observes the entire [[cooking]] process and ensures that the non-Jew didn't add any non-Kosher food, the food is nevertheless prohibited because of bishul akum . The main reason for the issur of bishul akum is that it might lead to intermarriage, and standing over a non-Jew does not mitigate this factor.<ref>Rivash 514, Noam Halacha page 76. </ref>

==Sephardim==

#Ideally, according to Sephardim, one should not eat in a restaurant where the food was not put on the fire by a Jew, regardless of who lit the flame. Rav Ovadia Yosef articulated a leniency to eat in a restaurant or hotel with an Ashkenazic hashgacha (that only makes sure that a Jew turns on the fire, but not that a Jew actually puts the food on the fire). One should ask a qualified rabbi regarding how to apply this leniency in various situations, such as Jewish homes where the maid did some cooking, Shawarma cut by a non Jew, etc.<ref>Rav Ovadyah Yosef in Yechave Daat vol. 5 Siman 54, Yabia Omer vol. 9 Yoreh Deah 6, Halichot Olam vol. 7 page 120. Patbag Hamelech p. 69 writes that lechatchila (initially) one can be lenient, but it is proper to be strict. However, Divrei Dovid YD 4:18 disagrees and strongly encourages one to be strict, and says that only those who can't be strict have what to rely upon to be lenient. See also Shu"t Rav Pealim vol. 3 Yoreh Deah Siman 9, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=19979&st=&pgnum=31&hilite= Shu"t Ohr LeTzion vol 2. page 12], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?168477&pageid=P0347 Shu"t HaRav HaRoshi (R' Mordechai Eliyahu) 5750-5753 Siman 152 page 346], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?608029&pageid=0106 Shu"t Maamar Mordechai (Eliyahu vol. 3 Yoreh Deah Siman 4], Shu"t Minchat Yitzchak vol. 7 Siman 62, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=52140&st=&pgnum=143 Shu"t Binyan Av (R' Eliyahu Bakhchi Doron) vol. 1 Siman 33], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=52138&st=&pgnum=161 Shu"T Binyan Av vol. 3 Siman 35] and [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=52138&st=&pgnum=166&hilite= 36] and [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=52136&st=&pgnum=211 vol. 5 Siman 46], Ohr Torah ([http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?14604&pageid=P0187L Sivan 5752 page 363], Iyyar 5752, [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?14604&pageid=P0396L Av 5752 Siman 155], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?154390&pageid=P0371 Adar 5764 Siman 94], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?154390&pageid=P0595 Iyyar 5764 Siman 88 page 559], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?154390&pageid=P0681 Sivan 5764 Siman 99]), [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21865&st=&pgnum=112 Shu"t Shema Shlomo vol. 2 Yoreh Deah Siman 7-10], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=48336&st=&pgnum=106 Shu"t Dibrot Eliyahu (Abergel) vol. 6 Yoreh Deah 55], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/55063 Lilkot Shoshanim (R' Eliyahu Bochbot) vol. 5], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=55207&st=&pgnum=296 Shu"t Divrei Benayahu (Dayan) vol. 17 Siman 29], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?23030&pageid=P0136 Shu"t Ateret Paz (R' Shmuel Pinchasi) vol. 1-2 Yoreh Deah Siman 2 page 102 and on], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?199834&pageid=19983400285 Ateret Avot vol. 3 page 273], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?28897&pageid=P0235 Shu"t Birkat Yehudah (R' Yehuda Bracha) vol. 1 Yoreh Deah 23-31], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=51920&st=&pgnum=146 Shu"t Asher Chanan (Aflalo) vol. 3 Yoreh Deah 35], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?198010&pageid=19801000352 Shu"t Avnei Derech (Rav Elchanan Prince) vol. 8 Siman 528], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?194191&pageid=19419100513 Shu"t Avnei Derech vol. 9 page 513],[http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?199083&pageid=19908300235 Shu"t Avnei Derech vol. 10 Siman 86-88], and [https://www.srugim.co.il/126159-לספרדים-יש-בעיה-לקנות-שווארמה-כשהמוכר שו"ת: לספרדים יש בעיה לקנות שווארמה כשהמוכר ערבי] regarding the general issue and shwarma, [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?194191&pageid=19419100286 Shu"t Avnei Derech vol. 9 Siman 99] and [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?199083&pageid=19908300453 vol. 10 page 453] regarding sushi, [https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2014/02/2014.02.pdf OU Daf HaKashrus Adar 5774], Banim Chavivim (R' Eli Yanay) page 483, and the Further Reading section below.</ref>

==Credits==
Special thanks to Rabbi Moishe Dovid Lebovits Rabbinical Administrator for KOF-K Kosher Supervision and author of Halachically Speaking for this article. To reach the author please email mlebovits@kof-k.org. Most of the halachos can also be found in original print on [http://thehalacha.com/wp-content/uploads/Vol7Issue1.pdf thehalacha.com].

==Further Reading==

#For Sephardim, see the sources to the above Halachot and these articles:
##See [http://www.badatz.biz/article/בישולי-גויים/ בהלכות בישולי נכרים] by Rav Moshe Yosef, of Badatz Beit Yosef
##Patgan HaMelech by Rav Moshe Parzis ([http://www.ateret4u.com/online/f_01904.html ToratEmmet edition], [https://www.otzar.org/wotzar/Book.aspx?52200& Otzar HaChochmah edition], [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oymv6CkzEMk YouTube Shiur])
##[https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/2171/bishul-yisroel-sefardi-and-now-for-the-rest-of-the-story/ BISHUL YISROEL SEPHARDI: AND NOW FOR THE REST OF THE STORY], By: Rabbi Tzvi Rosen, Star-K
##HalachaYomit.co.il ([http://halachayomit.co.il/en/Default.aspx?HalachaID=2612&PageIndex=5 May 24th 2017], [http://halachayomit.co.il/en/Default.aspx?HalachaID=4783 June 18th 2018])
##[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=1649 The Prohibition of Bishul Akum – Eating Foods Prepared by a Gentile], by Rabbi Eli Mansour, DailyHalacha.com
##[http://dinonline.org/2012/06/09/bishul-akum-for-sephardim/ Bishul Akum for Sephardim], Din online
#[https://oukosher.org/blog/kosher-professionals/lo-basi-ella-lorer-bishul-akum/ Lo Basi Ella L’orer: Bishul Akum] (OUKosher)
#[https://oukosher.org/blog/kosher-professionals/drinking-coffee-on-the-road-2/ Drinking Coffee on the Road] (OUKosher)
#[https://oukosher.org/blog/consumer-kosher/playing-with-fire/ Playing With Fire] (OUKosher)
#[https://oukosher.org/blog/kosher-in-the-factory/coffee/ Coffee] (OUKosher)
#[https://oukosher.org/blog/consumer-kosher/master-list-of-bishul-akum-status-of-foods/ Master List Of Bishul Akum Status Of Foods] (OU Kosher)
#[https://www.star-k.org/articles/articles/1182/food-fit-for-a-king-reviewing-the-laws-of-bishul-akum-bishul-yisroel/ FOOD FIT FOR A KING: REVIEWING THE LAWS OF BISHUL AKUM & BISHUL YISROEL] (Star-K)
#[https://rabbikaganoff.com/some-contemporary-bishul-akum-curiosities/ Some Contemporary Bishul Akum Curiosities] (R' Kaganoff)
#[https://rabbikaganoff.com/the-right-type-of-help/ The Right Type of Help] (R' Kaganoff)
#[https://www.yeshiva.co/midrash/shiur.asp?id=31779 Bishul Akum Problems in the Home] (R' Kaganoff)

==Sources==
<references />
[[Category:Kashrut]]
{{Kashrut}}

Bishul Akum

2024-08-22T20:00:26Z

Bchernigoff: edited grammar

[[File:Mashgiach.png|thumb|From https://www.ekollel.com/what-is-mashgiach/ (reproduced with permission)]]
Bishul Akum (Hebrew: בשול עכו"ם, tran. ''cooking of a non-Jew'') is a rabbinic restriction that forbids a Jew from eating many foods that a non-Jew cooked. The reason for the restriction is to prevent intermarriage and to avoid eating non-kosher ingredients that may have been mixed in. There are many leniencies that relate to the quality of the food as well as the significance of the cooking for the particular food in question. Additionally, if a Jew is partially involved in the cooking process, this can alleviate the issue of ''bishul akum''. This is a key reason for the need to have a hashgacha on many foods even though all of the ingredients are kosher.

==The Restriction==

#The rabbis<ref>This gezeirah is d’rabanan in nature (Meseches Avodah Zarah 38b, Yerushalmi Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:8, Ran Meseches Avodah Zarah page 28 “rebbe,” Rosh Meseches Chullin 3:61, Issur V’heter 43:1, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:9, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 113:16, Aruch Hashulchan 113:1, Sdei Chemed mareches bais page 133:69, see Teshuvos V’hanhagos 3:247 who seems to say there is a semach to a d’oraisa and therefore one should be very careful with these halachos). Refer to Kav Hayosher 75:5. </ref> enacted a decree forbidding food that was cooked by a non-Jew, even if the food is totally made from Kosher ingredients.<ref>Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b.</ref> However, it is permitted to derive benefit from food cooked by a non-Jew.<ref>Meseches Avodah Zarah 38b. </ref>

===Reasons===

#There are a number of reasons for this restriction. Some early commentators<ref>Rashi (Beitzah 16a s.v. ein and Avodah Zarah 35b s.v. v’hashlakos) and Tosfot (Avoda Zara 38a). Refer to Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:15, Tur Y.D. 113, Ramban Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b.</ref> explain that the rabbis wanted to prevent socializing with non-Jews, which might lead to intermarriage<ref>Devarim 7:3. </ref><ref>Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:15, Issur V’heter 43:1, Tur Y.D. 112. Refer to Pardes Yosef Vayeichi 49:page 838 (new). The issur applies even if one may not come to intermarriage (Refer to Rashba 1:248, Ramban Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b, Levush Y.D. 113:1, Shevet Hakehasi 6:273). This halacha even applies to non-Jews who aren't idolaters. (See Pri Tohar 112:3, Matei Yehonosson 112, Rav Poalim Y.D. 4:17, Yechaveh Daas 5:54, see Rav Poalim Y.D. 4:17, Shema Shlomo Y.D. 2:67, Shulchan Melachim pages 194-198). Regarding whether an issue of bishul akum exists if there will be animosity, see Taz Y.D. 152:1, Shach on Taz Y.D. 152:1, Chavos Yuer 66, Shulchan Melachim pages 189-194 in depth. </ref>. Others<ref>Rashi a"z 38a s.v. m’d’rabanan.” Refer to Tur 113, Ha’go’es Ashri Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:28, Levush 113:1, Chochmas Adom 66:1. </ref> think that the motivation for this restriction is that we are concerned that if the Jew often eats the non-Jew's food, the non-Jew might later serve a non-kosher food item to the Jew.<ref>Refer to Bishul Yisroel page 3:footnote 1 on the two views of Rashi. </ref> Most rabbis agree with the first reason.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:9, 15, Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “ela”, Issur V’heter 43:1, Tosfas Harid Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b, Ohr Zeruah Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:190:page 53, Tur 113, Bais Yosef 113, Bach, Levush 113:1, Taz 1, Shach 1, Prisha 3, Chochmas Adom 66:1, Pischei Teshuva 113:1, Aruch Hashulchan 2, 6, Kaf Hachaim 1, Chelkes Binyomin 113:1. The Halichos Shlomo Moadim 2:3:footnote 11 says the reason for the increase in intermarriage today is because of the many leniencies we accept for bishul akum. </ref>
#The rabbis were more stringent with these laws of ''bishul'' (cooking) than with [[Pat Akum|bread of a non-Jew]].<ref>Shach 112:17, Aruch Hashulchan 113:1-2, see Mesora 1:pages 84-85. Refer to Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, Noam Halacha page 64:footnote 3 in depth.</ref>

===Exceptions===

#There are two basic exceptions to the restrictions. A food that falls into either of these two categories<ref>This is expressed in Tosfas in Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “ika”, and “dagim”, and codified by the poskim. Refer to Rosh Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:28:page 83, Ran page 15, Rashba Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Ramban Meseches Avodah Zarah 37b, Toras Habayis 3:7, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:14-15, Bais Yosef 113, Bach, Shulchan Aruch 113:1, Levush 2, Aruch Hashulchan 5. Refer to Mordechai Meseches Avodah Zarah 830:page 42.</ref> is not subject to the laws of [[bishul]] akum and may be eaten by a Jew.<ref>Chelkes Binyomin 113:3.</ref>
#A food that can be eaten raw (ne'echal k'mo she'hu chay) may be cooked by a non-Jew. There are two reasons for this. First, the [[cooking]] does not really improve the food<ref>Rashi Meseches Beitzah 16a “ein”, Chochmas Adom 66:1, Bais Yitzchok 33:pages 565-566, Chelkes Binyomin 113:3, 5.</ref> because it can be eaten raw<ref>Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a, Avodah Zarah 38a, Ran Beitzah page 8b “im tzolon”, Rosh Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:28, Rif page 14, Issur V’heter 43:2, Tur 113, Shulchan Aruch 113:1, Toras Chatos 75:16, Levush 2, Chochmas Adom 66:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:6. Refer to Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “dagim”.</ref> (and it's not considered cooked).<ref>Rashi Meseches Beitzah 16a “ein buhem”, Levush 113:2.</ref> Second, food which is edible raw is not an important food, and one would not invite someone to his home to eat such foods.<ref>Ran Meseches Beitzah 8b “im tzolon”, Taz 113:1.</ref> Examples of such foods are beets,<ref>OU document A-110. Refer to the opinion of the Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 119:12 regarding borscht.</ref> cheese,<ref>Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “ika”, Darchei Teshuva 113:5, Kaf Hachaim 15. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 576-557 regarding processed cheeses.</ref> fruits,<ref>Refer to Shevet Ha’Levi 6:108:5. This is even if they are fried in sugar or honey (Aruch Hashulchan 13).</ref> honey,<ref>Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “ika”, Rosh 2:28, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:23, Issur V’heter 43:5, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 114:7, Aruch Hashulchan 113:13, Yalkut Yosef Y.D. 2:page 149, Shevet Ha’Levi 6:109.</ref> juice, ice cream, milk, (this will be discussed in a later issue), sugar cane,<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 23.</ref> zucchini and other vegetables,<ref>Refer to Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:14, Shulchan Aruch 113:3. This is only if the vegetable is not cooked with meat that is [[bishul]] akum since the fat from the meat gets absorbed into the vegetable (Shulchan Aruch 113:3, see G’ra 3, Darchei Teshuva 33-34, Chelkes Binyomin 33).</ref> and water.<ref>OU document A-110.</ref> Examples of foods that are not edible raw are asparagus, cauliflower, chicken, meat, potatoes, (this will be discussed in a later issue) and pumpkin.<ref>OU document A-110 </ref>
#The prohibition of [[bishul]] akum is limited to foods which are served on a king's table<ref>Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Rosh 2:28, Ran page 15, Rashba Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:15, Tur 113, Shulchan Aruch 113:1, Levush 3, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:6, Chochmas Adom 66:1, see Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a. </ref> (''oleh al shulchan melachim'') and accompany bread (such as meat,<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 10. </ref> eggs, or fish)<ref>Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:15, Ritvah Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 35a. </ref> or as an appetizer.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:18, Issur V’heter 43:2, Tur 113, Bais Yosef, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 113:1, Toras Chatos 75:16, Shach 112:5, Chochmas Adom 66:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:6, Chelkes Binyomin 113:12, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 180-181. Others say a dessert which is not eaten with bread is not a concern (Pri [[Chadash]] 114:6, Chasam Sofer 113:2, Kaf Hachaim 7), while others disagree (Refer to Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 113:1, Aruch Hashulchan 7, Darchei Teshuva 12). </ref> Only these types of foods are served at social gatherings, and only then is there the concern of intermarriage.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7. </ref> When there is no invitation, there is also no concern that the Jew will become used to eating the non-Jew's food, and therefore, there is no concern that the non-Jew might later serve the Jew non-Kosher.<ref>Chachmas Adam 66:1. See Chelkas Binyomin 113:3, and [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 130-131. </ref>
#Many say that any food that is fit to be served on a king's table is subject to [[bishul]] akum, even if it is not eaten with bread.<ref>Rashba Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Toras Habayis 3:7, Levush 3, Pri Tohar 3, Tiferes Yisroel Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:52, Aruch Hashulchan YD 113:7, Darchei Teshuva 12, Shevet Ha’Levi 2:43, 10:124, [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 148:footnote 15 quoting the opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita.</ref> Others say that the above stipulation is to be taken literally, and even an important food is only prohibited if it is eaten with bread.<ref>Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Issur V’heter 43:2, Zer Zahav 2, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Pri [[Chadash]] 113:3, 22, opinion of Harav Henkin zt”l quoted in Shearim Metzuyanim B’halacha 38:4, Hamesivta 5754:pages 83-84, Teharas Hamayim page 328:footnote*. Such an example would be a fancy spread ([[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 170-172). </ref> The accepted custom follows the stringent opinion.
#There is a third, somewhat obscure exception, which permits food which does not change when it is cooked.<ref>The Shevet Ha’Levi 6:108:2 says this reason and the reason of edible raw is the same reason. Refer to the Pri [[Chadash]] 113:1. See Meseches Avodah Zarah 37b (bottom), Ohr Zeruah Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:191:page 53, Ha’go’es Ashri Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:28, Ran Meseches Avodah Zarah page 28 “rebbe”, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Toras Chatos 75:16, Minchas Yaakov 75:32, Aruch Hashulchan 8. The Ran on page 15 (Meseches Avodah Zarah) says this third exception is not found in other Rishonim. See Darchei Moshe 113:3, Shach 113:1. </ref> However, most poskim maintain that this may not be relied upon to permit [[bishul]] akum.<ref>Issur V’heter 43:1, Shach 1, Be’er Heitiv 1, Pri [[Chadash]] 1, Pri Tohar 1, Aruch Hashulchan 9, Darchei Teshuva 14, Zivchei Tzedek 113:1, Kaf Hachaim 3, Chelkes Binyomin Biurim “davar” pages 60-61, Shevet Ha’Levi 2:43, Hamesivta 5754:pages 78-80. Refer to Avnei Nezer Y.D. 96:1. </ref>
# A bakery's food is permissible, even if the baker is not Jewish, as long as the ingredients are kosher. <ref> Yehave Daat, 5, 53 </ref>

====What Does "Eaten Raw" Mean?====

#The poskim debate the definition of "eaten raw. Some say that it depends on each individual's eating habits.<ref>Pri [[Chadash]] 113:2-3, Aruch Hashulchan 112:12, Darchei Teshuva 113:3 quoting the opinion of the Bnei Chai.</ref> However, many say that it follows the custom of most people.<ref>Rashi Meseches Avodah Zarah 38b “l’inyun”, Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7. Refer to Chochmas Adom 66:3. Refer to Shiurei Beracha 113:1, Darchei Teshuva 3, Chochmas Adom 66:4, Aruch Hashulchan 113:12, Kaf Hachaim 10, Shevet Ha’Levi 5:93:page 97, Chelkes Binyomin 113:6, Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 116:16. Refer to Chelkes Yaakov 113:5. </ref> Accordingly, if most people eat a certain food raw, even if one personally doesn't eat such a food, then one may eat it if a non-Jew cooked it. .<ref>Chelkes Binyomin 113:6, see Biurim “nechal.”</ref>
#A food which can only be eaten raw in difficult circumstances (al yedai ha'dechak) is not halachically considered edible raw.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis (hakutzer) 3:7:page 213 (new), Ran Meseches Avodah Zarah 16b s.v. beitzah, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Tur 113, Shulchan Aruch 113:12. Refer to Pri [[Chadash]] 113:21, Chochmas Adom 66:3, Ben Ish Chai Chukas 2:22, Aruch Hashulchan 26, Kaf Hachaim 71, Shevet Ha’Levi 9:162, Chelkes Binyomin 113:117, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 85-87. Refer to Bach 113 “umeiy shnu” who explains why if a food is cooked is it permitted even if it can be eaten if one pushes himself. </ref> However, others disagree and hold that this is halachically considered edible raw.<ref>Rama 113:12. Refer to Ramban and Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38b. </ref>
#If it is common to eat the item raw with other ingredients, then the raw item is still considered edible raw.<ref>Gilyon Maharsha Y.D. 113, Magen Avraham O.C. 203:4, Mishna Brurah 203:11, M’Bais Levi 8:page 26:1, Chelkes Binyomin 113:6-7. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 102, OU Document A-59 quoting the opinion of Rav Schachter Shlita, OU madrich pages 100-101. See Darchei Teshuva 113:4, [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 102 quoting the opinion of Harav Shmuel Felder Shlita. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 463 who is not sure what status sushi has in this regard.</ref> A food which was edible raw while fresh, is not considered edible raw after it dries out.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 15. See Dugel Mervuva Y.D. 113. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 88-90. </ref>
#Some say that [[bishul]] akum doesn't apply to corn because it's normal to eat corn raw, it's just not commonly done. On the other hand, others hold that [[bishul]] akum does apply to corn since it isn't eaten raw.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/788653/Rabbi_Mordechai_I_Willig/Yoreh_De'ah_Shiur_06_Bishul_Akum Rabbi Mordechai Willig in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 55-57)] quotes Rav Yisrael Belsky as saying that [[bishul]] akum doesn't apply to corn since it would be normal to eat it raw, it is just that we are picky. However, Rav Hershel Schachter held that [[bishul]] akum does apply unless a majority of people eat it raw.</ref>
#Eggs are considered inedible raw and are therefore subject to the laws of bishul akum.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 113:14</ref>

===="Fit to be Served on a King's Table"====

#We mentioned earlier that food which is fit to be served on a king's table is subject to the halachos of [[bishul]] akum.<ref>Refer to Darchei Teshuva 113:10 if this applies to a Jewish king or non-Jewish king. Additionally, refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 187-188 if this applies to something which is fit for a king’s table sometimes. See Tosfas Meseches Beitzah 16b “dagim”, Avodah Zarah 38a “dagim”.</ref> This term requires clarification. What if a king eats a certain food for breakfast, but would not eat it for supper? Would this be considered "fit to be served on a king's table"? Some say that "fit to be served on a king's table" refers to food that would be served at a royal dinner.<ref>Based on the Gemorah in Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a. Refer to Shevet Hakehasi 6:274:4. </ref> The prevailing opinion is that this term is not limited to a king, but instead refers to anyone of stature.<ref>Issur V’heter 43:2, Shiurei Beracha Y.D. 113:2, Ben Ish Chai Chukas 2:9, Zivchei Tzedek 113:2, Kaf Hachaim 13:2. Refer to Aruch Hashulchan 18 who seems to hold this way as well. See Chelkes Binyomin 113:10, [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 133. See Shulchan Melachim 2:pages 1164-1165. </ref> Others say it means food which would be served at a state dinner,<ref>Refer to Kashrus Kurrents from the Star-K “Food Fit For A King”.</ref> while some apply it even if a food is eaten by a king at breakfast<ref>Refer to Mesora 1:page 86:2, Shulchan Melachim 2:page 1209:3. </ref> (this is not the halacha). Others are of the opinion that it refers to a food that one would serve on [[Shabbos]] to invites guests,<ref>Based on the opinion of the Rambam in Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:15, Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 116:18, opinion of Harav Falk Shlita in [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) page 28:3. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 134-135 who says this clause is not mentioned in Shulchan Aruch, but it seems to be l’halacha anyways. </ref> or food served at a fancy meal in honor of a mitzvah.<ref>Shevet Ha’kehusi 6:274:4, see Dinei Machalei Nuchrim pages 18-19. </ref> Harav Yisroel Belsky (this is the OU policy) holds that it refers to food served at a wedding smorgasbord.<ref>Based on a personal conversation. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) page 28:3 who does not seem to agree with this. </ref> Examples of foods which do not fit into the above categories and are permitted are: chickpeas,<ref>Refer to Darchei Moshe 113:3, Rama 113:2, Aruch Hashulchan 13, 15-16, Halichos Olom 7:pages 102-103, Opinion of the Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 119:14, Halichos Olom 7:page 102, OU Documents A-64:1, A-130, M-7. Refer to Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:17, Ben Ish Chai Chukas 2:12. See Minchas Yaakov 75:31 who says (in his days) cooked chickpeas were fit to be served on a king’s table.</ref> corn, snacks,<ref>Toras Chaim Avodah Zarah 38a, Zechor L’Avraham 5762-5763:page 749, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 1:438, Noam Halacha page 190, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 169:footnote 3, Kitzur Hilchos [[Bishul]] Akum (Sharf) 11. </ref> Rice Krispies,<ref>Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 117:21, Star-K article entitled “Food Fit For A King”.</ref> and popcorn.<ref>Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 118:2, Rivevos Ephraim 7:page 450, Noam Halacha page 193, Chai Ha’Levi 4:50:10. </ref>
#Is "Fit to be Served on a King's Table" defined by the category of food, or by the specific type of food? Some poskim hold that if a certain type of food can be prepared in a way that could be served at a king's table, then any dish prepared from this food falls under the problem of [[bishul]] akum, even if this particular dish would not be served at the king's table.<ref>Refer to Aruch Hashulchan 113:10, Emes L’Yaakov Y.D. 112:footnote 42, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 1:438, opinion of Harav Elyashiv Shlita quoted in [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 146:14, Igros Moshe Y.D. 5:48:5, Dinei Machalei Nuchrim pages 23-24, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 139-144, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 1:438, Be’er Moshe quoted in Pischei Halacha (Kashrus) page 116:17. Refer to Tiferes Yisroel Avodah Zarah 2:52.</ref> However, most poskim disagree with this position and maintain that each dish must be evaluated individually.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see OU documents A-21, A-23, and A-106, Maharsham 2:262, Gan Shoshanim 2:page 202. Refer to Chelkes Binyomin 113:6, 8, biurim page 96, Shevet Ha’kehasi 6:274, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 3:249, [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 143, Kerem Ephraim pages 64-65. </ref> Accordingly, if a specific potato is prepared in a way that it is fit for a king's table, then only that type of potato is a problem of [[bishul]] akum. This opinion is followed by most kashrus agencies.<ref>Tiferet Yisrael (Avoda Zara Yachin. 2:52) writes that when judging whether something is fit for a king we judge the type of food. Teshuvot Vhanhagot 1:438 agrees and forbids potato chips.

*One proof is that the Iser Vheter that is cited and accepted by the Shach (113:2) writes that intestines are forbidden because of Bishul Akum even though they aren’t fit to serve a guest (S”A YD 101:5). Since meat is important we judge all meat as fit for a king’s table even the parts which are very low quality. This is echoed by the Pri Chadash 113:2 and Aruch Hashulchan 113:10. Rav Pesach Falk (author of Machazeh Eliyahu, in Am Hatorah 5754 p. 75) argues with the Tiferet Yisrael based on a number of proofs.</ref><ref>Another factor to use to permit potato chips is that usually they aren’t eaten with bread and some poskim hold that any food which isn’t eaten with bread isn’t included in Bishul Akum. Pri Chadash 113:3 is lenient. See Darkei Teshuva 113:12 for those who are lenient. Chayei Adam 66:1 and Yechava Daat 4:42 don’t hold of this Pri Chadash. [https://www.star-k.org/articles/articles/1182/food-fit-for-a-king-reviewing-the-laws-of-bishul-akum-bishul-yisroel/ Rav Heinemann] is lenient for potato chips since they are not eaten for a meal at all. Rav Shlomo Machpud (Daat Kashrut 5762 p. 136) agrees.</ref>
#If a food would only be fit for the king's table after certain spices and seasoning were added, it is still considered fit for the king's table even without the spices.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 113:9, Chelkes Binyomin 113:8. Refer to OU document A-41. </ref>
#[[Bishul]] Akum applies to instant rice which was cooked by the non-Jewish manufacturer. Parboiled rice, however, which requires further [[cooking]] to be edible is not [[Bishul]] Akum at the time of manufacturing and need to be finished [[cooking]] by a Jew.<ref>[http://www.star-k.org/kashrus/kk-issues-bishul.htm Article on star-k.org]</ref>
#Many hold that [[Bishul]] Akum does not apply to potato chips since in that particular way of preparing a potato it isn't fit to be served on a king's table.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/788653/Rabbi_Mordechai_I_Willig/Yoreh_De'ah_Shiur_06_Bishul_Akum Rabbi Mordechai Willig in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 55-57)] quoting Rabbi Belsky from the OU Papers on [[Bishul]] Akum</ref> Some are strict about this and won't eat pringles with an OU because of the bishul akum issue.<ref>[https://kavhalacha.co.il/index.php/parashathashavoa-dafyomi-halachayomit-lectures-9/harav-david-yosef-17/3459-2017-05-30-05-42-83 Rav Eliyahu Pinchasi] based on Rav Elyashiv and the Badatz Edah Charedit.</ref>

#Many hold that the definition of fit for a king's tables depends on the current custom and not a previous custom.<ref>This is the opinion of the Chochmas Adam 66:4 as well as Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:18, Pri Tohar 7, Shiurei Beracha 113:9, Kaf Hachaim 6 and 11, Chelkes Binyomin 113:6, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 198-199. The Pri [[Chadash]] 113:5 argues (see Sdei Chemed mareches [[bishul]] akum u’pitan 5:page 287, Darchei Teshuva 113:7). </ref>

===Product Shipped From one Place to Another===

#If a non-Jew cooks a food which ''is'' edible raw then it is permitted even if it is shipped to a country where it is not eaten raw.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita as expressed in OU document A-88, see Pri [[Chadash]] Y.D. 113:22, Shiurei Beracha 113:1, Kaf Hachaim 113:11. Refer to Shevet Ha’Levi 9:163. The reason for this is since the food is edible raw in one place there is no certainty that it will not be edible raw in the place where it is shipped since it is many days from when the food is made and the food may be dry. </ref> This is not a common issue as a food which is edible in one country is usually edible in a different country as well.<ref>OU document A-88 </ref>
#If a non-Jew prepared a food which ''is not'' edible raw in a country where it is not served on a king's table and shipped it to a country where the food is fit to be served on a king's table the food is forbidden because of [[bishul]] akum.<ref>Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) pages 31-32. See OU document A-131.</ref> If the situation is reversed, and a non-Jew prepared a food which is not edible raw and it is fit to be served on a king's table in that country, then the food is forbidden even if it is shipped to a country where it is not eaten on a king's table.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita as expressed in OU document A-88, opinion of Harav Falk Shlita as expressed in [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) pages 31-34 in depth. Refer to Shiurei Beracha 113:7, Ben Ish Chai Chukas 2:12, Chaim Shaul 1:74:6, Kaf Hachaim 113:20, Kerem Ephraim pages 62-63, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 61-62. In regard to tortillas see Dinei Machalei Nuchrim pages 93-101 in depth. </ref>

===Important Person===

#There is a discussion in the poskim if an important person should go beyond the letter of the law regarding the laws of [[bishul]] akum. Some poskim say that such a person should refrain from any food cooked by a non-Jew even if it can be eaten raw, if it is fit to be served on a king's table.<ref>Refer to Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a, Meiri [[Shabbos]] 51a, Ritvah 51a, Shach Y.D. 152:2, Bach Y.D. 113, Shiurei Beracha 113:4-5, Tosfas [[Shabbos]] O.C. 257:17 in depth, Kaf Hachaim 12, Shevet Ha’kehasi 4:200, M’Bais Levi 8:page 31:13, Shevet Ha’Levi 6:108:3, Minchas Yaakov 75:30, Dinei Machalei Nuchrim page 9:footnote 4, see Pri Megadim Eishel Avraham 257:15. The Taz 3 says it is a pious act. Some even says this applies to water (Kaf Hachaim 13 quoting the opinion of the Arizal). </ref> The reason is that if one sees an important person being lenient even though it is permitted strictly speaking, the onlooker will potentially be more lenient in a circumstance where it can be forbidden.<ref>Rashi Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a s.v. adom, Meiri Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a </ref>
#If it is eaten raw and fit to be served on a king's table one should be stringent.<ref>Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 385-386. </ref> However, others disregard this concern,<ref>Dugel Mirvuva Y.D. 113, Zivchei Tzedek 113:10, Machzik Beracha O.C. 257:2, Kaf Hachaim 113:12, Hamesivta 5754:page 82, see Chelkes Binyomin 113:4. </ref> and the custom seems to follow the latter opinion.<ref>Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita, see Pri [[Chadash]] 113:3, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 113:11, Chai Ha’Levi 4:51:6.</ref> Even the stringent opinion makes allowances for health reasons (see below).<ref>Tashbatz 1:89, Maharsham 5:36:page 35. </ref>

===Health Reasons===

#A food which is fit to be served on a king's table and is not eaten raw is still not a concern of [[bishul]] akum if it is eaten for health reasons. It is not a "chashuva" food, and sharing it will not lead to closeness with a non-Jew.<ref>Radvaz 3:637, Meiri Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Maharsham 2:262, Noam Halacha page 75, Chelkes Binyomin 113:page 11 (biurim). </ref>

==Types of Food==
===Beverages===

#The consensus of the poskim is that there is a concern of [[bishul]] akum with beverages (i.e. soup) if one cannot drink it without [[cooking]] it or it is fit to be served on a king's table.<ref>Refer to Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 31b “v’travaihu,” Rosh 2:15, Rambam Hilchos Machalas Asuros 17:14, Orchos Habayis 8:14:footnote 41, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 185-186. Refer to Pri [[Chadash]] 113:3, 114:6 who seems to argue. See Sdei Chemed mareches “[[bishul]] eino yehudi u’pitan” page 349:10. </ref>

===Frozen===

#A food that is forbidden because of [[bishul]] akum and placed into the freezer is still forbidden even though it is inedible while it is frozen.<ref>Dinei Machalei Nuchrim page 48:6, Noam Halacha page 71:16:footnote 28, Kitzur Hilchos [[Bishul]] Akum (Berger) page 27. </ref> By the same token, if a Jew cooked food and froze it, there is no concern if a non-Jew heats up the food.<ref>Kitzur Hilchos [[Bishul]] Akum (Berger) page 26-27.</ref>

===Dried===

#Potatoes which were milled or pureed and then dehydrated to be used for producing other food is subject to Bishul Akum since it is edible without further cooking such as adding lukewarm water.<ref>Rav Shlomo Machpud in Daat Kashrut 5762 p. 136 writes that since the potatoes were steamed and then pureed they are ready to be eaten with simply adding lukewarm water and therefore forbidden. He cites Rav Masas in Shemesh Umagen 2:44 who is lenient but also cites Rav Mordechai Eliyahu who was strict. Rav Masas argued that since the pureed needed further processing it is like the original cooking wasn't ineffective.</ref>

===Canned Foods===

#There is a discussion among the poskim if canned food is subject to the halachos of [[bishul]] akum. Food which is cooked before it is canned and is just put in a can for storage would be forbidden.<ref>[[Bishul]] Yisroel page 34, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 3:247. </ref> However, one could argue that food cooked in a can is not fit to be served on a king's table.<ref>Refer to Mesora 1:page 86 (bottom), Mesora 2:pages 74-75, OU document A-64:4, Star-K article entitled “Food Fit For A King” page 2, opinion of Harav Pinchus Sheinberg Shlita quoted in Divrei Chachamim pages 182-183:22. </ref> The custom seems to treat canned goods as a concern of [[bishul]] akum (if the food is not edible raw) even if it is cooked with indirect steam.<ref>Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) pages 46-47, Teshuvos V’hanhagos 3:247. Also see [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 34-36. Some are lenient because many products do not get changed when cooked in a can (Aleh Ezra Y.D. 5). </ref> However, this can be used as an additional factor to be lenient in certain cases.

===Fried Foods===

# Sufganiyot fried in oil by non-Jews are permitted. <ref> Halichot Olam, 7, Page 106</ref>

==Utensils==

#There is a discussion in the poskim if food cooked by a non-Jew<ref>The Shach 113:20 says [[cooking]] for herself is more stringent because it is unlikely that a Jew will intervene. Refer to Prisha 113:17, Chochmas Adom 66:11. See Shulchan Melachim 2:pages 959-957.</ref> renders the pot treif.<ref>Some say if the [[cooking]] was not done in front of us then there is a concern of non-kosher being cooked and all would agree that hagalah is required (Chelkes Binyomin 113:134). </ref> Some poskim say that no hagalah (kashering) is required.<ref>Tosfot Harosh Avoda Zara 40a s.v. vani, Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Issur V’heter 43:8, Shulchan Aruch 113:16, Levush 16, Shiurei Beracha 18. Refer to Hamesivta 5754:pages 123-125 who says most poskim hold no hagalah is required. </ref> Some explain that the main reason for the issur of [[bishul]] akum is because of intermarriage, and there is no socializing with flavor absorbed in the pot.<ref>Bedek Habayis 3:7:page 209 (new), G’ra 40, 42, See Aruch Hashulchan 113:50. </ref> However, many poskim maintain that hagalah is in fact required,<ref>Rashba in Toras Habayis 3:7 (end), Rashba Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, Ran (teshuvos) 5:11, Toras Chatos 75:14, Tur, Bais Yosef, Shulchan Aruch 113:16, Levush 16, Shiurei Beracha 18-19, Chochmas Adom 66:11, Mishna Brurah O.C. 328:63, Aruch Hashulchan 113:50, Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 113:89, Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:41, Kitzur Hilchos [[Bishul]] Akum (Berger) page 45:67. Refer to Matei Yehonosson 113:16, Pri [[Chadash]] 25, Kashrus 2:pages 13-20 in depth. See Shulchan Melachim 2:pages 943-951.</ref> and this is the overwhelming custom.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 113:16, Aruch Hashulchan 113:50, Chai Ha’Levi 5:54:1. Some say if the [[cooking]] was done in a Jewish home or Jewish establishment no hagalah is required since there are two sefikos. One doubt is if such utensils require hagalah and the other doubt is if there is [[bishul]] akum in a Jew’s home (Halichos Olom 7:page 104:footnote). </ref> The reason is that the food itself becomes forbidden, and the blios (absorption) from the food are considered as forbidden foods.<ref>Toras Habayis 3:7:page 214 (new), Aruch Hashulchan 113:50. See Gr’a 113:40, 42. Refer to Tzitz Eliezer 22:44 in depth on this dispute. </ref> This applies even if the utensils were not used within twenty-four hours (eino ben-yomo) in which case the taste of the food is pogem (ill tasting).<ref>Ben Ish Chai Chukas 2:24, Kaf Hachaim 113:89-90, Chelkes Binyomin 113:138, [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 373-374, opinion of Harav Falk Shlita stated in [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) page 67. Refer to Chochmas Adom 66:12. See Darchei Teshuva 113:92 who brings a lenient opinion. See Rama O.C. 452:2, Mishna Brurah 20. The opinion of Harav Falk Shlita stated in [[Bishul]] Yisroel (teshuvos) pages 78-79 is that in time of need one can be lenient and do hagalah even within twenty-four hours. Refer to Chochmas Adom 66:12. </ref> Nonetheless, one can do ''[[Koshering a Kitchen|hagalah]]'' (after waiting twenty-four hours)<ref>Kaf Hachaim 113:90, Chelkes Binyomin 113:142. </ref> for an earthenware utensil (which we normally do not kasher)<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 451:22. </ref> three times and use it for kosher food.<ref>Bais Yosef 113, Shulchan Aruch 113:16, Toras Chatos 75:14, Levush 16, Chochmas Adom 66:11, Mishna Brurah O.C. 328:63, Aruch Hashulchan 113:50, Kaf Hachaim 95, see Gilyon Maharsha 113, Mishna Brurah 328:63, Shevet Ha’Levi 9:162:16. Refer to Shevet Ha’Levi 6:108:8, Kashrus 2:pages 237-238. </ref> This is common if a non-Jew used a crock-pot to cook food.<ref>Kitzur Hilchos [[Bishul]] Akum (Berger) page 46:70. </ref>
#An interesting question arises regarding kashering the utensils of a convert which were only used for kosher food. It would seem from the language of the Shulchan Aruch<ref>Y.D. 113:16. </ref> (when he discusses the obligation to kasher from [[bishul]] akum) that he does not require kashering.<ref>Opinion of Harav Herschel Schachter Shlita and Rabbi Ari Senter Shlita. Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlita added that the non-Jew before he converted did nothing wrong when [[cooking]] for himself so his utensils are not [[bishul]] akum (if they were used for kosher food). </ref> However, when the question arises one should discuss it with a competent Rav.

==Doubts and Mixtures==
===Doubt===

#The halacha is that anytime<ref>Rama 113:11, Chochmas Adom 66:9, Aruch Hashulchan 48. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel 304-310.</ref> one has a doubt<ref>Even if the doubt is if a Jew was involved in the [[cooking]] of the food (Chelkes Binymon biurim “v’chein” page 100). </ref> whether a Jew stoked the coals<ref>Taz 11. This would not be valid according to the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch since stoking the coals is not [[bishul]] yisroel (Kaf Hachaim 68). </ref>, or if a food was cooked 1/3 by a Jew<ref>Chochmas Adom 66:9 </ref>, then we can be lenient. Some even say that if one is not sure whether a particular food is subject to the laws of [[bishul]] akum he may be lenient since the entire prohibition is rabbinic ([[Klalei_Halacha#Safek_Derabbanan_Lkula]]).<ref>Tosfas Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a “ika”, Issur V’heter 43:10, Tur 113, Rama 113:11, Toras Chatos 75:7, Chochmas Adom 66:9, Aruch Hashulchan 48. Refer to Darchei Teshuva 70. </ref> There is a discussion if we can be lenient if one is unsure if a food is fit to be served on a king's table. Some poskim are lenient even if one can verify the status,<ref>Opinion of the Shevet Ha’Levi quoted in Kerem Ephraim page 48:15:1. Refer to Pri Megadim Sifsei Da’as Y.D. 110:34. </ref> but the custom is to be stringent.<ref>Shach 110:34 (dinei sfek sfeika), [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 490-491, opinion of Harav Falk Shlita quoted in [[Bishul]] Yisroel page 52 (teshuvos) 5:16. </ref>

===Rov or Shishim===

#Most poskim are of the opinion that [[bishul]] akum is nullified in a simple majority ([[Nullification|botel b'rov]])<ref>Toras Chatos 75:9, Shach 112:23, 113:21, Be’er Heitiv 18, Shiurei Beracha 113:10, Chochmas Adom 66:11, Aruch Hashulchan 53, Darchei Teshuva 90, Kaf Hachaim 91, see Mishna Brurah 328:63. Refer to Darchei Teshuva 113:91 if one is permitted to be mevatel [[bishul]] akum with his hands. Refer to Yeshoshua Yaakov Y.D. 113:3 in depth why one is permitted to mix a [[bishul]] akum food with a non-[[bishul]] akum food.</ref> while some maintain you need shishim (60 times).<ref>Refer to Hagalas Keilim 10:footnote 11, Chelkes Binyomin 113:136. </ref> Sephardim hold you need 60 times but if you have majority and not sixty you can add more permitted ingredients in order to nullify it.<ref>Divrei Dovid 2:20 proves the Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 113:3 holds that bishul akum isn't nullified by a majority. He cites this approach from the Bear Sheva 19, Minchat Cohen 1:1, Pri Chadash 99:17, Maharashdam 41, Kahal Yehuda 113:2, Misgeret Hashulchan 113:2, Ayin Hamayim 112:11, Kiseh Eliyahu 113:2, Maharam Shik 134, and Yeshuot Yakov 113:3. [http://www.toratemetfreeware.com/online/f_01598.html#HtmpReportNum0002_L3 Patbag Hamelch 2:23] agrees.</ref>

===Mixing Edible with Non-Edible Raw Food===

#If food which is edible raw is mixed<ref>There is no concern of being mevatel an issur here (Darchei Teshuva 113:18). </ref> with food that is not edible raw, the mixture is not subject to the halachos of [[bishul]] akum if most of the ingredients are food which can be eaten raw.<ref>Ritvah Meseches Avodah Zarah 38a, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1381&st=&pgnum=77 Tashbetz 1:89], Shulchan Aruch 113:2, Toras Chatos 75:12, Levush 15, Chochmas Adom 66:6, Aruch Hashulchan 14. See Mishna Brurah 203:11. Refer to Meseches Beitzah 16a-16b, Avodah Zarah 38a, Rashi Meseches Beitzah 16a “asirei,” Avodah Zarah 38a “ku mashma lon”, Ran page 15. Refer to [[Bishul]] Yisroel pages 330-333.</ref> Some permit even if it is half and half<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 14, Darchei Teshuva 19. Some say if the five grains are mixed in they are the main ingredient in this regard as well as in hilchos berochos (Darchei Teshuva 113:20, Chelkes Binyomin 113:21, see Hamesivta 5754:pages 88-89 where he asks on the Aruch Hashulchan). </ref> (this will be discussed in a later issue). Some say that the five grains are considered the main ingredient as is the case in hilchos [[berachos]].
#Some say this is only permitted if the food which is not edible raw is not recognizable in the mixture.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 113:22, Divrei Dovid 2:20. See Kaf Hachaim 17</ref>

===Tafel===

#Sometimes, a food may be eaten raw but is a tafel to the main food which has a concern of [[bishul]] akum (not eaten raw). The question is if the food eaten as a tafel is subject to the halachos of [[bishul]] akum. The rules here follow the same rules as [[berachos]]. A food which is mixed to the same degree where it is considered mixed in regard to the halachos of [[berachos]] would not be permitted because of [[bishul]] akum. For example, if peas (edible raw) are mixed with other food then there would be a [[bishul]] akum concern for the peas as well.<ref>Gemara Avoda Zara 38a, Shulchan Aruch YD 113:2, Refer to OU document A-131. </ref>

==Forms of Cooking==

#Some poskim hold that there is no prohibition of bishul akum when cooking in a microwave, while others disagree.<ref>[https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/2168/food-fit-for-a-king-reviewing-the-laws-of-bishul-akum-and-bishul-yisroel/ Rav Heinemann at Star K] holds that there is no bishul akum on a microwave. [https://halachablog.com/2016/01/18/bishul-akum-and-microwaves/] quotes Rav Asher Weiss (Minchat Asher Devarim) as being lenient in case of need. See Chelkas Binyamin p. 106, Lehorot Natan 7:64 and Rivevot Efraim 8:111 for more lenient opinions.

*[https://halachablog.com/2016/01/18/bishul-akum-and-microwaves/] writes that Shevet Halevi 8:185, Shraga Hameir 6:52:3, and Rav Elyashiv (Shvut Yitzchak v. 6 p. 61) hold that there is bishul akum for microwaves.
*The [https://oukosher.org/faqs/are-there-kosher-concerns-of-bishul-akum-if-the-food-is-cooked-in-a-microwave-by-a-gentile/ OU] writes that it is a dispute whether there is bishul akum when cooking in a microwave since it is an innovation or perhaps it is considered a normal form of cooking today.</ref>

===Jew Watching non-Jew===

#A prohibition remains even if a Jew observes the [[cooking]] process and ensures that nothing is added. The reason is that the main reason for the issur is because of intermarriage, and standing over a non-Jew does not mitigate this factor.<ref>Rivash 514, Noam Halacha page 76. </ref>

==Sephardim==

#Ideally, according to Sephardim, one should not eat in a restaurant where the food was not put on the fire by a Jew, regardless of who lit the flame. Rav Ovadia Yosef articulated a leniency to eat in a restaurant or hotel with Ashkenazic hashgacha that only makes sure that a Jew turns on the fire but not that a Jew is involved in the [[cooking]]. One should ask a qualified rabbi regarding how to apply this leniency in various situations, such as Jewish homes where the maid did some cooking, Shawarma cut by a non Jew, etc.<ref>Rav Ovadyah Yosef in Yechave Daat vol. 5 Siman 54, Yabia Omer vol. 9 Yoreh Deah 6, Halichot Olam vol. 7 page 120. Patbag Hamelech p. 69 writes that initially one can be lenient but it is proper to be strict, however, Divrei Dovid YD 4:18 disagrees and encourages using a strongly language to be strict and only those who can't be strict have what to rely upon to be lenient. See also Shu"t Rav Pealim vol. 3 Yoreh Deah Siman 9, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=19979&st=&pgnum=31&hilite= Shu"t Ohr LeTzion vol 2. page 12], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?168477&pageid=P0347 Shu"t HaRav HaRoshi (R' Mordechai Eliyahu) 5750-5753 Siman 152 page 346], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?608029&pageid=0106 Shu"t Maamar Mordechai (Eliyahu vol. 3 Yoreh Deah Siman 4], Shu"t Minchat Yitzchak vol. 7 Siman 62, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=52140&st=&pgnum=143 Shu"t Binyan Av (R' Eliyahu Bakhchi Doron) vol. 1 Siman 33], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=52138&st=&pgnum=161 Shu"T Binyan Av vol. 3 Siman 35] and [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=52138&st=&pgnum=166&hilite= 36] and [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=52136&st=&pgnum=211 vol. 5 Siman 46], Ohr Torah ([http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?14604&pageid=P0187L Sivan 5752 page 363], Iyyar 5752, [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?14604&pageid=P0396L Av 5752 Siman 155], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?154390&pageid=P0371 Adar 5764 Siman 94], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?154390&pageid=P0595 Iyyar 5764 Siman 88 page 559], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?154390&pageid=P0681 Sivan 5764 Siman 99]), [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21865&st=&pgnum=112 Shu"t Shema Shlomo vol. 2 Yoreh Deah Siman 7-10], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=48336&st=&pgnum=106 Shu"t Dibrot Eliyahu (Abergel) vol. 6 Yoreh Deah 55], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/55063 Lilkot Shoshanim (R' Eliyahu Bochbot) vol. 5], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=55207&st=&pgnum=296 Shu"t Divrei Benayahu (Dayan) vol. 17 Siman 29], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?23030&pageid=P0136 Shu"t Ateret Paz (R' Shmuel Pinchasi) vol. 1-2 Yoreh Deah Siman 2 page 102 and on], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?199834&pageid=19983400285 Ateret Avot vol. 3 page 273], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?28897&pageid=P0235 Shu"t Birkat Yehudah (R' Yehuda Bracha) vol. 1 Yoreh Deah 23-31], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=51920&st=&pgnum=146 Shu"t Asher Chanan (Aflalo) vol. 3 Yoreh Deah 35], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?198010&pageid=19801000352 Shu"t Avnei Derech (Rav Elchanan Prince) vol. 8 Siman 528], [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?194191&pageid=19419100513 Shu"t Avnei Derech vol. 9 page 513],[http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?199083&pageid=19908300235 Shu"t Avnei Derech vol. 10 Siman 86-88], and [https://www.srugim.co.il/126159-לספרדים-יש-בעיה-לקנות-שווארמה-כשהמוכר שו"ת: לספרדים יש בעיה לקנות שווארמה כשהמוכר ערבי] regarding the general issue and shwarma, [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?194191&pageid=19419100286 Shu"t Avnei Derech vol. 9 Siman 99] and [http://www.otzar.org/wotzar/book.aspx?199083&pageid=19908300453 vol. 10 page 453] regarding sushi, [https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2014/02/2014.02.pdf OU Daf HaKashrus Adar 5774], Banim Chavivim (R' Eli Yanay) page 483, and the Further Reading section below.</ref>

==Credits==
Special thanks to Rabbi Moishe Dovid Lebovits Rabbinical Administrator for KOF-K Kosher Supervision and author of Halachically Speaking for this article. To reach the author please email mlebovits@kof-k.org. Most of the halachos can also be found in original print on [http://thehalacha.com/wp-content/uploads/Vol7Issue1.pdf thehalacha.com].

==Further Reading==

#For Sephardim, see the sources to the above Halachot and these articles:
##See [http://www.badatz.biz/article/בישולי-גויים/ בהלכות בישולי נכרים] by Rav Moshe Yosef, of Badatz Beit Yosef
##Patgan HaMelech by Rav Moshe Parzis ([http://www.ateret4u.com/online/f_01904.html ToratEmmet edition], [https://www.otzar.org/wotzar/Book.aspx?52200& Otzar HaChochmah edition], [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oymv6CkzEMk YouTube Shiur])
##[https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/2171/bishul-yisroel-sefardi-and-now-for-the-rest-of-the-story/ BISHUL YISROEL SEPHARDI: AND NOW FOR THE REST OF THE STORY], By: Rabbi Tzvi Rosen, Star-K
##HalachaYomit.co.il ([http://halachayomit.co.il/en/Default.aspx?HalachaID=2612&PageIndex=5 May 24th 2017], [http://halachayomit.co.il/en/Default.aspx?HalachaID=4783 June 18th 2018])
##[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=1649 The Prohibition of Bishul Akum – Eating Foods Prepared by a Gentile], by Rabbi Eli Mansour, DailyHalacha.com
##[http://dinonline.org/2012/06/09/bishul-akum-for-sephardim/ Bishul Akum for Sephardim], Din online
#[https://oukosher.org/blog/kosher-professionals/lo-basi-ella-lorer-bishul-akum/ Lo Basi Ella L’orer: Bishul Akum] (OUKosher)
#[https://oukosher.org/blog/kosher-professionals/drinking-coffee-on-the-road-2/ Drinking Coffee on the Road] (OUKosher)
#[https://oukosher.org/blog/consumer-kosher/playing-with-fire/ Playing With Fire] (OUKosher)
#[https://oukosher.org/blog/kosher-in-the-factory/coffee/ Coffee] (OUKosher)
#[https://oukosher.org/blog/consumer-kosher/master-list-of-bishul-akum-status-of-foods/ Master List Of Bishul Akum Status Of Foods] (OU Kosher)
#[https://www.star-k.org/articles/articles/1182/food-fit-for-a-king-reviewing-the-laws-of-bishul-akum-bishul-yisroel/ FOOD FIT FOR A KING: REVIEWING THE LAWS OF BISHUL AKUM & BISHUL YISROEL] (Star-K)
#[https://rabbikaganoff.com/some-contemporary-bishul-akum-curiosities/ Some Contemporary Bishul Akum Curiosities] (R' Kaganoff)
#[https://rabbikaganoff.com/the-right-type-of-help/ The Right Type of Help] (R' Kaganoff)
#[https://www.yeshiva.co/midrash/shiur.asp?id=31779 Bishul Akum Problems in the Home] (R' Kaganoff)

==Sources==
<references />
[[Category:Kashrut]]
{{Kashrut}}

Sleeping in Sukkah

2024-08-22T19:07:59Z

Bchernigoff: /* Exemptions from Sleeping in the Sukkah */

==Exemptions from Sleeping in the Sukkah==
# If it’s cold outside, many have the practice not to sleep in the [[Sukkah]], and some poskim defend this practice. However, many poskim hold that one should make an extra effort to sleep in the [[Sukkah]] (either by making an insulated [[Sukkah]], by bringing in heaters, or by toughing it out). <ref> Rama 639:2 defends the practice of those who are lenient to not [[sleeping in the Sukkah|sleep in the Sukkah]] by saying that where it's too cold, it's painful to sleep there (mitztair) and one is therefore exempt from sleeping in the Sukkah. Mishna Brurah 639:17 comments that this is so if one doesn't have proper pillows and blankets to keep one warm (implying that if one has proper coats and blankets one should sleep in the [[Sukkah]].)[see Nemukei Orach Chaim 639:1 who discusses this at length.] Chazon Ovadyah pg 195 rules like the Rama. Yalkut Yosef (Sukkah pg [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=55400&st=&pgnum=722 722] and [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=55400&st=&pgnum=725 725)]</ref>
# A person who is afraid of bandits at night is exempt from sleeping in the Sukkah.<ref> Rama 640:4</ref> Similarly, one is exempt from sleeping in the [[sukkah]] if he is genuinely afraid of terrorists in a place where that is relevant. <ref> Rav Avigdor Neventzal in his Mishnah Brurah Biytizchak Yikare on Rama 639:2 </ref>
# Some Chasidim have the practice of not [[sleeping in the Sukkah]]. <ref> See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XXIX, pp. 211-219 quoted by [http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/92423/jewish/Sukkos.htm#footnote8a92423 chabad.org]</ref>

==If it Rains==
# If it rains, one is exempt from sleeping in the sukkah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:7</ref>
# Even after it stops raining, one doesn't have to go back into the sukkah, even if one wakes up in the middle of the night, since that is considered a pain to have to move into the sukkah in the middle of one's sleep.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 639:7. Mishna Brurah 639:40 quotes a machloket achronim if a person woke up because of the rain and moved inside, but before he fell asleep it stopped raining, whether he has to return to the sukkah. The Rama 639:7 clarifies that once he is exempt because of the rain, he can sleep until he wakes up in the morning, and he doesn't have to get someone to wake him up in the morning so that he can sleep in the sukkah. </ref> Similarly, if when it was raining in the night a person put up a shlock on top of the sukkah he can sleep in the sukkah with the shlock on top and even if it stops raining he can continue to sleep there since it would be a pain to have to remove it. However, if it is easy to remove the shlock then he should do so. <ref>Mishna Brurah 639:41</ref>
# If a person knows that it is going to certainly rain but has not started to rain, some poskim hold that one is exempt at this point since it will be a pain to have to wake up and move one's bed out of the sukkah when it starts to rain, while others hold that he is obligated until it starts to rain.<ref>Ritva (Sukkah 29a s.v. tanu) writes that if a person sees that it is very cloudy and going to rain he is allowed to eat outside the sukkah. Shevet Halevi 7:191:2 argues that the poskim do not pasken like this Ritva. Similarly, Shevet Hakehati 1:199 holds that even if one sees that it is cloudy and going to rain as long as it didn't yet rain one is obligated in the sukkah and his proof is from Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:5 and Shaar Hatziyun 639:60. Furthermore, Dirshu 639:40 cites Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani Sukkot p. 247) as holding that one is exempt from sleeping in a sukkah if it is going to rain but obligated to eat in the sukkah. Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky (Kovetz Halachot 16:2, p. 203) is also strict regarding eating but lenient regarding sleeping. Dirshu also quotes that Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 3:26:30) held that one was obligated until it started to rain. Chazon Ovadia p. 184 cites this Ritva but gives no indication if the halacha is like the Ritva or not. Yalkut Yosef (Sukkot, 5776, p. 777) also raises this Ritva and Shevet Hakehati but doesn't give a final conclusion. Rav Asher Bush (Bet Yitzchak v. 38 p. 567) writes that there's a strong basis to be lenient though the poskim haven't agreed on this. </ref>
# A man who has a baby that wakes up in the middle of the night and his wife needs him to take care of the baby is exempt from sleeping in the sukkah.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Sukkot p. 200). Shevet Hakehati 1:198 writes that the man who needs to take care of the baby in the night is exempt from the sukkah even before the baby cries because if he sleeps in the sukkah he won't hear the baby. His ruling is based on Shulchan Aruch 640:3 that those who are taking care of the sick are exempt from the sukkah.</ref>

==Sleeping in a small Sukkah==
# One is obligated to sleep in a small [[Sukkah]] even if that means bending or folding one’s body and there’s no exemption of being uncomfortable in the [[Sukkah]] (like there is if it rains). <Ref>Rama 640:4, Chazon Ovadyah pg 194) </ref>

==Leaving the table in the Sukkah==
# Even though one major authority states that one must leave the table in the [[Sukkah]] while one sleeps, many disagree and say that one doesn’t need to be strict but should be if there’s no need to remove the table and so is the custom. <Ref> Mishna Brurah 640:27 writes that if one takes the table out of the [[Sukkah]] in order to sleep one doesn’t fulfill the mitzvah since the [[Sukkah]] must be useful for all purposes and if one isn’t able to sleep in it with a table, one doesn’t fulfill the mitzvah of eating it in either. At first glance there appear to be no early sources to corroborate this stringency, however Mikrai Kodesh (Siman 35 pg 155) and Sh”t Shraga Meir 5:55 both try to defend the Mishna Brurah. Moadim UZmanim (Rav Moshe Shternbach; Vol 1, Siman 87) quotes someone who actually saw the Chafetz Chaim act this way in practice. Orchot Rabbenu (Vol 2 pg 229) writes that that the practice of the Steipler would leave a small table in his [[Sukkah]] when he slept. Similarly, Sh”t Az Nidabru 14:1 writes once such a holy mouth said such a ruling it’s proper to follow it. On the other hand, many achronim including Rabbi Eliezer Waldenburg in Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 8:33, Rav Ovadyah Yosef in Chazon Ovadyah (pg 198), Rav Moshe Shternbach in Moadim UZmanim (Vol 1, Siman 87), and Piskei Teshuvot 640:8 argue on the Mishna Brurah saying that there’s no source for such a stringency and conclude that one may remove the tables if there’s a need for room to people to sleep (even a child who reached the age of [[Chinuch]]). Chazon Ovadyah and Moadim Uzmanim write the minhag is to remove the tables. </ref>
# One may sleep under the table in the [[Sukkah]] if it’s not Ten [[Tefachim]] high. <Ref> Natai Gavriel 59:19 based on S”A 627:1 </ref>

== Dozing off while learning or listening to a shiur ==

# A person should take sure not to fall asleep while learning or listening to a shiur outside of a Sukkah. He should do whatever he can to avoid this.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Piskei Shemuot p. 92). Rav Shlomo Zalman (Piskei Shemuot p. 92) is quoted as saying that it is forbidden to go to a shiur out the Sukkah that he knows he'll fall asleep in the middle of.</ref>

==Taking a short nap==
# It’s forbidden to sleep outside a [[Sukkah]] whether it’s a fixed sleep or a short nap.<Ref> S”A 639:2; Yalkut Yosef, Moadim, laws of dwelling in the [[Sukkah]], 10 </ref> (However, it's not even considered a nap if it's less than 53.7 seconds and many poskim hold that it's permissible while some forbid even that). <ref> Mishna Brurah 639:11 writes that even though one may not take a short nap outside the [[Sukkah]] one may take a nap that's less than the time it takes to walk 100 steps. Mishna Brurah 44:4 defines this time as around 1/67 of an hour (which is 53.7 seconds). Kaf HaChaim 639:27, Pri Megadim (M"Z 639:5), and Natai Gavriel 59:2 (as first stam-anonymous opinion) agree with Mishna Brurah. However, Bikurei Yacov 639:12 and Hilchot Chag BeChag (pg 44) argue on Mishna Brurah and forbid for any amount of time. </ref> Additionally, Hacham Ovadia Yosef provides a leniency for anyone who is prone to sickness to take naps outside of the [[Sukkah]]. <ref> Yalkut Yosef, Moadim, laws of dwelling in the [[Sukkah]], 10 </ref>
# If someone fell asleep outside the Sukkah some poskim hold that it is necessary to wake him up so he can go to sleep in the Sukkah,<ref>Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Piskei Shemuot p. 93)</ref> others hold that it isn't necessary to wake him up.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo ch. 9)</ref>

==Married Man==
# Many married men are lenient not to sleep in the Sukkah because sleeping alone wouldn't be a fulfillment of the mitzvah of living in the sukkah like we live in our homes. It is preferable that a man sleep with his wife in the [[Sukkah]] (not on nights of Onah or her Tevilah) to fulfill the requirement of dwelling in the [[Sukkah]] like one would in one’s home. However, some poskim hold that one shouldn't be lenient for these reasons. <ref>Rama 639:2 writes that reason for those who don't sleep in the sukkah if a married man would sleep alone in the sukkah that wouldn't be a fulfillment of the concept of dwelling in the sukkah like we dwell in our homes during the year. However, he concludes that it is preferable to sleep in a private sukkah with his wife. The Taz 639:9 asks on the Rama that if he is correct the Sukkah should be pasul since it isn't fit to be used for sleeping (Rama 640:3). Rather he defends the minhag in another fashion. He writes that a married man has a mitzvah to sleep in the same room as his wife to gladden his wife even if she isn't tahor. That mitzvah makes him exempt from the sukkah. The Magen Avraham 639:8 has a different justification which is that a person would be pained about not being able to sleep in the same room as his wife and someone who is pained by the sukkah is exempt. He explains that this doesn't render the sukkah pasul since it is fit for sleeping and he just has a personal external exemption. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Chazon Ovadyah (pg 196) agrees with the Taz.
* The Gra 639:13 argues with the Rama. Following the Gra, Mishna Brurah 639:18 writes that men are obligated to sleep in the [[Sukkah]] without their wives and it’s not pained by not sleeping in the same room as his wife unless it’s the night of Onah. </ref>
# On a night when the couple has Onah or the night of Tevilah the man isn't obligated to sleep in the [[Sukkah]]. <Ref> Rama 639:2 writes that many are lenient not to sleep in the [[Sukkah]] since a man can’t sleep with his wife in the [[Sukkah]] unless he has a private [[Sukkah]]. However, the Mishna Brurah 639:18 quotes the Gra who argues on this saying that a married man is obligated in [[Sukkah]] even if he can’t sleep with his wife in the [[Sukkah]]. However, the Mishna Brurah concludes that on nights when there is a mitzvah of Oneh or the women has her Tevilah night, they may sleep outside the [[Sukkah]] so as not to miss the mitzvah of Pru Urevu, assuming that it’s not private enough in the [[Sukkah]]. This is also the opinion of Chazon Ovadyah (pg 194, 82, and 130). </ref>
# A married man in the first year of his marriage, some say that he shouldn't sleep in the Sukkah in order to keep his wife company at night while others believe there is no difference for sleeping in the between a man in the first year of marriage or any other time.<ref>Chazon Ovadia p. 196 quotes a dispute between the Divrei Yatziv OC 274 who holds that in the first year of marriage a man should keep his wife company at night as he has a mitzvah to gladden his wife and the Shalmei Moed p. 114 who thinks that there's no difference between the first year and any other, but if the wife is scared to sleep alone indoors her husband is exempt from sleeping in the sukkah.</ref>

==Sleeping alone in the Sukkah==
# It is permissible to sleep alone in the [[Sukkah]] even though one shouldn't sleep alone in a house. <ref>Maaseh Rav (Siman 214), Nefesh Kol Chai (Samach #4), Yafeh Lelev 2:1, Bikurei Yacov 639:18, Torat HaMoedim (Rabbi Efraim Oved) 6:3, Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Piskei Shemuot p. 91) </ref>

==If one's traveling==
# One is allowed to travel by bus for business purposes even if one knows that one will fall asleep on the way and one does not have to stand up so as not to fall asleep outside the [[Sukkah]]. However, if one is traveling for a leisure trip one may not sleep outside the [[Sukkah]] and one may not even nap on the bus. <ref>Torat HaMoedim (Rabbi Efraim Oved) 6:2 and 10:10 based on Shulchan Aruch 640:8. BeYitzchak Yikra 640:8 quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman who holds that a trip isn't considered someone who's traveling that could be exempt from the [[Sukkah]] and so one can't nap on the bus. See also Halichot Shlomo 9:21. </ref>

==Other activities in the Sukkah==
# [[Eating in the Sukkah]]
# [[Eating in the Sukkah#Learning in the Sukkah|Learning in the Sukkah]]
# [[Eating in the Sukkah#Other activities in the Sukkah|Doing other activities in the Sukkah]]

==Links==
* [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/55400 Yalkut Yosef Hilchot Sukkah (Hebrew 5776)]
==Sources==
{{reflist|30em}}
[[Category:Holidays]]
[[Category:Sukkot]]

Eating in the Sukkah

2024-08-22T18:28:19Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

[[Image:sukkah.jpg | 200px | right]]
Based on the pesukim in the Torah-בַּסֻּכֹּת תֵּשְׁבוּ, שִׁבְעַת יָמִים; כָּל-הָאֶזְרָח, בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, יֵשְׁבוּ, בַּסֻּכֹּת. לְמַעַן, יֵדְעוּ דֹרֹתֵיכֶם, כִּי בַסֻּכּוֹת הוֹשַׁבְתִּי אֶת-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, בְּהוֹצִיאִי אוֹתָם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם: אֲנִי, ה אֱלֹקיכֶם.- "For a seven day period you shall live in booths. Every resident among the Israelites shall live in booths, in order that your [ensuing] generations should know that I had the children of Israel live in booths when I took them out of the land of Egypt. I am the Lord, your God." <ref>Vayikra (23:42-43)</ref>, there is a positive commandment to sit in the [[Sukkah]] for the 7 days of [[Sukkot]].<ref>Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot, Aseh #168), [[Chinuch]] Mitzva 325. The Tur 625 explains that the reason we were commanded to do this specifically in Tishrei and not in Nissan (which would have made more sense, as this is when we left Egypt) is to make it clear that we aren't doing it for the shade that it provides, but rather because of Hashem's command, as Tishrei is a time that people normally move indoors, and we move outdoors for this time. Bach 625-1 wonders why the Tur goes out of his way to flesh out this point, as he usually focuses on halacha and doesn't discuss explanations of the mitzvot. Bach suggests that Tur thinks that since the Torah spells out the reason, "so that your generations may know...", if you don't have the proper intent of the mitzvah in mind, then you haven't properly fulfilled it. Bach suggests that the Tur records the reasons for both Tzitzit and Tefillin for the same reason. Since the Torah fleshes out the rationale of the mitzvah, possessing this kavanah is neccessary for the proper fulfillment of the mitzvah. </ref>

==Eating in the Sukkah==

#There’s an obligation to eat a [[Kezayit]] of bread in the [[Sukkah]] on the first night of [[Sukkot]].<ref>Rambam Hilchot Succa 6:7, S”A 639:3, Chazon Ovadyah pg 132 </ref> During the remaining days there is no obligation to eat in the [[Sukkah]], as you can just eat fruits or vegetables. However, there is still a mitzva to eat bread in the succa every day.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:24 </ref>
#While [[sitting in the Sukkah]], one should have intent to fulfill the mitzvah. Additionally, one should also have in mind that Hashem commanded us to sit in [[Sukkot]] in order to remember the exodus from Egypt (Yetsiat Mitzrayim), and that the [[Sukkot]] commemorate the clouds of glory.<ref>There is a dispute in Gemara [[Sukkah]] 11b whether the sukkah commemorates the physical [[sukkot]] that Bnei Yisrael sat in, or the Ananei Hakavod (clouds of glory) that God gave us for protection. The Tur 625:1 writes that the [[Sukkot]] are in commemoration of the Ananei Hakavod. He adds that the Jews sit in the Succa specifically in the winter (instead of when Bnei Yisrael left Egypt) to show that even though the norm is to move back into your house for the winter, we move outside to fulfill G-d’s will. The Bach 625:1 s.v. BaSukkot says that the fact that the Tur wrote this indicates that one hasn't fulfilled one's mitzva completely if while [[sitting in the Sukkah]] one didn’t remember the exodus from Egypt (Yetsiyat Mitzrayim), since the pasuk states explicitly that the mitzvah of [[Sukkot]] is to remind us of the exodus. The Mishna Brurah 625:1 writes that one should have the intent that Hashem commanded us to sit in [[Sukkot]] in order to remember the exodus from Egypt (Yetsiat Mitzrayim) and that the Sukkat are in commemoration for the clouds of glory.

*See also the Tur 417 who quotes his brother regarding the connection between [[Sukkot]] and Yacov Avinu. See more about that idea on [https://www.dailyhalacha.com/WeeklyParasha.asp?PageIndex=26&ParashaClipID=328 dailyhalacha.com].</ref> According to most authorities, after the fact, if one didn't have these intentions, one still fulfills the mitzvah as long as one had intention to fulfill the mitzvah.<ref>The Pri Megadim (A"A Intro to Siman 625) writes that Bach's requirement is only in order to perform the mitzvah in the best way. However, after the fact, even if one didn't have this intent, one has still fulfilled one's obligation as long as one had the intent to fulfill the mitzvah (as part of the concept that mitzvot need kavana). Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 97) and Mishna Brurah (625:1) agree with the Pri Megadim, unlike the Bikkurei Yaakov (625:3) who holds that one doesn't fulfill one's obligation at all without the proper intent. Rav Shternbuch in Moadim UZmanim (vol 1 pg 169) writes that although lacking the Kavanna doesn’t take away the mitzvah, however, one still loses the separate mitzvah of having kavanah.</ref>

==Who is obligated to eat in the Sukkah?==

#One who is exempt from the sukkah yet chooses to remain there does not receive reward for remaining in the sukkah and is foolish.<ref>Rama 639:7. The Biur Halacha 639 explains that one is only considered foolish if one became exempt while sitting in the sukkah and continued to sit there. This is particularly true with rain because Chazal compare rain on Sukkot to a servant who served his master water and had it splashed back in his face. Once the master demonstrated that he wasn’t interested in the services, if the servant forces his master to allow him to serve him, the servant is foolish. That is why remaining in the sukkah while it's raining is foolish. Nonetheless, if one is technically exempt not because of suffering, (i.e. if it began to rain and then the rain stopped and he is still in the middle of eating his meal inside), and he chooses to return to the sukkah, he will receive reward.</ref>

===Women and Children===
#Women are exempt from the mitzvah of [[Sukkah]].<ref>Mishna [[Sukkah]] 28a, Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 640:1 </ref> They can volunteer to sit in the Sukkah, and if they do so, according to Ashkenazim they can recite a bracha, while according to Sephardim they may not.<ref>{{Bracha on Mitzvot Aseh Shehazman Grama}}</ref>
#Very young children are exempt from the mitzvah of [[Sukkah]]. However, once they no longer need their mother (around age 5), there is a mitzvah of [[Chinuch]] (training them in mitzvot) for them to sit in the [[sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 640:2, Mishna Brurah 640:2. The Magen Avraham 640 says that it is prohibited to feed children outside the [[sukkah]], just like it is forbidden to feed children non-kosher food. Sh"t Binyan Av 1:25 says that a man cannot feed the child outside the [[sukkah]], but a woman is allowed to. The Mishna Brurah 640:5 quotes this magen avraham, and adds that one shouldn't even tell the child to eat outside the [[sukkah]]. Rav Moshe Shternbuch in Tshuvot Vihanhagot 3:211 says that very young children are exempt, based on the fact that they need their mothers to eat properly. Aruch Hashulchan 640:2 justifies not obligating them in sukka because children have a lower tolerance for the cold.</ref>

===Rain or Sick===

#A sick person is exempt from sitting in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 640:3 based on Mishna [[Sukkah]] 25a. </ref>
#One is not required to eat in the [[sukkah]] if it is raining.<ref>Mishnah [[Sukkah]] 28b </ref> If it is raining, and one began to eat inside, he may continue to eat inside even when it stops raining.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:38 based on Rashi [[Sukkah]] 29a "viyardu." Ritva [[Sukkah]] 29a "Tannu Rabanan," writes that one is not required to eat in the [[sukkah]] if there are rain-clouds in the sky and it appears as if it is going to rain. Rav Shalom Schwadron in Daat Torah OC 639:5 says that most poskim don't accept this opinion, but he is in doubt if you can recite a beracha in such a situation. </ref> However, these rules only apply after the first night. For the rules for the first night see below.
#Even after it stops raining, if the sukkah is still wet and the s'chach is dripping, one is exempt from the sukkah.<ref>Shevet Hakehati 1:199</ref>
#One who is suffering from sitting in the sukkah is exempt. For instance, if one cannot sleep in the sukkah because of the wind, or because of the buzzing flies, or because of the cold, or even because of a small amount of rain, he is exempt. An important caveat is that one is only exempt from the sukkah because of suffering if leaving the sukka will help alleviate his suffering.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 640:4, Rama 639:2, 639:5, and 640:4 </ref>
#If it's Shabbat and the lights in the sukkah go out, one is not obligated to go to his friend’s sukkah if this is difficult or uncomfortable; rather, he may eat his meal in his house.<ref>Rama 640:4</ref>
#If one feels crowded in the sukkah, this does not constitute “suffering” and one must continue to live there.<ref>Rama 640:4. Mishna Brurah 640:26 writes that a fastidious person for whom this is difficult is exempt. </ref>
#In general, one cannot claim that he is suffering and therefore exempt from the sukkah if others would typically not suffer from experiencing the matter he is facing.<ref>Rama 640:4. Nonetheless, the Mishna Brurah 640:29 writes that if one is a fastidious individual and other fastidious people of the same type would suffer from what he is undergoing, this would suffice to exempt him. </ref>
#Some poskim permit sitting under a handheld umbrella, even over ten [[Tefachim]], unlike a more permanent umbrella such as one supported by a table, because it is still considered sitting under the [[schach]]. One should not recite a beracha in this case <ref>Halichot Shlomo 2:8-20, Shalmei Moed pg. 112, She’arim Metzuyanim b’Halachah 135:5, and Nefesh Chayah OC 629 all allow sitting in the Sukkah under an umbrella. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Piskei Shemuot p. 101) holds that it is permissible to do but unnecessary. Rav Elyashiv, quoted in Succat Chayim page 52, however, does not permit sitting in the Sukkah under an umbrella. The Brisker Rav (HaSuccah Hashalem, Miluim 13:4) did in fact do this himself. </ref> This is relevant to chol hamoed, but not to on Shabbat or Yom Tov, when an umbrella may not be used. See [[Boneh#Umbrella]].

===Traveling===

#People who are traveling for business or for pressing matters <ref>Igrot Moshe OC 3:93 and Yalkut Yosef as quoted in Piskei Teshuvot p. 385 no. 38, hold that these are the travelers referred to in the Shulchan Aruch. However, those who travel for pleasure or without a real need and claim that they are exempt from sukkah are acting improperly. </ref> are exempt from a sukkah as long as they are traveling.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 640:8</ref> When they pause their journey, if they are unable to find a sukkah, they are also exempt from sukkah then. <ref>Rama 640:8 </ref>
#If one is involved in a mitzvah, such as going to learn Torah,<ref>Mishna Brurah 640:35 </ref> he is exempt from the mitzvah of sukkah.<ref>The Shulchan Aruch 640:7, as explained by the Mishna Brurah, feels that in such a case one is not required to enter a sukkah even when one reaches a resting point on his mitzvah journey. Conversely, the Rama writes that if this is not difficult and will not affect his ability to perform the mitzvah, one should find a sukkah in which to eat and sleep. </ref> Accordingly, those tending to the needs of the sick are exempt from the sukkah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 640:3 as explained by the Mishna Brurah. Note that this rule does not include those helping one who is mitztaer (in pain), but only the sick as defined above.</ref>

===Lights Went Out===

#If a person's lights went out in their Sukkah, or their Sukkah became inhabitable, if it is very difficult to go to another person's Sukkah, one doesn't have to and one is exempt.<ref>Rama 640:4. Mishna Brurah 640:23 elaborates that if it's simply inconvenient to go to someone else's sukkah, then that is insufficient to exempt oneself. However, if it's very difficult, then one is exempt.</ref>

==Which foods can one eat outside the Sukkah?==
===Bread===

#It is permissible to eat up to a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]] of bread outside the [[Sukkah]], but for any more than a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]], one must eat it in the [[Sukkah]] and make a bracha of Leshev BaSukkah.<ref>The Mishna in [[Sukkah]] 25a states that one may eat a snack (achilat arai) outside of the [[sukkah]]. The Gemara [[Sukkah]] 26a, states that the quantity of an achilat arai is the amount that a yeshiva student would eat in the morning on his way to the beit midrash. Tosafot 26a s.v. "Tarti", say that this amount is a k'beitzah. This is the conclusion of Shulchan Aruch 639:2, Mishna Brurah 639:13, Beiur Halacha s.v. [[KeBaytzah]], Natai Gavriel 48:2, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 132), Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 142). </ref>
#If one ate a [[Kezayit]] consisting of bread and other foods, according to Ashkenazim, this is a meal and one must eat it in the [[Sukkah]] and even make a bracha of Leshev BaSukkah<ref>Natai Gavriel 48:7</ref>. However, according to Sephardim one doesn't have to eat this in the [[Sukkah]], and even if one eats in the [[Sukkah]], one does not make the bracha of LeShev BaSukkah.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 134)</ref>
#For Sephardim, if one sat in the [[sukkah]] planning to eat less than a [[kebaytza]] of bread, and then decided that he wanted to eat more than a [[kebaytza]], he should recite a beracha then, even if what he has left is less than a [[kebaytza]].<ref>Chazon Ovadia pg. 133 </ref>
#Some poskim hold that any food on [[shabbat]] needs to be eaten in the [[sukkah]], because it is achilat keva and not achilat arai<ref>This is based on a concept that comes up on Beitzah 35a, that Shabbat is a Kovaih (makes something into an achilat keva) with regards to Terumot and Maasarot. These poskim believe that this concept extends to sukkah as well. </ref>. However, most poskim disagree.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 143, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 141 </ref>

===Fruits===

#It is permissible to eat fruits outside of the sukkah, even if one eats a lot of them.<ref>This issue is debated in the Gemara Yoma 79b. Tosafot 26a s.v. tarti rule that it is permitted even in a large quantities, because fruit is always considered arai. The Rosh [[Sukkah]] 2:13 quotes the Maharam Mirutenberg who holds that one may not eat fruit outside the [[sukkah]]. Rosh explains that the Maharam only refers to eating more than a k'beitzah, but he nevertheless permits eating less than a k'beitzah of fruit. Shulchan Aruch and Rama 639:2 rule like Tosafot, as does Natai Gavriel 50:1 </ref> Nonetheless, it's praiseworthy to have fruit in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Chazon Ovadyah (pg 138), Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 143), Nitei Gavriel 50:12</ref>

===Drinks===

#One may have drinks outside of the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 639:2 </ref> However, if one sits down to drink wine in a fixed manner (not just as a snack), especially if a group of people sit to drink wine, one must drink it in the [[Sukkah]] without making the Bracha of Leshev BaSukkah. According to Ashkenazim, one should preferably not establish a drink of wine or beer except in a meal of a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]] of bread, or at least a cooked dish made out of the five grains, which one must eat in the [[Sukkah]] and make a Bracha of Leshev BaSukkah.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:13, Natai Gavriel 50:3 </ref> Nonetheless, it's praiseworthy to have all drinks in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 639:2 </ref>
#Even for those who usually make kiddush in shul on Friday nights, it is preferable not to do so on Sukkot since it's outside the Sukkah.<ref>Mateh Efraim 625:40</ref>

===Meat, Fish, Cheese===

#If one makes a meal out of meat, fish, cheese, and the like, one should eat it in the [[Sukkah]]. However, if one doesn't eat it as a meal, one may eat outside the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Rosh [[Sukkah]] 2:13 quotes Rabbeinu Peretz that the leniency of eating fruit outside of the [[sukkah]] does not apply to meat, fish and cheese. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:2 doesn't rule explicitly on these items, but Mishna Brurah 639:13 says that Shulchan Aruch implies that it is permissible to eat these items outside of the [[sukkah]], like fruit. This is also the conclusion of Natai Gavriel 50:2 </ref> Nonetheless, it's praiseworthy to have meat, fish, rice, eggs, and cheese in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 138), Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 143). see also Halichot Olam 2: page 281. </ref> Some say that it is proper to eat these foods in a Sukkah if one is having them as a meal.<Ref>Beyt Dovid Hilchot Sukkot (R' Dovid Shaul) p. 249 16:19 writes that it is proper to be strict to eat meat, fish, cheese, chullent, potatoes, eggs, cornflakes, and other similar foods which are filling in the Sukkah. He quotes this from Rav Elyashiv.</ref>

===Cookies and Cakes===

#If one ate more than a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]] of [[Pas Haba Bikisnin]] (cookies and cakes), then one must eat it in the [[Sukkah]]. The Ashkenazic minhag is to make a bracha of LeShev BaSukkah. If one eating it as a snack and not a meal, then it is preferable to establish one's residence in the [[Sukkah]] for a brief time before or after eating, and have in mind when making the bracha that it should cover the eating as well as the sitting in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:16, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20231&pgnum=604 Maamar Mordechai 639:3], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=46442&pgnum=245 Natai Gavriel 49:1-3]. Both the Maamar Mordechai and Nitai Gavriel clarify that there's no distinction between Pat Haba Bkisnin and other cooked mezonot dishes. Divrei Dovid 1:40 agrees and writes that if someone has a meal of noodles, they must eat it in the sukkah. Rav Ovadia is quoted in Mshiurei Maran Rishon Letzion v. 1 p. 110 that one can eat up to 55 grams of noodles outside of a sukkah.

*The Gemara Yoma 79b establishes that there's no obligation to eat fruit in the Sukkah. However, there is one suggestion in the gemara that fruit would require a Sukkah, and the Gemara doesn't come to a clear conclusion. The Gemara does indicate that targima would require a Sukkah. Rosh Sukkah 2:13 and Rambam Sukkah 6:6 rule that fruit doesn't need a Sukkah, but the Rosh quotes the Maharam who was strict to eat fruit in the Sukkah. The Rosh clarifies that even the Maharam was only strict if he established the fruit as a meal and not a snack. What is targima? Tosfot 79b s.v. mini cites Rashi as explaining targima to mean fruit and rejecting that explanation. Tosfot Yeshanim 79b s.v. mini based on Tosefta Brachot 4:4 explains targima to be cooked mezonot dishes. Tosfot Harosh 79b s.v. mah and Rosh Sukkah 2:13 agrees. However, Rosh also cites Rabbenu Peretz who explains that meat and cheese are considered targima.
*Based on Tosfot and Rosh, Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:2 conclude that cooked mezonot dishes require a Sukkah if one establishes them as a meal. What is a keviyut seudah? The Maamar Mordechai 639:3 learns from the Magen Avraham 639:6 that keviyut seudah depends on a person's intention to have a meal as opposed to have a snack, and is not defined by an objective amount. Aruch Hashulchan 639:9 and Biur Halacha 639:2 s.v. im agree. The Magen Avraham 639:6 disagrees with the Rosh, and thinks that the definition of keviyat seudah is anything more than a Kbeytzah. The Mishna Brurah 639:15 is concerned for the Rosh, but doesn't require a bracha of leshev.
*Cooked Dish: Maamar Mordechai 639:3, Aruch Hashulchan 639:9, and Nitai Gavriel 49:1-3 hold that there is no distinction between a cooked dish and Pat Haba Bkisnin.
*Ginat Veradim 4:6 writes that everyone would agree that more than a Kbeytzah of Pat Haba Bkisnin requires a Sukkah with a bracha. However, Chida (Machzik Bracha 639:5) points out that the Ginat Veradim has no proof for this contention. Chida instead concludes that only for more than a Kbeytzah of bread should one recite a leshev bsukkah, since there isn't a definite obligation to have Pat Haba Bkisnin in a Sukkah.
*Mishna Brurah 639:16 concludes that if one has intention to have a meal with mezonot, there is no distinction between Pat Haba Bekisnin and a cooked dish mezonot, both require a Sukkah with a bracha of Leshev. However, if one doesn't have intention to have a meal with mezonot, according to the Rosh there's no obligation to have it in a Sukkah, and according to the Magen Avraham there is. Although the halacha doesn't follow the Magen Avraham, the minhag is to follow the Magen Avraham to recite a leshev for more than a Kbeytzah of Pat Haba Bkisnin.
*[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=49175&pgnum=344 Shoneh Halachot 639:10-11] clarifies that this minhag only applies to Pat Haba Bkisnin and not cooked dish mezonot. Therefore, if one ate more than a K'beytzah of Pat Haba Bkisnin one should eat in the Sukkah. If one is eating that as a meal one should recite a bracha of Leshev Bsukkah. Even if one isn't eating it as a meal nonetheless the minhag is to recite a bracha of Leshev. However, to avoid a question of a bracha levatala a person should sit down for some time to establish their residence in the sukkah. If one ate less than a K'beytzah of Pat Haba Bkisnin. it is considered a snack and doesn't require a sukkah. Yet, if one ate more than a K'beytzah of a cooked dish of mezonot if one eats it as a meal one should recite a Leshev. However, if one doesn't intend to eat it as a meal one should eat it in the Sukkah without reciting a leshev.
*However, Nitai Gavriel Sukkot 49:3 argues that if one eats more than a Kbeytzah of any mezonot food, the Ashkenazic minhag is to recite a Leshev Bsukkah.</ref>
##Some say that this short while is a half hour.<ref>Piskei Hahalachot 639:26 quoting Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 26:15)</ref>
##If one is going to stay a short while in the sukkah and eat a kebeytzah of pat haba bkisnin, one should recite a bracha of leshev bsukkah before the mezonot. Some poskim say that one can recite it between the mezonot and eating.<ref>Piskei Hahalachot 639:30 quotes a dispute between Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 45 fnt. 45) and Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani p. 250) about this issue. Rav Auerbach thinks that one should recite leshev bsukkah in advance of reciting mezonot, so that it isn't an interruption between the mezonot and eating, since the bracha isn't exclusively on the eating. Rav Karelitz argues that one can recite leshev between the mezonot and eating as usual, since the bracha of lshehev is primarily for the eating.</ref>
#If one ate more than a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]] of a cooked dish made out of the five grains (such as noodles), one must eat in the Sukkah. If one establishes it as a meal, then one should recite a Leshev Basukkah. If one is just eating it as a snack, according to Ashkenazim, there is a dispute if one should recite a Leshev Basukkah.<ref>See footnotes to the previous halacha.</ref>
#Sephardim hold that even though one must eat it in a [[Sukkah]] (if one eats more than a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]]), one doesn't make the bracha of LeShev BaSukkah unless one ate 162 grams of a [[Pat Haba Bkisnin]] food, and it's preferable to eat 216 grams in order to make the bracha according to all opinions. For cooked dish mezonot foods, there is no bracha of leshev basukkah.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 132-6), Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 142-3) </ref> If one made a meal out of noodles and ate 162 grams, one must eat it in the sukkah and recite the bracha of Leshev Bsukkah even according to Sephardim.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:2, Chazon Ovadia p. 136. Yalkut Yosef (Sukkah, 5775, p. 690) holds that we recite a bracha like the Shoel Vnishal 3:95 and 3:165 and Etz Shatul 49 unlike the Ben Ish Chai (Yedey Chaim p. 93). </ref>

===If one is in the middle of a meal===

#If one is in the middle of a bread meal, one may not eat any food or drink outside the [[Sukkah]]. Even if there is food in one's mouth and one began chewing, when one leaves the [[Sukkah]], one shouldn't continue chewing until one returns to the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 143), Halichot Olam 2:pg. 271, Meiri Sukka 26b "Hamishnah Hachamishit", Shaar Hatziyun 639:29 </ref>

==Bracha of Leshev BeSukkah==

#Some say that It's proper to say the bracha of Leshev before making the [[HaMotzei]]. However, it's not an interruption if one recites [[HaMotzei]] before the beracha of Leshev basukkah. On [[Shabbat]] and [[Yom Tov]], the Leshev beracha is said in [[Kiddish]] before one drinks from the wine.<ref>Shulchan Aruch and Rama 643:3, Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg 145, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 172). 
The Rosh (Sukkah 4:3) cites the practice of the Maharam Rotenberg to recite the bracha of leshev ba’sukkah prior to making a hamotzei on a meal he would eat in the sukkah. He explained that the Maharam held that one should recite a bracha for any use of the sukkah including sitting in there. Since one is technically obligated in the bracha prior to eating, one should recite that bracha first. However, the Rosh notes, the minhag is only to recite leshev ba’sukkah when one eats a meal. If so, one should first recite hamotzei to start the meal and then leshev ba’sukkah. The S”A 643:3 codifies the opinion of the Maharam but also mentions the common minhag. Chazon Ovadia (Sukkot p. 172) writes that it is proper to follow the Maharam. Nitai Gavriel 45:3 advises following the minhag. [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2769 Rabbi Eli Mansour] writes that both practices are valid. </ref>
#One who eats while standing can nevertheless recite the beracha of leshev besukkah.<ref>Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 175 </ref>
#Regarding which foods one should make a LeShev BaSukkah on, see above [[#Which_foods_can_one_eat_outside_the_Sukkah?]].
#If one is fasting for a taanit chalom on [[sukkot]], one should nevertheless from reciting the beracha on sleeping or sitting in the [[sukkah]], because the beracha was established for eating only.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 145 </ref>

===Temporarily Leaving the Sukkah===

#Anytime one “leaves completely” from the sukkah, he must make a new bracha upon returning to the sukkah if he desires to eat foods requiring a leshev ba’sukkah. “Leaving completely” includes anytime a person plans on leaving the sukkah and not returning immediately, thereby causing him to forget about the fact that he is planning on returning to the sukkah soon (“hesech ha’daas”).<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:46. It may be that this only applies while one is in the midst of his meal. However, if after birkat hamazon, one leaves for even a small amount of time, it could be that he is obligated to make a new bracha upon returning. However, the Shaar Ha’tziyun 639:91 concludes safek brachos le’hakel, and that one shouldn't make a beracha in this case. </ref>

===If One Is Not Eating===

#If one plans to sit or sleep in the sukkah for a significant period of time without eating foods that require a sukkah, one should not recite a bracha of leshev ba’sukkah. Some poskim, however, assume that one can recite leshev ba’sukkah.<ref>*The Gemara (Sukkah 45b) records a dispute whether one should recite one bracha of leshev ba’sukkah for all of Sukkot, or if one should say a new bracha each day. Tosfot (s.v. echad) explains that the opinion who says to make it each day really holds that one should recite a bracha each time one enters the sukkah. The Rosh (Sukkah 4:3), Rif (22a), and Rambam (Sukkah 6:12) hold like the opinion who holds one should make it each time one enters the sukkah.
*The Rosh notes that the minhag is only to recite the bracha when sitting down to eat in the sukkah, since it's the most permanent of one’s actions in the sukkah. S”A 639:4 and Rama codify this minhag. Nonetheless, the Chaye Adam 147:15 and Mishna Brurah 639:45 write that if one enters the sukkah for a significant amount of time and doesn’t eat, one should still recite a bracha since there’s nothing to exempt that time spent in the sukkah. The Piskei Teshuvot (p. 377) cites a dispute whether we accept the Chaye Adam, and suggests that one should avoid this situation by eating some food that requires a leshev ba’sukkah.</ref>

==First Night of Sukkot==

#There is an obligation to eat a Kezayit of bread in the Sukkah on the first night of Sukkot.<ref>The Rabbis in the Mishna (Sukkah 27a) hold that there is an obligation to eat in the Sukkah on the first night, and afterwards it is optional to eat in the Sukkah. The Gemara explains that the reason for the Rabbis is that there is a gezerah shava between Sukkot and Pesach, and just like there is an obligation to eat Matzah on the first night of Pesach, so too there is an obligation to eat bread on the first night of Sukkot. This is codified by the Rambam (Sukkah 6:7) and Shulchan Aruch 639:3.</ref> According to many Rishonim, there is an obligation to eat a meal in the Sukkah each day and night of Yom Tov.<ref>The Gemara Brachot 49b states that on Yom Tov one would have to repeat Birkat HaMazon if one forgot to say Yaaleh VeYavo, because there is an obligation to eat a meal on Yom Tov. This is as opposed to Rosh Chodesh, when there's no obligation to eat a meal, one would not have to repeat Birkat HaMazon if he omitted Yaaleh VeYavo. The rishonim point out that this seems to be at odds with the gemara Sukkah 27a, which says that it is optional to have a meal on Sukkot other than on the first night.

*Some rishonim answer that there is an obligation to eat a meal each day and night of Yom Tov because of Yom Tov, but the obligation unique to the Sukkah is just the first night. The rishonim raise the issue of what the difference is between the obligation to eat a meal due to the fact that it is Yom Tov, and the obligation to eat a because of Sukkot. Rabbenu Yehuda (Tosfot Brachot 49b s.v. Iy) answers that if it rains and one has to eat inside, if the obligation is just because of Yom Tov, then one would fulfill one's obligation. However, if the obligation is because of the Sukkah, one would have to eat in the Sukkah anyway after the rain stops. The Rosh (Brachot 7:23) quotes Rabbenu Yehuda with a slight discrepancy; he states that one should eat one's meal in the rain, as opposed to waiting until the rain stops.
*Some rishonim argue that there is no obligation to eat in the Sukkah if it rains outside, and the first night is no different. Ths is the opinion of the Rashba (responsa 4:78) and Raavad (cited by Kol Bo 87 and Beit Yosef 639:3). According to the Trumat HaDeshen (Pesakim n. 160), the Smag (Asin 43), and Or Zaruah 2:301 also agree. S”A 639:3-5 rules like the Rashba, that one is not obligated to eat in the Sukkah aside from the first night, nor is one obligated to eat in the Sukkah on the first night if it rains. Chazon Ovadia (p. 100 and 122) rules like S”A in both instances.
*However, the Magen Avraham (188:7 and 639:10) and Mishna Brurah 639:23 hold that one is obligated to eat in the sukkah each day and night of Sukkot. Also, the Rama 639:5 rules that one is obligated to eat in the sukkah on the first night if it rains.
*Alternatively, the Ritva (Sukkah 27a s.v. VeShiur) quotes his Rebbe as explaining that while one can fulfill the regular Yom Tov meal by eating a Kezayit of bread outside the Sukkah, the first night meal needs to be eaten in the Sukkah even if it is only a Kezayit. The Tur 639:3 agrees. This opinion is also cited by the Ran (Sukkah 12b s.v. Matnitin). Accordingly, one would be obligated to eat a meal each day and night of Yom Tov.
*Other rishonim answer simply that the Gemara Brachot which said that it is an obligation to eat a meal on Yom Tov was only referring to the first nights of Pesach and Sukkot. However, there's no obligation to eat a bread meal the rest of the days of Pesach and Sukkot. This is the opinion of the Tosfot (Sukkah 27a s.v. Iy), Rashba (Brachot 49b s.v. Tefillah and responsa 3:287), and Smag (Asin 43).</ref>

===Kiddush===

#On the first night of Sukkot, one should wait to recite [[Kiddush]] until after [[Tzet HaKochavim]]. However, after the fact, if one made [[Kiddish|Kiddush]] during [[Bein HaShemashot]] and ate a [[Kezayit]] of bread, one should make sure to have another [[Kezayit]] after [[Tzet HaKochavim|Tzet HaKochavim,]] but one doesn’t need to make another Bracha of LeShev BaSukkah.<ref>Rama 639:3 writes that one should wait to eat until nighttime. Mishna Brurah 639:25 explains that this is based on the connection between [[Pesach]] and [[Sukkot]], and by [[Matzah]] the halacha is that one may only eat at night, as the passuk says: בערב תאכלו מצות. Mishna Brurah continues that after the fact, if one ate during bein ha'shemashot, then one should eat another [[Kezayit]], but not make another LeShev BaSukkah because of [[Safek Brachot LeHakel]]. Nitei Gavriel ([[Sukkot]] 38:12) extends the Rama to not even making [[Kiddish]] before nighttime. Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 138) agrees with the above halachot. </ref>
#The order of Kiddush is hagefen, kiddush hayom, leshev ba’sukkah, and then on the first night, shehechiyanu. The reason that leshev follows kiddush hayom is because we only sit in the sukkah due to the sanctity of the day. Also, we delay shehechiyanu until the end in order to ensure that it covers both the kiddush hayom and the sukkah itself.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 643:1, Mishna Brurah 643:1, Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 95 </ref> After the fact, if one made [[Shehecheyanu]] before [[Kiddish|Kiddush]], one fulfilled one's obligation, and one shouldn't repeat it after [[Kiddish]].<ref>Mishna Brurah 643:3 </ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, if one didn’t sit in the sukkah on the first night, but recited kiddush with Shehechiyanu indoors, one should repeat Shehechiyanu the next time one eats in the sukkah. According to Sephardim, one should not repeat Shehechiyanu when he eats in a Sukkah.<ref>The Ran (Sukkah 22a s.v. VeIm) cites the Raavad who says that if one didn’t eat in the sukkah on the first night and said shehechiyanu indoors, one should say shehechiyanu the next time one eats in the sukkah for the sukkah itself. This is codified by the Rama 641:1. Chazon Ovadia (p. 127), however, is concerned for the Bach (responsa 132) who argues that the bracha of shehechiyanu can exempt a mitzvah even if it isn’t present when the bracha was made. Seemingly, this is only relevant for the Rama under extenuating circumstances. See Eliyah Rabba 641:2. </ref>
#If one didn’t make a [[Shehecheyanu]] on the first night of [[Sukkot]], one can make it on the rest of the days and nights of [[Sukkot]].<ref>Magen Avraham 643:1, Mishna Brurah 643:2, Chazon Ovadyah (pg. 95) </ref>
# Some poskim hold that a woman shouldn't answer amen to the bracha of Leshev Bsukkah in the kiddush if they plan to drink wine or grape juice, since it could be a hefsek,<ref>[https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=125962 Rav Dovid Yosef (Mitzvat Yeshiva Bsukkah 5781 min 9)] citing his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, holds that it is forbidden for the women to answer amen. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)] agrees that they shouldn't answer amen.</ref> while others allow them to answer amen.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe OC 4:101:1) says that it isn't a hefsek for a woman to answer amen to shehechiyanu in kiddush, even though she already said that bracha when she lit candles. He reasons that since the one making kiddush needs to recite that bracha for himself, she may answer amen as well. This line of reasoning would also allow her to answer amen to the leshev bsukkah. This is even true according to Sephardim who hold that they may not recite the bracha themselves. </ref>

===If it rains the first night of [[Sukkot]]===

#If it rains the first night of [[Sukkot]],
##According to Ashekenazim, one is not exempt from the [[Sukkah]]. Some poskim hold that one should wait an hour or two for the rain to stop. If it does, one should eat in the [[Sukkah]] with a bracha of Leshev Basukkah. But if it doesn't, then one should recite [[Kiddush]] and eat a [[kezayit]] of bread in the [[Sukkah]] without the bracha of Leshev Basukkah.<ref>Rama 639:5, Mishna Brurah 639:35

*Practically, the Rama 639:5 writes, that if it rains one should remain in the sukkah for kiddush and eating of the first kezayit of bread.
*However, the Gra (639:3), in explaining the opinion of Tosfot, writes that eating in the sukkah while it is raining is worthless since it isn’t considered a sukkah. Rather one should eat in the sukkah after it stops raining.
*Accordingly, the Tzlach (Brachot 49b) writes that a person should wait an hour or two for the rain to stop, so that one can eat in the sukkah after it stops raining. The Mishna Brurah 639:35 agrees.
*However, the Shvut Yaakov 3:45 (cited by Shaarei Teshuva 639:13) writes vehemently against those who would wait until midnight for the rain to stop, and only then to start the meal. He explains that either one is exempt from the sukkah altogether, like S”A, or one should eat in the sukkah while it is raining, but waiting to eat only detracts from simchat Yom Tov.
*Chachmat Shlomo 639:5 writes that one is usually exempt from sitting in the Sukkah when it is raining, because doing so would be causing oneself pain. On the first night, however, since it is a mitzvah to eat in the sukkah, that in and of itself is a reason why it would be considered an enjoyment and not a pain to eat in the rain.
*Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky (“Eating In The Succah The first Night Of Succos and Hilchos Mitztaer” min 30-3) quotes Rabbi Mordechai Willig as having ruled that if it rains on the first night of Sukkot, one may say Kiddush in the Sukkah without waiting for the rain to stop. Similarly, Rav Hershel Schachter (“Inyonei Sukkos 2” min 51-2) said that if it is raining, the minhag is to say Kiddush without leshev ba’sukkah, eat a kezayit of bread in the sukkah, and then if it stops raining, have another kezayit in the sukkah.</ref> Other poskim hold that one may say [[Kiddush]] in the [[Sukkah]] without waiting for the rain to stop.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/749248/Rabbi_Zvi_Sobolofsky/_Eating_In_The_Succah_The_first_Night_Of_Succos_and_Hilchos_Mitztaer# Rabbi Tzvi Sobolovsky in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 30-3)] quotes Rabbi Mordechai Willig as having ruled that if it rains on the first night of [[Sukkot]] one may say [[Kiddush]] in the [[Sukkah]] without waiting for the rain to stop. </ref>
##If the weather forecast is that there is supposed to be rain all night, even according to Ashkenazim, it isn't necessary to wait any amount of time, and it is fine to immediately make Kiddush without the bracha of Leshev Basukkah and eat a kezayit of bread in the Sukkah.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)]</ref>
##When one eats a kezayit of bread in the Sukkah and then goes inside, a person should eat a little bit of bread inside so that he can recite birkat hamazon inside.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)]</ref>
##According to Sephardim, one is exempt from the [[Sukkah]] and one should eat in the house.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 639:3-5 rules like the Rashba that one is not obligated to eat in the Sukkah besides the first night and one is not obligated to eat in the Sukkah on the first night if it rains. Chazon Ovadia (p. 100 and 122) rules like Shulchan Aruch in both instances. </ref> However, if one wants to be strict, one may wait a little bit for the rain to stop, but one should not wait too long that it'll cause oneself pain on [[Yom Tov]]. If after eating in the house the rains stops and it’s before [[chatzot]] (halachic midnight), then one should go into the [[Sukkah]] and eat one [[kezayit]] of bread and make a Leshev Basukkah. If it’s after [[chatzot]], then one shouldn’t recite the bracha of Leshev unless one eats a [[KeBaytzah|kebaytzah]] of bread.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 140), Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 122) </ref>
#If one recited [[Kiddush]] and ate a [[keyazit]] of bread in the [[Sukkah]] while it was raining, and then one wakes up in the middle of the night and sees that it is not raining, some poskim hold that one does not have to get up to eat in the [[Sukkah]],<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:36</ref> while others hold that one should get up to eat more than a kebeytzah of bread in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/749248/Rabbi_Zvi_Sobolofsky/_Eating_In_The_Succah_The_first_Night_Of_Succos_and_Hilchos_Mitztaer# Rabbi Tzvi Sobolovsky in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 30-5)] quotes Rabbi Mordechai Willig as having ruled that if it rains on the first night of [[Sukkot]] and one ate in the [[Sukkah]], and then fell asleep, if one wakes up and sees that it stopped raining, one should get up and eat a [[Kezayit]] in the [[Sukkah]] in order to be certain that one fulfilled this mitzvah deoritta. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)] agrees that he should eat again in the Sukkah. He adds that someone who woke up should even wake others up in order to fulfill this mitzvah. </ref>
#It is permissible for the men to make Kiddush in the Sukkah, and the women and those who are exempt from Sukkah to listen to the Kiddush while staying inside.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 273:6, Mishna Brurah 273:28. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)] writes that in such a situation the women should make kiddush for themselves inside.</ref>
#If the rain stops, but your Sukkah is still too wet to sit in, and someone else has a Sukkah which had a shlok (roof) on to protect it from the rain, on the first two nights of Sukkot he must go and eat in his friends Sukkah that is dry.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)] explains that the type of mista'er (pain that exempts a person from Sukkah) to have to go to his friend's Sukkah only exempts him on the other days of Sukkot, but not the first two nights of Sukkot, since at the time when he's sitting in the Sukkah, he won't be mista'er. </ref>

=== If it rains on the second night of [[Sukkot]] ===

# If it rains on the second night of Sukkot, according to Ashkenazim, it isn't necessary to wait to see if the rain is going to stop. He should just recite Kiddush inside, and at the end of the meal he should eat a kezayit of bread in the Sukkah, even if the rain has not yet stopped. If it is still raining, he should not recite Leshev Basukkah. If the rain ends up stopping, he should return to the Sukkah to eat more than a Kebaytzah with a bracha of Leshev Basukkah. This is the strict halacha. However, some poskim hold that it is proper even on the second night to wait a little bit to see if the rain is going to stop.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:36. In Shaar Hatziyun 639: 71 he cites Magen Avraham who is lenient not to require sitting in the Sukkah at all on the second day if it is raining, but rejects that opinion because Radvaz and Eliya Rabba argue that the second day is like the first day for this matter. </ref>
## Some poskim argue that it isn't necessary to sit in the rain in the Sukkah on the second day of Sukkot. If someone wants to be strict, they may eat a kezayit of bread in the Sukkah in the middle or end of the meal.<ref>Magen Avraham 639:15, Shulchan Aruch Harav 639:19, Aruch Hashulchan 639:18</ref>

==Kiddush During the Day==

#According to Ashkenazim, if one plans to eat mezonot products after reciting the daytime kiddush, he should recite leshev ba’sukkah before drinking the wine.<ref>Mishna Brurah 643:9</ref> According to Sephardim, no leshev is recited for mezonot.<ref>Chazon Ovadia p. 134 </ref>
#Regarding one who plans on eating bread after the daytime kiddush, some recite leshev before drinking the wine, whereas others recite leshev only before eating the bread.<ref>Mishna Brurah 643:9 </ref>
#According to Sephardim, it is proper to stand for Kiddush. The Ashkenazic practice, however, is to sit.<ref>The Rambam (Sukkah 6:12) writes that one should stand for kiddush, make the bracha of leshev ba’sukkah, sit, and then say shehechiyanu. The Maggid Mishna explains that the Rambam held that one should recite the bracha immediately prior to fulfilling the mitzvah of sitting in the sukkah. The Raavad, however, argues that the bracha is really made upon the eating, and so it should be said sitting down before eating. The Maggid Mishna and Rosh (Sukkah 4:3) agree with the Raavad, and explain that the language of ‘leshev ba’sukkah’ doesn’t refer to literally sitting but to dwelling, as per the pasuk “BaSukkot Teshvu”. Shulchan Aruch 643:2 holds the Rambam and Rama like the Raavad. </ref>

==Lighting Candles in the Sukkah==

#Ideally, the Yom Tov candles should be lit where you are going to eat, in this case, in the Sukkah. However, if there is any concern that it might cause a fire, then one should just have electric lights in the Sukkah and light the candles indoors in the kitchen or bedroom where they can be enjoyed on Yom Tov.<ref>Mateh Efraim 625:33 writes that the candles should be lit in the sukkah. Chazon Ovadia (Sukkot p. 207) writes that the candles can be lit indoors if there's any concern of danger. Responsa Maamer Mordechai 4:12 clarifies that the candles can be lit in the kitchen or bedroom, but the woman should be sure to benefit from them during the night and not just leave them in the kitchen and go somewhere else. Aseh Lecha Rav 2:42 agrees.</ref>
#Even though women are exempt from eating in the Sukkah, it's nevertheless their right to light the candles over the men.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Sukkot p. 213)</ref>

==Forgetting to say Yaale VeYavo==

#If on the first night of [[Sukkot]] one had the required [[Kezayit]] of bread, and in [[benching]] one forgot to say Yaale VeYavo

*if one remembers after saying Baruch Atta Hashem and didn’t conclude [[Boneh]] Yerusalayim, one should conclude with Lamdeni Chukecha, and go back to Yaale VeYavo.
*if one remembers after the entire Bracha of [[Boneh]] Yerushalayim, one should insert the Bracha of Baruch Atta Hashem… Asher Nattan Moadim LeSimcha…Mikadesh Yisrael VeHaZmanim (as printed in the siddur).
*if one remembers after saying Baruch Atta Hashem Eloken Melech HaOlam (of the Bracha of HaTov VeHaMeitiv), one should conclude with Asher Nattan Moadim Lisimcha… and then start the Bracha of HaTov VeHaMeitiv again.
*if one didn’t remember until the middle of HaTov VeHaMeitiv or later, one must repeat [[benching]].<ref>Chazon Ovadyah (pg 101) </ref>

#If one forgot Yaale VeYavo in [[benching]] any other day or night of [[Sukkot]]

*if one remembers after [[Boneh]] Yerusalayim one should say Baruch Atta Hashem…Asher Nattan Moadim LeSimcha…Mikadesh Yisrael VeHaZmanim.
*if one didn’t remember until the middle of HaTov VeHaMeitiv or later, one doesn’t repeat [[benching]].<ref>Chazon Ovadyah (pg 101) </ref>

==Ushpizin==

#It is proper to bring a chair for the ushpizin, like we have a chair at a [[brit mila]] for eliyahu hanavi zachur latov, because if there's no chair they will not come.<ref>Chid"a in Moreh Bietzbah 289, Leket Hakatzir 32:5 pg. 461 </ref>

==Eating or sleeping in the Sukkah before [[Sukkot]]==

#It’s permissible to eat in the [[Sukkah]] before [[Sukkot]] (erev [[Sukkot]]) and it’s not an issue of Bal Tosif.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah pg 481 holds that’s there no issue of Bal Tosif before the mitzvah was done. </ref>

==Other activities in the Sukkah==

#[[Sleeping in the Sukkah]] (click the link)
#One should live in one's [[Sukkah]] like one lives in one's house the rest of the year. Therefore, one should eat, drink, sleep, hang out, speak to one's friend, and learn in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 639:1 writes that one should live in one's [[Sukkah]] like one lives in one's house the rest of the year, which includes eating, drinking, and sleeping. Mishna Brurah 639:2 adds speaking to one's friend, and BeYitzchak Yikare 639:1 adds hanging out. Regarding speaking with friends, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 147 quotes those who disagree and say that one should only speak words of torah in the [[sukkah]]. See also Sh"t Minchat Shlomo 2:58. Minhagei Chatam Sofer 8:12 tells that that the Chatam Sofer only left the sukka once each day for [[Shacharit]]. He even said [[mincha]] and [[maariv]] in the [[sukkah]]. Regarding learning in the [[Sukkah]] see further. </ref>
#One should bring one's nice utensils into the [[Sukkah]], just like he uses them during the year in the house. However, one should not bring one's [[cooking]] pots into the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 639:1 writes that one should bring one's nice untensils into the [[Sukkah]]. However, the [[cooking]] pots shouldn't brought in the [[Sukkah]]. The Rama adds that one may leave the [[cooking]] pots in the [[Sukkah]] during the meal, but not after the meal. However, the Mishna Brurah 639:5 writes that the minhag is to be strict not to bring [[cooking]] pots into the [[Sukkah]] even during the meal. </ref>
#One should not do any degrading activity in the [[Sukkah]]. Therefore, one should not clean the dishes in the [[Sukkah]]. However, one may clean the cups.<ref>Rama 639:1, Mishna Brurah 639:9. However, the Ben Ish Chai Haazinu Halacha 9 forbids even cleaning cups except if they are small cups like coffee cups. </ref>
#One may not go to the bathroom in the [[Sukkah]] even if one goes in a pot.<ref>Chayei Adam 147:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 135:2, Aruch Hashulchan 639:4. Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 131 is mekil for someone who is old or sick and it is too difficult for him to leave the sukka, that he may relieve himself in a pot. R' Ovadia warns that he should make sure to cover the pot properly. </ref>
#One shouldn't change a baby's diaper in the [[sukkah]].<ref>Yalkut Yosef moadim pg. 142, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 129. </ref>
#It is permissible to have marital relations in the [[sukkah]].<ref>Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 130 </ref>
#It is permissible to smoke in the [[sukkah]] (regardless of the permissibility of smoking in general).<ref>Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 130, for smoking in general, see Yalkut Yosef Hilchot Kibbud Av Vaem 7:footnote 16 and [[Hygiene_%26_Health#Smoking|Smoking]] </ref>
#Because of the holiness of the [[Sukkah]], it's proper to minimize one's mundane speech in the [[Sukkah]] and increase one's speech in Torah and holy matters. One should certainly be careful not to engage in any forbidden speech, such as [[Lashon Hara]] or getting angry.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:2, Baer Heitev 639:2, Kaf Hachaim 639:5-6, Bikkurei Yaakov 639:2</ref>

==Learning Torah in the Sukkah==

#One should learn Torah in the [[Sukkah]]. However, if one isn't unable to concentrate, then he should learn inside.<ref>Gemara Sukkah 28b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:4. Nitei Gavriel 58:1 quotes the Yarot Dvash (Dorosh 6 s.v. VeZehu) who explains that one who sits in the [[sukkah]] with pure intent, learns, and enjoys the holiday merits a special level of divine presence.
*Is spending time in the sukkah an obligation? Toratcha Shashu'ay (Binyanei Sukkah by R' Toledano ch. 1) quotes Tosfot Rabbi Yehuda Hachiddush Brachot 11b who says that there's no prohibition to have a tiyul and to learn outside of a sukkah, and it is only a mitzvah if you want to. However, Rashi Sukkah 48a s.v. lo says it is an obligation to learn in the sukkah. Baal Hameor end of pesachim says this as well regarding tiyul. There's two versions of the Rosh Brachot 1:13 regarding this question. Shaar Hatziyun 629:29 holds it is an obligation.</ref>
#If the cold or heat (if one doesn't have air conditioning in the [[Sukkah]]) bothers oneself and one can't concentrate on his learning, one may learn inside.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:29 writes that if it's too cold for oneself in the [[sukkah]] and one can't concentrate one may learn inside. Natai Gavriel 48:7 extends this where it's too hot and one doesn't have air conditioning in the [[sukkah]]. </ref>
#If it's a pain to bring all the Seforim into the [[Sukkah]] many times (as one needs the space to eat or sleep), then one doesn't have to learn in the [[Sukkah]]. However, if one can leave all the Seforim in the [[Sukkah]] for the entire holiday, then one must do that.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:29, Natai Gavriel 58:3. see also Kaf Hachaim 639:62 Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 127 and Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 141 </ref>
#One who usually learns in a Bet Midrash doesn't have to learn in a [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch HaRav 639:4, Kaf HaChaim 639:63, Natai Gavriel 58:6 </ref>
==Davening in a Sukkah==
#One should pray in a shul and not in one's [[Sukkah]], even if one can get a [[minyan]] in the [[Sukkah]]. If there's no shul in one's city, if one is able to concentrate in the [[Sukkah]], one should pray in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:4 writes that if one wants one may pray in the [[Sukkah]]. The Mishna Brurah 639:30 explains that in the place where one has greater kavanah (concentration) one should pray unless there is a shul in the city in which case one should go there (because during the rest of the year one would leave one's house to go to the shul. Pri Megadim (M"Z 639:14), Kaf HaChaim 639:67, and Nitei Gavriel 58:8 add that one should pray in the established shul even if one can get a [[minyan]] in the [[Sukkah]]. </ref>
==Havdalah in a Sukkah==
#If one usually recites [[Havdalah]] at home, during [[Sukkot]] one should say it in the [[Sukkah]]. However, those who listen to [[Havdalah]] in shul can also do so on [[Sukkot]].<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:30, Shaar HaTziyun 639:57, Kaf HaChaim 639:66.
Taz 639:14 explains that davening can be in a shul since it is always outside the house. However, those who generally do havdalah at their house, should do it in the sukkah. Pri Megadim M"Z 639:14 writes that the minhag is to do havdalah in the sukkah. The Taz and Mishna Brurah seem to understand that the reason to do havdalah in the sukkah is because one should spend one's time and do all of one's normal household activities in one's sukkah. Since one normally does havdalah at home, one should do it in the sukkah. Hilchot Chag Bchag ch. 13 fnt. 30 and Shoshanat Yisrael p. 113 understand the Mishna Brurah this way. However, the Shevet Halevi 6:42 understands that the reason to do havdalah in the sukkah seems only to be because havdalah is an established way to drink wine and thus requires a sukkah (see Magen Avraham 639:5). If that is the case, Rav Ovadia (Chazon Ovadia Sukkaot p. 140) disagrees and thinks that there's no obligation to do havdalah in the sukkah, since even drinking wine in an established way doesn't need a sukkah according to the Rama 639:2. Additionally, Shoshat Yisrael cites Rav Shlomo Miller as holding that the only reason to do havdalah in the sukkah is because of the drinking.</ref> If one recites Havdalah in the succah, there is a discussion if you should recite the beracha.<ref>Shevet HaLevi 6:42 writes that no beracha of leshev basuccah is recited upon havdalah because it isn't a keviat seuda. However, Chazon Ish quoted in Rivevos Efrayim 1:428 and 3:424 rules that since it is wine for [[havdala]], it elevates the level of drinking to keviat seuda, and therefore would require the beracha. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 58 fnt. 103 cited by Dirshu 639:36) agrees. Rav Elyashiv in Succas Chayim page 202 rules that this applies only to wine but not to grape juice. The Steipler in Orchos Rabbeinu 2: page 228 as well as Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchita 58:22 recommend eating bread immediately after [[havdala]] to avoid any doubts, and recite leshev basuccah. Shemirat Shabbat kihilchita recommends reciting the leshev basuccah before the boreh pri hagefen. Sh"t Minchat Yitzchak 9:163 says that one should have in mind when eating seudat shlishit that the leshev basukkah recited then will not cover [[havdala]], then when reciting [[havdala]] one should say the beracha and immediately start eating melaveh malka. </ref>
# Some say that if it's difficult for a man to hear havdalah in the sukkah, it's permissible for him to listen to havdalah from someone who is mitztair (in pain) and saying havdalah outside of the sukkah.<ref>Shoshat Yisrael p. 113 quoting Rav Shlomo Miller. His explanation is that there's no reason the one listening to the havdalah needs to be in the sukkah, just the one drinking.</ref>
#Sephardim hold that it is not necessary to recite havdalah in the sukkah.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Sukkot p. 140 explains that it isn't necessary to do havdalah in the sukkah since drinking wine even in an established way isn't considered a fixed meal that needs a sukkah (Rama 639:2). He adds that this is the minhag.</ref>

==Meetings in a Sukkah==
# A person who is talking with friends should do so in a sukkah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Harav 639:4</ref>
#A community committee meeting can take place as usual and doesn't have to be in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Nitei Gavriel 58:10 explains that during Sukkot, the [[Sukkah]] is supposed to replace one's home. However, when it comes to a community meeting, one always leaves one's home to go another place, so there'd be no need to go into a Sukkah. Additionally, if they have the meeting in the Sukkah, they won't be able to concentrate as well as they otherwise could. </ref>

==Links==

*[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/55400 Yalkut Yosef Hilchot Sukkah (Hebrew 5776)]

==Sources==
{{Reflist|30em}}
[[Category:Holidays]]
[[Category:Sukkot]]
<references />

Eating in the Sukkah

2024-08-22T15:39:20Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

[[Image:sukkah.jpg | 200px | right]]
Based on the pesukim in the Torah-בַּסֻּכֹּת תֵּשְׁבוּ, שִׁבְעַת יָמִים; כָּל-הָאֶזְרָח, בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, יֵשְׁבוּ, בַּסֻּכֹּת. לְמַעַן, יֵדְעוּ דֹרֹתֵיכֶם, כִּי בַסֻּכּוֹת הוֹשַׁבְתִּי אֶת-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, בְּהוֹצִיאִי אוֹתָם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם: אֲנִי, ה אֱלֹקיכֶם.- "For a seven day period you shall live in booths. Every resident among the Israelites shall live in booths, in order that your [ensuing] generations should know that I had the children of Israel live in booths when I took them out of the land of Egypt. I am the Lord, your God." <ref>Vayikra (23:42-43)</ref>, there is a positive commandment to sit in the [[Sukkah]] for the 7 days of [[Sukkot]].<ref>Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot, Aseh #168), [[Chinuch]] Mitzva 325. The Tur 625 explains that the reason we were commanded to do this specifically in Tishrei and not in Nissan (which would have made more sense, as this is when we left Egypt) is to make it clear that we aren't doing it for the shade that it provides, but rather because of Hashem's command, as Tishrei is a time that people normally move indoors, and we move outdoors for this time. Bach 625-1 wonders why the Tur goes out of his way to flesh out this point, as he usually focuses on halacha and doesn't discuss explanations of the mitzvot. Bach suggests that Tur thinks that since the Torah spells out the reason, "so that your generations may know...", if you don't have the proper intent of the mitzvah in mind, then you haven't properly fulfilled it. Bach suggests that the Tur records the reasons for both Tzitzit and Tefillin for the same reason. Since the Torah fleshes out the rationale of the mitzvah, possessing this kavanah is neccessary for the proper fulfillment of the mitzvah. </ref>

==Eating in the Sukkah==

#There’s an obligation to eat a [[Kezayit]] of bread in the [[Sukkah]] on the first night of [[Sukkot]].<ref>Rambam Hilchot Succa 6:7, S”A 639:3, Chazon Ovadyah pg 132 </ref> During the remaining days there is no obligation to eat in the [[Sukkah]], as you can just eat fruits or vegetables. However, there is still a mitzva to eat bread in the succa every day.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:24 </ref>
#While [[sitting in the Sukkah]], one should have intent to fulfill the mitzvah. Additionally, one should also have in mind that Hashem commanded us to sit in [[Sukkot]] in order to remember the exodus from Egypt (Yetsiat Mitzrayim), and that the [[Sukkot]] commemorate the clouds of glory.<ref>There is a dispute in Gemara [[Sukkah]] 11b whether the sukkah commemorates the physical [[sukkot]] that Bnei Yisrael sat in, or the Ananei Hakavod (clouds of glory) that God gave us for protection. The Tur 625:1 writes that the [[Sukkot]] are in commemoration of the Ananei Hakavod. He adds that the Jews sit in the Succa specifically in the winter (instead of when Bnei Yisrael left Egypt) to show that even though the norm is to move back into your house for the winter, we move outside to fulfill G-d’s will. The Bach 625:1 s.v. BaSukkot says that the fact that the Tur wrote this indicates that one hasn't fulfilled one's mitzva completely if while [[sitting in the Sukkah]] one didn’t remember the exodus from Egypt (Yetsiyat Mitzrayim), since the pasuk states explicitly that the mitzvah of [[Sukkot]] is to remind us of the exodus. The Mishna Brurah 625:1 writes that one should have the intent that Hashem commanded us to sit in [[Sukkot]] in order to remember the exodus from Egypt (Yetsiat Mitzrayim) and that the Sukkat are in commemoration for the clouds of glory.

*See also the Tur 417 who quotes his brother regarding the connection between [[Sukkot]] and Yacov Avinu. See more about that idea on [https://www.dailyhalacha.com/WeeklyParasha.asp?PageIndex=26&ParashaClipID=328 dailyhalacha.com].</ref> According to most authorities, after the fact, if one didn't have these intentions, one still fulfills the mitzvah as long as one had intention to fulfill the mitzvah.<ref>The Pri Megadim (A"A Intro to Siman 625) writes that Bach's requirement is only in order to perform the mitzvah in the best way. However, after the fact, even if one didn't have this intent, one has still fulfilled one's obligation as long as one had the intent to fulfill the mitzvah (as part of the concept that mitzvot need kavana). Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 97) and Mishna Brurah (625:1) agree with the Pri Megadim, unlike the Bikkurei Yaakov (625:3) who holds that one doesn't fulfill one's obligation at all without the proper intent. Rav Shternbuch in Moadim UZmanim (vol 1 pg 169) writes that although lacking the Kavanna doesn’t take away the mitzvah, however, one still loses the separate mitzvah of having kavanah.</ref>

==Who is obligated to eat in the Sukkah?==

#One who is exempt from the sukkah yet chooses to remain there does not receive reward for remaining in the sukkah and is foolish.<ref>Rama 639:7. The Biur Halacha 639 explains that one is only considered foolish if one became exempt while sitting in the sukkah and continued to sit there. This is particularly true with rain because Chazal compare rain on Sukkot to a servant who served his master water and had it splashed back in his face. Once the master demonstrated that he wasn’t interested in the services, if the servant forces his master to allow him to serve him, the servant is foolish. That is why remaining in the sukkah while it's raining is foolish. Nonetheless, if one is technically exempt not because of suffering, (i.e. if it began to rain and then the rain stopped and he is still in the middle of eating his meal inside), and he chooses to return to the sukkah, he will receive reward.</ref>

===Women and Children===
#Women are exempt from the mitzvah of [[Sukkah]].<ref>Mishna [[Sukkah]] 28a, Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 640:1 </ref> They can volunteer to sit in the Sukkah, and if they do so, according to Ashkenazim they can recite a bracha, while according to Sephardim they may not.<ref>{{Bracha on Mitzvot Aseh Shehazman Grama}}</ref>
#Very young children are exempt from the mitzvah of [[Sukkah]]. However, once they no longer need their mother (around age 5), there is a mitzvah of [[Chinuch]] (training them in mitzvot) for them to sit in the [[sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 640:2, Mishna Brurah 640:2. The Magen Avraham 640 says that it is prohibited to feed children outside the [[sukkah]], just like it is forbidden to feed children non-kosher food. Sh"t Binyan Av 1:25 says that a man cannot feed the child outside the [[sukkah]], but a woman is allowed to. The Mishna Brurah 640:5 quotes this magen avraham, and adds that one shouldn't even tell the child to eat outside the [[sukkah]]. Rav Moshe Shternbuch in Tshuvot Vihanhagot 3:211 says that very young children are exempt, based on the fact that they need their mothers to eat properly. Aruch Hashulchan 640:2 justifies not obligating them in sukka because children have a lower tolerance for the cold.</ref>

===Rain or Sick===

#A sick person is exempt from sitting in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 640:3 based on Mishna [[Sukkah]] 25a. </ref>
#One is not required to eat in the [[sukkah]] if it is raining.<ref>Mishnah [[Sukkah]] 28b </ref> If it is raining, and one began to eat inside, he may continue to eat inside even when it stops raining.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:38 based on Rashi [[Sukkah]] 29a "viyardu." Ritva [[Sukkah]] 29a "Tannu Rabanan," writes that one is not required to eat in the [[sukkah]] if there are rain-clouds in the sky and it appears as if it is going to rain. Rav Shalom Schwadron in Daat Torah OC 639:5 says that most poskim don't accept this opinion, but he is in doubt if you can recite a beracha in such a situation. </ref> However, these rules only apply after the first night. For the rules for the first night see below.
#Even after it stops raining, if the sukkah is still wet and the s'chach is dripping, one is exempt from the sukkah.<ref>Shevet Hakehati 1:199</ref>
#One who is suffering from sitting in the sukkah is exempt. For instance, if one cannot sleep in the sukkah because of the wind, or because of the buzzing flies, or because of the cold, or even because of a small amount of rain, he is exempt. An important caveat is that one is only exempt from the sukkah because of suffering if leaving the sukka will help alleviate his suffering.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 640:4, Rama 639:2, 639:5, and 640:4 </ref>
#If it's Shabbat and the lights in the sukkah go out, one is not obligated to go to his friend’s sukkah if this is difficult or uncomfortable; rather, he may eat his meal in his house.<ref>Rama 640:4</ref>
#If one feels crowded in the sukkah, this does not constitute “suffering” and one must continue to live there.<ref>Rama 640:4. Mishna Brurah 640:26 writes that a fastidious person for whom this is difficult is exempt. </ref>
#In general, one cannot claim that he is suffering and therefore exempt from the sukkah if others would typically not suffer from experiencing the matter he is facing.<ref>Rama 640:4. Nonetheless, the Mishna Brurah 640:29 writes that if one is a fastidious individual and other fastidious people of the same type would suffer from what he is undergoing, this would suffice to exempt him. </ref>
#Some poskim permit sitting under a handheld umbrella, even over ten [[Tefachim]], unlike a more permanent umbrella such as one supported by a table, because it is still considered sitting under the [[schach]]. One should not recite a beracha in this case <ref>Halichot Shlomo 2:8-20, Shalmei Moed pg. 112, She’arim Metzuyanim b’Halachah 135:5, and Nefesh Chayah OC 629 all allow sitting in the Sukkah under an umbrella. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Piskei Shemuot p. 101) holds that it is permissible to do but unnecessary. Rav Elyashiv, quoted in Succat Chayim page 52, however, does not permit sitting in the Sukkah under an umbrella. The Brisker Rav (HaSuccah Hashalem, Miluim 13:4) did in fact do this himself. </ref> This is relevant to chol hamoed, but not to on Shabbat or Yom Tov, when an umbrella may not be used. See [[Boneh#Umbrella]].

===Traveling===

#People who are traveling for business or for pressing matters <ref>Igrot Moshe OC 3:93 and Yalkut Yosef as quoted in Piskei Teshuvot p. 385 no. 38, hold that these are the travelers referred to in the Shulchan Aruch. However, those who travel for pleasure or without a real need and claim that they are exempt from sukkah are acting improperly. </ref> are exempt from a sukkah as long as they are traveling.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 640:8</ref> When they pause their journey, if they are unable to find a sukkah, they are also exempt from sukkah then. <ref>Rama 640:8 </ref>
#If one is involved in a mitzvah, such as going to learn Torah,<ref>Mishna Brurah 640:35 </ref> he is exempt from the mitzvah of sukkah.<ref>The Shulchan Aruch 640:7, as explained by the Mishna Brurah, feels that in such a case one is not required to enter a sukkah even when one reaches a resting point on his mitzvah journey. Conversely, the Rama writes that if this is not difficult and will not affect his ability to perform the mitzvah, one should find a sukkah in which to eat and sleep. </ref> Accordingly, those tending to the needs of the sick are exempt from the sukkah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 640:3 as explained by the Mishna Brurah. Note that this rule does not include those helping one who is mitztaer (in pain), but only the sick as defined above.</ref>

===Lights Went Out===

#If a person's lights went out in their Sukkah, or their Sukkah became inhabitable, if it is very difficult to go to another person's Sukkah, one doesn't have to and one is exempt.<ref>Rama 640:4. Mishna Brurah 640:23 elaborates that if it's simply inconvenient to go to someone else's sukkah, then that is insufficient to exempt oneself. However, if it's very difficult, then one is exempt.</ref>

==Which foods can one eat outside the Sukkah?==
===Bread===

#It is permissible to eat up to a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]] of bread outside the [[Sukkah]], but for any more than a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]], one must eat it in the [[Sukkah]] and make a bracha of Leshev BaSukkah.<ref>The Mishna in [[Sukkah]] 25a states that one may eat a snack (achilat arai) outside of the [[sukkah]]. The Gemara [[Sukkah]] 26a, states that the quantity of an achilat arai is the amount that a yeshiva student would eat in the morning on his way to the beit midrash. Tosafot 26a s.v. "Tarti", say that this amount is a k'beitzah. This is the conclusion of Shulchan Aruch 639:2, Mishna Brurah 639:13, Beiur Halacha s.v. [[KeBaytzah]], Natai Gavriel 48:2, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 132), Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 142). </ref>
#If one ate a [[Kezayit]] consisting of bread and other foods, according to Ashkenazim, this is a meal and one must eat it in the [[Sukkah]] and even make a bracha of Leshev BaSukkah<ref>Natai Gavriel 48:7</ref>. However, according to Sephardim one doesn't have to eat this in the [[Sukkah]], and even if one eats in the [[Sukkah]], one does not make the bracha of LeShev BaSukkah.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 134)</ref>
#For Sephardim, if one sat in the [[sukkah]] planning to eat less than a [[kebaytza]] of bread, and then decided that he wanted to eat more than a [[kebaytza]], he should recite a beracha then, even if what he has left is less than a [[kebaytza]].<ref>Chazon Ovadia pg. 133 </ref>
#Some poskim hold that any food on [[shabbat]] needs to be eaten in the [[sukkah]], because it is achilat keva and not achilat arai<ref>This is based on a concept that comes up on Beitzah 35a, that Shabbat is a Kovaih (makes something into an achilat keva) with regards to Terumot and Maasarot. These poskim believe that this concept extends to sukkah as well. </ref>. However, most poskim disagree.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 143, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 141 </ref>

===Fruits===

#It is permissible to eat fruits outside of the sukkah, even if one eats a lot of them.<ref>This issue is debated in the Gemara Yoma 79b. Tosafot 26a s.v. tarti rule that it is permitted even in a large quantities, because fruit is always considered arai. The Rosh [[Sukkah]] 2:13 quotes the Maharam Mirutenberg who holds that one may not eat fruit outside the [[sukkah]]. Rosh explains that the Maharam only refers to eating more than a k'beitzah, but he nevertheless permits eating less than a k'beitzah of fruit. Shulchan Aruch and Rama 639:2 rule like Tosafot, as does Natai Gavriel 50:1 </ref> Nonetheless, it's praiseworthy to have fruit in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Chazon Ovadyah (pg 138), Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 143), Nitei Gavriel 50:12</ref>

===Drinks===

#One may have drinks outside of the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 639:2 </ref> However, if one sits down to drink wine in a fixed manner (not just as a snack), especially if a group of people sit to drink wine, one must drink it in the [[Sukkah]] without making the Bracha of Leshev BaSukkah. According to Ashkenazim, one should preferably not establish a drink of wine or beer except in a meal of a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]] of bread, or at least a cooked dish made out of the five grains, which one must eat in the [[Sukkah]] and make a Bracha of Leshev BaSukkah.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:13, Natai Gavriel 50:3 </ref> Nonetheless, it's praiseworthy to have all drinks in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 639:2 </ref>
#Even for those who usually make kiddush in shul on Friday nights, it is preferable not to do so on Sukkot since it's outside the Sukkah.<ref>Mateh Efraim 625:40</ref>

===Meat, Fish, Cheese===

#If one makes a meal out of meat, fish, cheese, and the like, one should eat it in the [[Sukkah]]. However, if one doesn't eat it as a meal, one may eat outside the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Rosh [[Sukkah]] 2:13 quotes Rabbeinu Peretz that the leniency of eating fruit outside of the [[sukkah]] does not apply to meat, fish and cheese. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:2 doesn't rule explicitly on these items, but Mishna Brurah 639:13 says that Shulchan Aruch implies that it is permissible to eat these items outside of the [[sukkah]], like fruit. This is also the conclusion of Natai Gavriel 50:2 </ref> Nonetheless, it's praiseworthy to have meat, fish, rice, eggs, and cheese in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 138), Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 143). see also Halichot Olam 2: page 281. </ref> Some say that it is proper to eat these foods in a Sukkah if one is having them as a meal.<Ref>Beyt Dovid Hilchot Sukkot (R' Dovid Shaul) p. 249 16:19 writes that it is proper to be strict to eat meat, fish, cheese, chullent, potatoes, eggs, cornflakes, and other similar foods which are filling in the Sukkah. He quotes this from Rav Elyashiv.</ref>

===Cookies and Cakes===

#If one ate more than a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]] of [[Pas Haba Bikisnin]] (cookies and cakes), then one must eat it in the [[Sukkah]]. The Ashkenazic minhag is to make a bracha of LeShev BaSukkah. If one eating it as a snack and not a meal, then it is preferable to establish one's residence in the [[Sukkah]] for a brief time before or after eating, and have in mind when making the bracha that it should cover the eating as well as the sitting in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:16, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20231&pgnum=604 Maamar Mordechai 639:3], [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=46442&pgnum=245 Natai Gavriel 49:1-3]. Both the Maamar Mordechai and Nitai Gavriel clarify that there's no distinction between Pat Haba Bkisnin and other cooked mezonot dishes. Divrei Dovid 1:40 agrees and writes that if someone has a meal of noodles, they must eat it in the sukkah. Rav Ovadia is quoted in Mshiurei Maran Rishon Letzion v. 1 p. 110 that one can eat up to 55 grams of noodles outside of a sukkah.

*The Gemara Yoma 79b establishes that there's no obligation to eat fruit in the Sukkah. However, there is one suggestion in the gemara that fruit would require a Sukkah, and the Gemara doesn't come to a clear conclusion. The Gemara does indicate that targima would require a Sukkah. Rosh Sukkah 2:13 and Rambam Sukkah 6:6 rule that fruit doesn't need a Sukkah, but the Rosh quotes the Maharam who was strict to eat fruit in the Sukkah. The Rosh clarifies that even the Maharam was only strict if he established the fruit as a meal and not a snack. What is targima? Tosfot 79b s.v. mini cites Rashi as explaining targima to mean fruit and rejecting that explanation. Tosfot Yeshanim 79b s.v. mini based on Tosefta Brachot 4:4 explains targima to be cooked mezonot dishes. Tosfot Harosh 79b s.v. mah and Rosh Sukkah 2:13 agrees. However, Rosh also cites Rabbenu Peretz who explains that meat and cheese are considered targima.
*Based on Tosfot and Rosh, Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:2 conclude that cooked mezonot dishes require a Sukkah if one establishes them as a meal. What is a keviyut seudah? The Maamar Mordechai 639:3 learns from the Magen Avraham 639:6 that keviyut seudah depends on a person's intention to have a meal as opposed to have a snack, and is not defined by an objective amount. Aruch Hashulchan 639:9 and Biur Halacha 639:2 s.v. im agree. The Magen Avraham 639:6 disagrees with the Rosh, and thinks that the definition of keviyat seudah is anything more than a Kbeytzah. The Mishna Brurah 639:15 is concerned for the Rosh, but doesn't require a bracha of leshev.
*Cooked Dish: Maamar Mordechai 639:3, Aruch Hashulchan 639:9, and Nitai Gavriel 49:1-3 hold that there is no distinction between a cooked dish and Pat Haba Bkisnin.
*Ginat Veradim 4:6 writes that everyone would agree that more than a Kbeytzah of Pat Haba Bkisnin requires a Sukkah with a bracha. However, Chida (Machzik Bracha 639:5) points out that the Ginat Veradim has no proof for this contention. Chida instead concludes that only for more than a Kbeytzah of bread should one recite a leshev bsukkah, since there isn't a definite obligation to have Pat Haba Bkisnin in a Sukkah.
*Mishna Brurah 639:16 concludes that if one has intention to have a meal with mezonot, there is no distinction between Pat Haba Bekisnin and a cooked dish mezonot, both require a Sukkah with a bracha of Leshev. However, if one doesn't have intention to have a meal with mezonot, according to the Rosh there's no obligation to have it in a Sukkah, and according to the Magen Avraham there is. Although the halacha doesn't follow the Magen Avraham, the minhag is to follow the Magen Avraham to recite a leshev for more than a Kbeytzah of Pat Haba Bkisnin.
*[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=49175&pgnum=344 Shoneh Halachot 639:10-11] clarifies that this minhag only applies to Pat Haba Bkisnin and not cooked dish mezonot. Therefore, if one ate more than a K'beytzah of Pat Haba Bkisnin one should eat in the Sukkah. If one is eating that as a meal one should recite a bracha of Leshev Bsukkah. Even if one isn't eating it as a meal nonetheless the minhag is to recite a bracha of Leshev. However, to avoid a question of a bracha levatala a person should sit down for some time to establish their residence in the sukkah. If one ate less than a K'beytzah of Pat Haba Bkisnin. it is considered a snack and doesn't require a sukkah. Yet, if one ate more than a K'beytzah of a cooked dish of mezonot if one eats it as a meal one should recite a Leshev. However, if one doesn't intend to eat it as a meal one should eat it in the Sukkah without reciting a leshev.
*However, Nitai Gavriel Sukkot 49:3 argues that if one eats more than a Kbeytzah of any mezonot food, the Ashkenazic minhag is to recite a Leshev Bsukkah.</ref>
##Some say that this short while is a half hour.<ref>Piskei Hahalachot 639:26 quoting Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 26:15)</ref>
##If one is going to stay a short while in the sukkah and eat a kebeytzah of pat haba bkisnin, one should recite a bracha of leshev bsukkah before the mezonot. Some poskim say that one can recite it between the mezonot and eating.<ref>Piskei Hahalachot 639:30 quotes a dispute between Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 45 fnt. 45) and Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani p. 250) about this issue. Rav Auerbach thinks that one should recite leshev bsukkah in advance of reciting mezonot, so that it isn't an interruption between the mezonot and eating, since the bracha isn't exclusively on the eating. Rav Karelitz argues that one can recite leshev between the mezonot and eating as usual, since the bracha of lshehev is primarily for the eating.</ref>
#If one ate more than a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]] of a cooked dish made out of the five grains (such as noodles), one must eat in the Sukkah. If one establishes it as a meal, then one should recite a Leshev Basukkah. If one is just eating it as a snack, according to Ashkenazim, there is a dispute if one should recite a Leshev Basukkah.<ref>See footnotes to the previous halacha.</ref>
#Sephardim hold that even though one must eat it in a [[Sukkah]] (if one eats more than a [[Measurements#KeBaytzah|KeBaytzah]]), one doesn't make the bracha of LeShev BaSukkah unless one ate 162 grams of a [[Pat Haba Bkisnin]] food, and it's preferable to eat 216 grams in order to make the bracha according to all opinions. For cooked dish mezonot foods, there is no bracha of leshev basukkah.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 132-6), Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 142-3) </ref> If one made a meal out of noodles and ate 162 grams, one must eat it in the sukkah and recite the bracha of Leshev Bsukkah even according to Sephardim.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:2, Chazon Ovadia p. 136. Yalkut Yosef (Sukkah, 5775, p. 690) holds that we recite a bracha like the Shoel Vnishal 3:95 and 3:165 and Etz Shatul 49 unlike the Ben Ish Chai (Yedey Chaim p. 93). </ref>

===If one is in the middle of a meal===

#If one is in the middle of a bread meal, one may not eat any food or drink outside the [[Sukkah]]. Even if there is food in one's mouth and one began chewing, when one leaves the [[Sukkah]], one shouldn't continue chewing until one returns to the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 143), Halichot Olam 2:pg. 271, Meiri Sukka 26b "Hamishnah Hachamishit", Shaar Hatziyun 639:29 </ref>

==Bracha of Leshev BeSukkah==

#Some say that It's proper to say the bracha of Leshev before making the [[HaMotzei]]. However, it's not an interruption if one recites [[HaMotzei]] before the beracha of Leshev basukkah. On [[Shabbat]] and [[Yom Tov]], the Leshev beracha is said in [[Kiddish]] before one drinks from the wine.<ref>Shulchan Aruch and Rama 643:3, Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg 145, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 172). 
The Rosh (Sukkah 4:3) cites the practice of the Maharam Rotenberg to recite the bracha of leshev ba’sukkah prior to making a hamotzei on a meal he would eat in the sukkah. He explained that the Maharam held that one should recite a bracha for any use of the sukkah including sitting in there. Since one is technically obligated in the bracha prior to eating, one should recite that bracha first. However, the Rosh notes, the minhag is only to recite leshev ba’sukkah when one eats a meal. If so, one should first recite hamotzei to start the meal and then leshev ba’sukkah. The S”A 643:3 codifies the opinion of the Maharam but also mentions the common minhag. Chazon Ovadia (Sukkot p. 172) writes that it is proper to follow the Maharam. Nitai Gavriel 45:3 advises following the minhag. [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2769 Rabbi Eli Mansour] writes that both practices are valid. </ref>
#One who eats while standing can nevertheless recite the beracha of leshev besukkah.<ref>Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 175 </ref>
#Regarding which foods one should make a LeShev BaSukkah on, see above [[#Which_foods_can_one_eat_outside_the_Sukkah?]].
#If one is fasting for a taanit chalom on [[sukkot]], one should nevertheless from reciting the beracha on sleeping or sitting in the [[sukkah]], because the beracha was established for eating only.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 145 </ref>

===Temporarily Leaving the Sukkah===

#Anytime one “leaves completely” from the sukkah, he must make a new bracha upon returning to the sukkah if he desires to eat foods requiring a leshev ba’sukkah. “Leaving completely” includes anytime a person plans on leaving the sukkah and not returning immediately, thereby causing him to forget about the fact that he is planning on returning to the sukkah soon (“hesech ha’daas”).<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:46. It may be that this only applies while one is in the midst of his meal. However, if after birkat hamazon, one leaves for even a small amount of time, it could be that he is obligated to make a new bracha upon returning. However, the Shaar Ha’tziyun 639:91 concludes safek brachos le’hakel, and that one shouldn't make a beracha in this case. </ref>

===If One Is Not Eating===

#If one plans to sit or sleep in the sukkah for a significant period of time without eating foods that require a sukkah, one should not recite a bracha of leshev ba’sukkah. Some poskim, however, assume that one can recite leshev ba’sukkah.<ref>*The Gemara (Sukkah 45b) records a dispute whether one should recite one bracha of leshev ba’sukkah for all of Sukkot, or if one should say a new bracha each day. Tosfot (s.v. echad) explains that the opinion who says to make it each day really holds that one should recite a bracha each time one enters the sukkah. The Rosh (Sukkah 4:3), Rif (22a), and Rambam (Sukkah 6:12) hold like the opinion who holds one should make it each time one enters the sukkah.
*The Rosh notes that the minhag is only to recite the bracha when sitting down to eat in the sukkah, since it's the most permanent of one’s actions in the sukkah. S”A 639:4 and Rama codify this minhag. Nonetheless, the Chaye Adam 147:15 and Mishna Brurah 639:45 write that if one enters the sukkah for a significant amount of time and doesn’t eat, one should still recite a bracha since there’s nothing to exempt that time spent in the sukkah. The Piskei Teshuvot (p. 377) cites a dispute whether we accept the Chaye Adam, and suggests that one should avoid this situation by eating some food that requires a leshev ba’sukkah.</ref>

==First Night of Sukkot==

#There is an obligation to eat a Kezayit of bread in the Sukkah on the first night of Sukkot.<ref>The Rabbis in the Mishna (Sukkah 27a) hold that there is an obligation to eat in the Sukkah on the first night, and afterwards it is optional to eat in the Sukkah. The Gemara explains that the reason for the Rabbis is that there is a gezerah shava between Sukkot and Pesach, and just like there is an obligation to eat Matzah on the first night of Pesach, so too there is an obligation to eat bread on the first night of Sukkot. This is codified by the Rambam (Sukkah 6:7) and Shulchan Aruch 639:3.</ref> According to many Rishonim, there is an obligation to eat a meal in the Sukkah each day and night of Yom Tov.<ref>The Gemara Brachot 49b states that on Yom Tov one would have to repeat Birkat HaMazon if one forgot to say Yaaleh VeYavo, because there is an obligation to eat a meal on Yom Tov. This is as opposed to Rosh Chodesh, when there's no obligation to eat a meal, one would not have to repeat Birkat HaMazon if he omitted Yaaleh VeYavo. The rishonim point out that this seems to be at odds with the gemara Sukkah 27a, which says that it is optional to have a meal on Sukkot other than on the first night.

*Some rishonim answer that there is an obligation to eat a meal each day and night of Yom Tov because of Yom Tov, but the obligation unique to the Sukkah is just the first night. The rishonim raise the issue of what the difference is between the obligation to eat a meal due to the fact that it is Yom Tov, and the obligation to eat a because of Sukkot. Rabbenu Yehuda (Tosfot Brachot 49b s.v. Iy) answers that if it rains and one has to eat inside, if the obligation is just because of Yom Tov, then one would fulfill one's obligation. However, if the obligation is because of the Sukkah, one would have to eat in the Sukkah anyway after the rain stops. The Rosh (Brachot 7:23) quotes Rabbenu Yehuda with a slight discrepancy; he states that one should eat one's meal in the rain, as opposed to waiting until the rain stops.
*Some rishonim argue that there is no obligation to eat in the Sukkah if it rains outside, and the first night is no different. Ths is the opinion of the Rashba (responsa 4:78) and Raavad (cited by Kol Bo 87 and Beit Yosef 639:3). According to the Trumat HaDeshen (Pesakim n. 160), the Smag (Asin 43), and Or Zaruah 2:301 also agree. S”A 639:3-5 rules like the Rashba, that one is not obligated to eat in the Sukkah aside from the first night, nor is one obligated to eat in the Sukkah on the first night if it rains. Chazon Ovadia (p. 100 and 122) rules like S”A in both instances.
*However, the Magen Avraham (188:7 and 639:10) and Mishna Brurah 639:23 hold that one is obligated to eat in the sukkah each day and night of Sukkot. Also, the Rama 639:5 rules that one is obligated to eat in the sukkah on the first night if it rains.
*Alternatively, the Ritva (Sukkah 27a s.v. VeShiur) quotes his Rebbe as explaining that while one can fulfill the regular Yom Tov meal by eating a Kezayit of bread outside the Sukkah, the first night meal needs to be eaten in the Sukkah even if it is only a Kezayit. The Tur 639:3 agrees. This opinion is also cited by the Ran (Sukkah 12b s.v. Matnitin). Accordingly, one would be obligated to eat a meal each day and night of Yom Tov.
*Other rishonim answer simply that the Gemara Brachot which said that it is an obligation to eat a meal on Yom Tov was only referring to the first nights of Pesach and Sukkot. However, there's no obligation to eat a bread meal the rest of the days of Pesach and Sukkot. This is the opinion of the Tosfot (Sukkah 27a s.v. Iy), Rashba (Brachot 49b s.v. Tefillah and responsa 3:287), and Smag (Asin 43).</ref>

===Kiddush===

#On the first night of Sukkot, one should wait to recite [[Kiddush]] until after [[Tzet HaKochavim]]. However, after the fact, if one made [[Kiddish|Kiddush]] during [[Bein HaShemashot]] and ate a [[Kezayit]] of bread, one should make sure to have another [[Kezayit]] after [[Tzet HaKochavim|Tzet HaKochavim,]] but one doesn’t need to make another Bracha of LeShev BaSukkah.<ref>Rama 639:3 writes that one should wait to eat until nighttime. Mishna Brurah 639:25 explains that this is based on the connection between [[Pesach]] and [[Sukkot]], and by [[Matzah]] the halacha is that one may only eat at night, as the passuk says: בערב תאכלו מצות. Mishna Brurah continues that after the fact, if one ate during bein ha'shemashot, then one should eat another [[Kezayit]], but not make another LeShev BaSukkah because of [[Safek Brachot LeHakel]]. Nitei Gavriel ([[Sukkot]] 38:12) extends the Rama to not even making [[Kiddish]] before nighttime. Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 138) agrees with the above halachot. </ref>
#The order of Kiddush is hagefen, kiddush hayom, leshev ba’sukkah, and then on the first night, shehechiyanu. The reason that leshev follows kiddush hayom is because we only sit in the sukkah due to the sanctity of the day. Also, we delay shehechiyanu until the end in order to ensure that it covers both the kiddush hayom and the sukkah itself.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 643:1, Mishna Brurah 643:1, Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 95 </ref> After the fact, if one made [[Shehecheyanu]] before [[Kiddish|Kiddush]], one fulfilled one's obligation, and one shouldn't repeat it after [[Kiddish]].<ref>Mishna Brurah 643:3 </ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, if one didn’t sit in the sukkah on the first night, but recited kiddush with Shehechiyanu indoors, one should repeat Shehechiyanu the next time one eats in the sukkah. According to Sephardim, one should not repeat Shehechiyanu when he eats in a Sukkah.<ref>The Ran (Sukkah 22a s.v. VeIm) cites the Raavad who says that if one didn’t eat in the sukkah on the first night and said shehechiyanu indoors, one should say shehechiyanu the next time one eats in the sukkah for the sukkah itself. This is codified by the Rama 641:1. Chazon Ovadia (p. 127), however, is concerned for the Bach (responsa 132) who argues that the bracha of shehechiyanu can exempt a mitzvah even if it isn’t present when the bracha was made. Seemingly, this is only relevant for the Rama under extenuating circumstances. See Eliyah Rabba 641:2. </ref>
#If one didn’t make a [[Shehecheyanu]] on the first night of [[Sukkot]], one can make it on the rest of the days and nights of [[Sukkot]].<ref>Magen Avraham 643:1, Mishna Brurah 643:2, Chazon Ovadyah (pg. 95) </ref>
# Some poskim hold that a woman shouldn't answer amen to the bracha of Leshev Bsukkah in the kiddush if they plan to drink wine or grape juice, since it could be a hefsek,<ref>[https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=125962 Rav Dovid Yosef (Mitzvat Yeshiva Bsukkah 5781 min 9)] citing his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, holds that it is forbidden for the women to answer amen. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)] agrees that they shouldn't answer amen.</ref> while others allow them to answer amen.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe OC 4:101:1) says that it isn't a hefsek for a woman to answer amen to shehechiyanu in kiddush, even though she already said that bracha when she lit candles. He reasons that since the one making kiddush needs to recite that bracha for himself, she may answer amen as well. This line of reasoning would also allow her to answer amen to the leshev bsukkah. This is even true according to Sephardim who hold that they may not recite the bracha themselves. </ref>

===If it rains the first night of [[Sukkot]]===

#If it rains the first night of [[Sukkot]],
##According to Ashekenazim, one is not exempt from the [[Sukkah]]. Some poskim hold that one should wait an hour or two for the rain to stop. If it does, one should eat in the [[Sukkah]] with a bracha of Leshev Basukkah. But if it doesn't, then one should recite [[Kiddush]] and eat a [[kezayit]] of bread in the [[Sukkah]] without the bracha of Leshev Basukkah.<ref>Rama 639:5, Mishna Brurah 639:35

*Practically, the Rama 639:5 writes, that if it rains one should remain in the sukkah for kiddush and eating of the first kezayit of bread.
*However, the Gra (639:3), in explaining the opinion of Tosfot, writes that eating in the sukkah while it is raining is worthless since it isn’t considered a sukkah. Rather one should eat in the sukkah after it stops raining.
*Accordingly, the Tzlach (Brachot 49b) writes that a person should wait an hour or two for the rain to stop, so that one can eat in the sukkah after it stops raining. The Mishna Brurah 639:35 agrees.
*However, the Shvut Yaakov 3:45 (cited by Shaarei Teshuva 639:13) writes vehemently against those who would wait until midnight for the rain to stop, and only then to start the meal. He explains that either one is exempt from the sukkah altogether, like S”A, or one should eat in the sukkah while it is raining, but waiting to eat only detracts from simchat Yom Tov.
*Chachmat Shlomo 639:5 writes that one is usually exempt from sitting in the Sukkah when it is raining, because doing so would be causing oneself pain. On the first night, however, since it is a mitzvah to eat in the sukkah, that in and of itself is a reason why it would be considered an enjoyment and not a pain to eat in the rain.
*Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky (“Eating In The Succah The first Night Of Succos and Hilchos Mitztaer” min 30-3) quotes Rabbi Mordechai Willig as having ruled that if it rains on the first night of Sukkot, one may say Kiddush in the Sukkah without waiting for the rain to stop. Similarly, Rav Hershel Schachter (“Inyonei Sukkos 2” min 51-2) said that if it is raining, the minhag is to say Kiddush without leshev ba’sukkah, eat a kezayit of bread in the sukkah, and then if it stops raining, have another kezayit in the sukkah.</ref> Other poskim hold that one may say [[Kiddush]] in the [[Sukkah]] without waiting for the rain to stop.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/749248/Rabbi_Zvi_Sobolofsky/_Eating_In_The_Succah_The_first_Night_Of_Succos_and_Hilchos_Mitztaer# Rabbi Tzvi Sobolovsky in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 30-3)] quotes Rabbi Mordechai Willig as having ruled that if it rains on the first night of [[Sukkot]] one may say [[Kiddush]] in the [[Sukkah]] without waiting for the rain to stop. </ref>
##If the weather forecast is that there is supposed to be rain all night, even according to Ashkenazim, it isn't necessary to wait any amount of time, and it is fine to immediately make Kiddush without the bracha of Leshev Basukkah and eat a kezayit of bread in the Sukkah.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)]</ref>
##When one eats a kezayit of bread in the Sukkah and then goes inside, a person should eat a little bit of bread inside so that he can recite birkat hamazon inside.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)]</ref>
##According to Sephardim, one is exempt from the [[Sukkah]] and one should eat in the house.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 639:3-5 rules like the Rashba that one is not obligated to eat in the Sukkah besides the first night and one is not obligated to eat in the Sukkah on the first night if it rains. Chazon Ovadia (p. 100 and 122) rules like Shulchan Aruch in both instances. </ref> However, if one wants to be strict, one may wait a little bit for the rain to stop, but one should not wait too long that it'll cause oneself pain on [[Yom Tov]]. If after eating in the house the rains stops and it’s before [[chatzot]] (halachic midnight), then one should go into the [[Sukkah]] and eat one [[kezayit]] of bread and make a Leshev Basukkah. If it’s after [[chatzot]], then one shouldn’t recite the bracha of Leshev unless one eats a [[KeBaytzah|kebaytzah]] of bread.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 140), Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 122) </ref>
#If one recited [[Kiddush]] and ate a [[keyazit]] of bread in the [[Sukkah]] while it was raining, and then one wakes up in the middle of the night and sees that it is not raining, some poskim hold that one does not have to get up to eat in the [[Sukkah]],<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:36</ref> while others hold that one should get up to eat more than a kebeytzah of bread in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/749248/Rabbi_Zvi_Sobolofsky/_Eating_In_The_Succah_The_first_Night_Of_Succos_and_Hilchos_Mitztaer# Rabbi Tzvi Sobolovsky in a shiur on yutorah.org (min 30-5)] quotes Rabbi Mordechai Willig as having ruled that if it rains on the first night of [[Sukkot]] and one ate in the [[Sukkah]], and then fell asleep, if one wakes up and sees that it stopped raining, one should get up and eat a [[Kezayit]] in the [[Sukkah]] in order to be certain that one fulfilled this mitzvah deoritta. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)] agrees that he should eat again in the Sukkah. He adds that someone who woke up should even wake others up in order to fulfill this mitzvah. </ref>
#It is permissible for the men to make Kiddush in the Sukkah, and the women and those who are exempt from Sukkah to listen to the Kiddush while staying inside.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 273:6, Mishna Brurah 273:28. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)] writes that in such a situation the women should make kiddush for themselves inside.</ref>
#If the rain stops, but your Sukkah is still too wet to sit in, and someone else has a Sukkah which had a shlok (roof) on to protect it from the rain, on the first two nights of Sukkot he must go and eat in his friends Sukkah that is dry.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1076067/Piskei-Rav-Schachter:-Rain-on-the-First-Two-Nights-of-Sukkos Rav Hershel Schachter (Teshuva Tishrei 5784)] explains that the type of mista'er (pain that exempts a person from Sukkah) to have to go to his friend's Sukkah only exempts him on the other days of Sukkot, but not the first two nights of Sukkot, since at the time when he's sitting in the Sukkah, he won't be mista'er. </ref>

=== If it rains on the second night of [[Sukkot]] ===

# If it rains on the second night of Sukkot, according to Ashkenazim, it isn't necessary to wait to see if the rain is going to stop. He should just recite Kiddush inside, and at the end of the meal he should eat a kezayit of bread in the Sukkah, even if the rain has not yet stopped. If it is still raining, he should not recite Leshev Basukkah. If the rain ends up stopping, he should return to the Sukkah to eat more than a Kebaytzah with a bracha of Leshev Basukkah. This is the strict halacha. However, some poskim hold that it is proper even on the second night to wait a little bit to see if the rain is going to stop.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:36. In Shaar Hatziyun 639: 71 he cites Magen Avraham who is lenient not to require sitting in the Sukkah at all on the second day if it is raining, but rejects that opinion because Radvaz and Eliya Rabba argue that the second day is like the first day for this matter. </ref>
## Some poskim argue that it isn't necessary to sit in the rain in the Sukkah on the second day of Sukkot. If someone wants to be strict, they may eat a kezayit of bread in the Sukkah in the middle or end of the meal.<ref>Magen Avraham 639:15, Shulchan Aruch Harav 639:19, Aruch Hashulchan 639:18</ref>

==Kiddush During the Day==

#According to Ashkenazim, if one plans to eat mezonot products after reciting the daytime kiddush, he should recite leshev ba’sukkah before drinking the wine.<ref>Mishna Brurah 643:9</ref> According to Sephardim, no leshev is recited for mezonot.<ref>Chazon Ovadia p. 134 </ref>
#Regarding one who plans on eating bread after the daytime kiddush, some recite leshev before drinking the wine, whereas others recite leshev only before eating the bread.<ref>Mishna Brurah 643:9 </ref>
#According to Sephardim, it is proper to stand for Kiddush. The Ashkenazic practice, however, is to sit.<ref>The Rambam (Sukkah 6:12) writes that one should stand for kiddush, make the bracha of leshev ba’sukkah, sit, and then say shehechiyanu. The Maggid Mishna explains that the Rambam held that one should recite the bracha immediately prior to fulfilling the mitzvah of sitting in the sukkah. The Raavad, however, argues that the bracha is really made upon the eating, and so it should be said sitting down before eating. The Maggid Mishna and Rosh (Sukkah 4:3) agree with the Raavad, and explain that the language of ‘leshev ba’sukkah’ doesn’t refer to literally sitting but to dwelling, as per the pasuk “BaSukkot Teshvu”. Shulchan Aruch 643:2 holds the Rambam and Rama like the Raavad. </ref>

==Lighting Candles in the Sukkah==

#Ideally, the Yom Tov candles should be lit where you are going to eat, in this case, in the Sukkah. However, if there is any concern that it might cause a fire, then one should just have electric lights in the Sukkah and light the candles indoors in the kitchen or bedroom where they can be enjoyed on Yom Tov.<ref>Mateh Efraim 625:33 writes that the candles should be lit in the sukkah. Chazon Ovadia (Sukkot p. 207) writes that the candles can be lit indoors if there's any concern of danger. Responsa Maamer Mordechai 4:12 clarifies that the candles can be lit in the kitchen or bedroom, but the woman should be sure to benefit from them during the night and not just leave them in the kitchen and go somewhere else. Aseh Lecha Rav 2:42 agrees.</ref>
#Even though women are exempt from eating in the Sukkah, it's nevertheless their right to light the candles over the men.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Sukkot p. 213)</ref>

==Forgetting to say Yaale VeYavo==

#If on the first night of [[Sukkot]] one had the required [[Kezayit]] of bread, and in [[benching]] one forgot to say Yaale VeYavo

*if one remembers after saying Baruch Atta Hashem and didn’t conclude [[Boneh]] Yerusalayim, one should conclude with Lamdeni Chukecha, and go back to Yaale VeYavo.
*if one remembers after the entire Bracha of [[Boneh]] Yerushalayim, one should insert the Bracha of Baruch Atta Hashem… Asher Nattan Moadim LeSimcha…Mikadesh Yisrael VeHaZmanim (as printed in the siddur).
*if one remembers after saying Baruch Atta Hashem Eloken Melech HaOlam (of the Bracha of HaTov VeHaMeitiv), one should conclude with Asher Nattan Moadim Lisimcha… and then start the Bracha of HaTov VeHaMeitiv again.
*if one didn’t remember until the middle of HaTov VeHaMeitiv or later, one must repeat [[benching]].<ref>Chazon Ovadyah (pg 101) </ref>

#If one forgot Yaale VeYavo in [[benching]] any other day or night of [[Sukkot]]

*if one remembers after [[Boneh]] Yerusalayim one should say Baruch Atta Hashem…Asher Nattan Moadim LeSimcha…Mikadesh Yisrael VeHaZmanim.
*if one didn’t remember until the middle of HaTov VeHaMeitiv or later, one doesn’t repeat [[benching]].<ref>Chazon Ovadyah (pg 101) </ref>

==Ushpizin==

#It is proper to bring a chair for the ushpizin, like we have a chair at a [[brit mila]] for eliyahu hanavi zachur latov, because if there's no chair they will not come.<ref>Chid"a in Moreh Bietzbah 289, Leket Hakatzir 32:5 pg. 461 </ref>

==Eating or sleeping in the Sukkah before [[Sukkot]]==

#It’s permissible to eat in the [[Sukkah]] before [[Sukkot]] (erev [[Sukkot]]) and it’s not an issue of Bal Tosif.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah pg 481 holds that’s there no issue of Bal Tosif before the mitzvah was done. </ref>

==Other activities in the Sukkah==

#[[Sleeping in the Sukkah]] (click the link)
#One should live in one's [[Sukkah]] like one lives in one's house the rest of the year. Therefore, one should eat, drink, sleep, hang out, speak to one's friend, and learn in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 639:1 writes that one should live in one's [[Sukkah]] like one lives in one's house the rest of the year which includes eating, drinking, and sleeping. Mishna Brurah 639:2 adds speaking to one's friend and BeYitzchak Yikare 639:1 adds hanging out. Regarding speaking with friends, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 147 quotes those who disagree and say that one should only speak words of torah in the [[sukkah]]. See also Sh"t Minchat Shlomo 2:58. Minhagei Chatam Sofer 8:12 it is tells that that the Chatam Sofer only left the sukka once each day for [[Shacharit]]. He even said [[mincha]] and [[maariv]] in the [[sukkah]]. Regarding learning in the [[Sukkah]] see further. </ref>
#One should even bring one's nice utensils into the [[Sukkah]] just like uses them during the year in the house, however, one should not bring one's [[cooking]] pots into the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 639:1 writes that one should bring one's nice untensils into the [[Sukkah]], however, the [[cooking]] pots shouldn't brought in the [[Sukkah]]. The Rama adds that one may leave the [[cooking]] pots in the [[Sukkah]] during the meal but not after the meal, however, the Mishna Brurah 639:5 writes that the minhag is to be strict not to even bring [[cooking]] pots in the [[Sukkah]] during the meal. </ref>
#One should not do any degrading activity in the [[Sukkah]]. Therefore one should not clean the dishes in the [[Sukkah]], however, one may clean the cups.<ref>Rama 639:1, Mishna Brurah 639:9. However, the Ben Ish Chai Haazinu Halacha 9 forbids even cleaning cups except if they are small cups like coffee cups. </ref>
#One may not go to the bathroom in the [[Sukkah]] even if one goes in a pot.<ref>Chayei Adam 147:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 135:2, Aruch Hashulchan 639:4. Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 131 is mekil for someone who is old or sick and it is too difficult for him to leave the sukka to go in a pot, just he warns that he should make sure to cover the pot properly. </ref>
#One shouldn't change a baby's diaper in the [[sukkah]].<ref>Yalkut Yosef moadim pg. 142, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 129. </ref>
#It is permissible to have marital relations in the [[sukkah]].<ref>Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 130 </ref>
#It is permissible to smoke in the [[sukkah]], disregarding the permissibility of smoking in general.<ref>Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 130, for smoking in general, see Yalkut Yosef Hilchot Kibbud Av Vaem 7:footnote 16 and [[Hygiene_%26_Health#Smoking|Smoking]] </ref>
#Because of the holiness of the [[Sukkah]], it's proper to minimize one's mundane speech in the [[Sukkah]] and increase one's speech in Torah and holy matters and all the more so one should be careful not to speak any forbidden speech such as [[Lashon Hara]] or getting angry.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:2, Baer Heitev 639:2, Kaf Hachaim 639:5-6, Bikkurei Yaakov 639:2</ref>

==Learning in the Sukkah==

#One should learn in the [[Sukkah]] unless one isn't unable to concentrate in which case one should learn inside.<ref>Gemara Sukkah 28b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:4. Nitei Gavriel 58:1 quotes the Yarot Dvash (Dorosh 6 s.v. VeZehu) who explains that one who sits in the [[sukkah]] with pure intent, learns, and enjoys the holiday merits a special level of divine presence.
* Is spending time in the sukkah an obligation? Toratcha Shashu'ay (Binyanei Sukkah by R' Toledano ch. 1) quotes Tosfot Rabbi Yehuda Hachiddush Brachot 11b who says that there's no prohibition to do tiyul and learning outside of a sukkah and it is only a mitzvah if you want to. However, Rashi Sukkah 48a s.v. lo says it is an obligation to learn in the sukkah and also Baal Hameor end of pesachim says this as well regarding tiyul. There's two versions of the Rosh Brachot 1:13 regarding this question. Shaar Hatziyun 629:29 holds it is an obligation.</ref>
#If the cold or heat (if one doesn't have air conditioning in the [[Sukkah]]) bothers oneself and one can't concentrate to learn one may learn inside.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:29 writes that if it's too cold for oneself in the [[sukkah]] and one can't concentrate one may learn inside. Natai Gavriel 48:7 extends this where it's too hot and one doesn't have air conditioning in the [[sukkah]]. </ref>
#If it's a pain to bring all the Seforim into the [[Sukkah]] many times (as one needs the space to eat or sleep) then one doesn't have to learn in the [[Sukkah]], however, if one can leave all the Seforim in the [[Sukkah]] for the entire holiday one must do that.<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:29, Natai Gavriel 58:3. see also Kaf Hachaim 639:62 Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] pg. 127 and Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 141 </ref>
#One who usually learns in a Bet Midrash doesn't have to learn in a [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch HaRav 639:4, Kaf HaChaim 639:63, Natai Gavriel 58:6 </ref>
==Davening in a Sukkah==
#One should pray in a shul and not in one's [[Sukkah]] even if one can get a [[minyan]] in the [[Sukkah]]. If there's no shul in one's city if one is able to concentrate in the [[Sukkah]] one should pray in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 639:4 writes that if one wants one may pray in the [[Sukkah]]. The Mishna Brurah 639:30 explains that in the place where one has greater kavanah (concentration) one should pray unless there is a shul in the city in which case one should go there (because during the rest of the year one would leave one's house to go to the shul. Pri Megadim (M"Z 639:14), Kaf HaChaim 639:67, and Nitei Gavriel 58:8 add that one should pray in the established shul even if one can get a [[minyan]] in the [[Sukkah]]. </ref>
==Havdalah in a Sukkah==
#If one usually does [[Havdalah]] at home during [[Sukkot]] one should do it in the [[Sukkah]]. However, those who listen to [[Havdalah]] in the shul can do so also on [[Sukkot]].<ref>Mishna Brurah 639:30, Shaar HaTziyun 639:57, Kaf HaChaim 639:66.
Taz 639:14 explains that davening which is usually outside one's house can be in a shul since it is always outside the house. However, those who generally do havdalah at their house should do it in the sukkah. Pri Megadim M"Z 639:14 writes that the minhag is to do havdalah in the sukkah. The Taz and Mishna Brurah seem to be understanding that the reason to do havdalah in the sukkah is because one should spend one's time and do all of one's normal household activities in one's sukkah. Since one normally does havdalah at home one should do it in the sukkah. Hilchot Chag Bchag ch. 13 fnt. 30 and Shoshanat Yisrael p. 113 understand the Mishna Brurah this way. However, the Shevet Halevi 6:42 understands that the reason to do havdalah in the sukkah seems only to be because havdalah is an established way to drink wine and that requires a sukkah (see Magen Avraham 639:5). If that is the case, in fact, Rav Ovadia (Chazon Ovadia Sukkaot p. 140) disagrees and thinks that there's no obligation to do havdalah in the sukkah since even drinking wine in an established way doesn't need a sukkah according to the Rama 639:2. Additionally, Shoshat Yisrael cites Rav Shlomo Miller as holding that the only reason to do havdalah in the sukkah is because of the drinking.</ref> If one does it in the succah there is a discussion if you should recite the beracha.<ref>Shevet HaLevi 6:42 writes that no beracha of leshev basuccah is recited upon havdalah because it isn't a keviat seuda. However, Chazon Ish quoted in Rivevos Efrayim 1:428 and 3:424 rules that since it is wine for [[havdala]] it elevates the level of drinking to keviat seuda, and therefore would require the beracha. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 58 fnt. 103 cited by Dirshu 639:36) agrees. Rav Elyashiv in Succas Chayim page 202 rules that this applies only to wine and not to grape juice. The Steipler in Orchos Rabbeinu 2: page 228 as well as Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchita 58:22 recommend eating bread immediately after [[havdala]] to avoid any doubts, and recite leseh basuccah Shemirat Shabbat kihilchita recommends reciting the leshev basuccah before the boreh pri hagefen. Sh"t Minchat Yitzchak 9:163 says that one should have in mind when eating seudat shlishit to have in mind specifically, that the leshev basukkah recited then will not cover [[havdala]], then when reciting [[havdala]] say the beracha and immediately start eating melaveh malka. </ref>
# Some say that the if it is difficult to hear for a man to hear havdalah in the sukkah it is permissible for him to listen to havdalah from someone who is exempt from the sukkah because he is pained by going to the sukkah and is saying it outside the sukkah.<ref>Shoshat Yisrael p. 113 quoting Rav Shlomo Miller because there's no reason the one listening to the havdalah needs to be in the sukkah, just the one drinking.</ref>
#Sephardim hold that it is not necessary to recite havdalah in the sukkah.<Ref>Chazon Ovadia Sukkot p. 140 explains that it isn't necessary to do havdalah in the sukkah since drinking wine even in an established way isn't considered a fixed meal that needs to be in a sukkah (Rama 639:2). He adds that this is the minhag.</ref>

==Meetings in a Sukkah==
# A person who is talking with friends should do so in a sukkah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Harav 639:4</ref>
#A community committee meeting can take place as usual and doesn't have to be in the [[Sukkah]].<ref>Nitei Gavriel 58:10 who explains that the [[Sukkah]] is supposed to replace one's home but anyway for the meeting one always leaves one's home to go another place and also that they wouldn't be able to concentrate as well in the [[Sukkah]]. </ref>

==Links==

*[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/55400 Yalkut Yosef Hilchot Sukkah (Hebrew 5776)]

==Sources==
{{Reflist|30em}}
[[Category:Holidays]]
[[Category:Sukkot]]
<references />

Template:Bracha on Mitzvot Aseh Shehazman Grama

2024-08-22T13:10:43Z

Bchernigoff: grammar

There is a major dispute regarding women and the recitation of a beracha when they perform mitzvot that are time bound (which they are exempt from). The Rambam (Hilchot Tzitzit 3:9) holds that since women are exempt from the Mitzvah of [[Tzitzit]], they can't make a Bracha on it (see also Hilchot Shofar Sukkah Vilulav 6:13 about sitting in a Sukkah). On the other hand, the Raavad (Hilchot Tzitzit 3:9) and Tosfot (Eruvin 96a, Rosh Hashanah 33a, Kiddshin 31a s.v. lo mifkadana) quoting Rabbenu Tam, argue that even if women are exempt from a mitzvah, they may recite the bracha if they opt to perform the mitzvah. The Maggid Mishna Hilhot Sukkah 6:13 explains the [[Rambam]] as saying that it is impossible to say VeTzivanu if a person is exempt from the mitzvah. Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 589:6 follows the [[Rambam]], while the Rama Orach Chaim 17:2 accepts the Rabbenu Tam. 
* What emerges from the halacha is that Ashkenazim hold that women may recite the bracha upon a mitzvah that they are volunteering to do, while according to Sepharadim they may not.
* Chacham Ovadia Yosef (Shu"t Yabea Omer 2:OC 6, Shu"t Yechave Daat 1:68, Chazon Ovadia Sukkot 149-151) very strongly encourages following Shulchan Aruch that women should not say a beracha. 
* However, see [[Chida]] (Birkei Yosef 654:2) who opines that even Sephardim have what to rely upon to follow Rabbenu Tam and Kaf Hachaim Orach Chaim 17:4 who quotes this. Similarly, given the dozens of Poskim who rule that a Sephardic woman may recite the beracha, and that this was the custom in their communities, Rav Mordechai Lebhar (Magen Avot, Orach Chaim 589:6) writes that women from those communities may continue with their traditions, but others may not, as the Shulchan Aruch rules stringently and we would say Safek Berachot Lehakel.

Building the Sukkah

2024-08-22T01:47:51Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

[[Image:BuildingSukkah.png|right|200px]]
==Building the Sukkah==

#One should try to begin building the [[sukkah]] immediately after [[Yom Kippur]], so that he goes from one mitzvah to another.<ref>Rama 624:5 and 625:1 </ref>
#One should try to personally be involved in the construction of his [[sukkah]].<ref>Rav Reuven Margolis (Nefesh Chaya 625:1) writes that even one who cannot sit in the [[Sukkah]] for whatever reason, and has no male family members that are required to sit in the [[Sukkah]], should nonetheless have a [[Sukkah]] built to at least perform the mitzvah of "Building" a [[Sukkah]]. He cites the Gemara Makkot 8a, Shvuot 29a, and Yerushalmi [[Berachot]] 9:3 that a beracha is recited on the construction of a [[sukkah]]. </ref> If one is unable to build a [[Sukkah]] on his own and has someone else do it for him, it is proper for the builder to leave off a small amount of Schach for the owner of the [[Sukkah]] to put up by himself.<ref>Kaf HaChaim 625:11. See also [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=684&txtSearch=build%20succah Rabbi Eli Mansour's Dailyhalacha] for a longer discussion </ref>
#Although it's permitted for any person to place the [[schach]]<ref>Shulchan Aruch 635:1 </ref>, it is preferable to be stringent and have an adult Jewish male place it on the [[sukkah]].<ref>Kaf Hachayim 635:8, Chida in Sefer Kaf Achat 24:2 </ref> Others hold that it is totally permitted to have women or children put up the skach.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Sukkot p. 64)</ref>
#When one appoints someone else to build their [[Sukkah]], it is proper to say to them "You are my messenger to do this Mitzvah of putting up my [[Sukkah]] and Schach for the Mitzvah".<ref>Kaf HaChaim 625:11 </ref>

===Taaseh Vilo Min Haasuy===

#One should try to build the walls of the sukkah before putting up the schach.<ref>Rama O.C. 635:1</ref> According to some poskim, if one puts the sechach up on the poles and only afterwards fills in the kosher walls, it is still kosher.<ref>Bach 635, Birkei Yosef 635:2, Maamar Mordechai 635:4, Moed Likol Chai 21:12. Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 38 even allows reciting a beracha on such a sukkah </ref> Others are strict and invalidate the sukkah if this was done.<ref>Levush 638, Taz 635:4, Mishna Brurah 635:10 </ref>
#If one builds a kosher sukkah, and then the walls fall down, whether they fall before Sukkot or during Sukkot, the Sukkah is still kosher when you put the walls back up, and this is not a violation of taaseh vilo min Haasuy.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 40, Kaf Hachaim 635:18; Pekudat Elazer 630, Mikraei Kodesh Sukkot 1:11; Shevet Halevi 7:56 and 8:146 </ref> However, some Poskim rule that if this occurred before Sukkot, one is required to replace the Sechach.<ref>Sh"t Rav Pealim OC 1:34; 3:40</ref>

==Number of Walls of the Sukkah==
<div style="float:right"></div>

#[[File:3D Sukkah Model.jpg|thumb|A kosher sukkah with 2.5 walls.]]A [[Sukkah]] requires a minimum of three walls, each with a length of 7 [[Tefachim]].<ref>The Mishna Sukkah 2a states that a sukkah requires only three walls. The Gemara (Sukkah 6b) quotes a Tosefta (Sukkah 1:9) which records a dispute about how many walls are needed for a sukkah. The Rabbis hold that a sukkah requires two full walls and a third wall of at least a tefach, while Rabbi Shimon holds that a sukkah requires three full walls and a fourth wall of at least a tefach. The Shulchan Aruch 630:2 rules in accordance with the Rabbis. The Chaye Adam (146:3) writes that it is preferable to construct a sukkah with four complete walls, but admits that this is not required.</ref> It's possible to build the third wall without having to complete it, but see footnote for details.<ref>Mishna Brurah 630:6 understands Shulchan Aruch 630:2 as holding that the third wall doesn't need to be a full wall of 7 [[Tefachim]], but must nevertheless still look like a wall. It's therefore permissible to build two walls next to each other at a right angle (say one is from southwest to southeast and the other is southeast to northeast), and then a third wall (from northeast to northwest) that is slightly over one [[Tefach]] thick, and within 3 [[Tefachim]] to one of the two other walls (within 3 [[Tefachim]] of the northeast corner), and also a pole at the end of 7 [[Tefachim]] (7 [[Tefachim]] from the northeast corner) and a pole on top of the more than one [[tefach]] wall and the pole at the end of 7 [[Tefachim]]. See picture. [[Image:Minimum_sukkah.png | 100px | right]]</ref>

===Dimensions===

#The minimum measure of a [[Sukkah]] is 7 [[Tefachim]] in length by 7 [[Tefachim]] in width and 10 [[Tefachim]] in height.<ref>Gemara Sukkah 3a, Shulchan Aruch 633:8, 634:1, Chazon Ovadia [[sukkot]] page 9.

*The Gemara records three opinions regarding the minimum area of a sukkah. Rebbe believes that the minimum area is four amot by four amot. (This is the shiur needed for the definition of a "bayit" (house) in halacha. Thus, the minimum size house needed to be obligated in mezuzah, building a fence, and tzara'at on the house, is four amot by four amot). Beit Hillel maintains that a sukkah only needs to fit one’s head and body, which is estimated to be about six by six tefachim. Beit Shammai rules that the sukkah must also be able to fit a small table, and thus must be at least seven by seven tefachim. The Gemara rules in accordance with Beit Shamai, and this is codified in the Shulchan Aruch 634:1. See Tosfot 3a s.v. di’amar for a list of six cases where the halacha is in accordance with Beit Shammai.</ref> If the decorations cause the sukkah to be smaller than 7x7, it is invalid.<ref>Gemara 10b, Shulchan Aruch 634:3</ref>
#It is permitted to make a sukkah in different shapes, provided that it's big enough to fit a sukkah of 7 x 7 tefachim. However, according to most poskim, a sukkah which is narrower than 7 tefachim but longer than 7 tefachim (so that it's at least 49 square tefachim), is invalid.<ref>This issue is discussed by the Achronim. The Bach 634:2 learns from Tosfot 3a said that such a sukkah is kosher. However, the Magen Avraham 634:1 and Taz 634:1 argue that it is invalid, and think that the Bach's version of Tosfot is incorrect. From the Tosfot Rosh s.v. baneha and Tosfot Rabbenu Peretz s.v. lo, it is clear that the Magen Avraham and Taz's version of Tosfot are correct. The Mishna Brurah 634:1 writes that most Achronim agree that this sukkah is invalid. Chazon Ovadia p. 11 agrees. Shulchan Aruch 634:2 writes that one may construct a sukkah of other shapes, such as a circle, as long as a sukkah of 7x7 tefachim can fit inside it. </ref>
#A sukkah must be at least ten tefachim tall.<ref>Mishna (Sukkah 2a), Rambam Hilchot Sukkah 4:1, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 633:8 </ref> If a sukkah is ten tefachim tall but there are branches of schach hanging down within the ten tefachim, the sukkah is invalid since it isn't fit for living. However, if there are decorations hanging from the ceiling, they are considered part of the sukkah and the sukkah is valid.<ref>Rava (Gemara Sukkah 4a) says that if there are branches hanging down into a ten tefach sukkah, it's invalid since it isn't livable. On the other hand, on 10b, the Gemara establishes that the decorations of a sukkah don't minimize its area. Shulchan Aruch 633:10 codifies this halacha. The Taz 633:10 explains that as long as the decorations don't bother you, it doesn't minimize the sukkah. </ref>
#If the walls of the sukkah are 10 tefachim tall, but do not reach all the way up to the sechach, the sukkah is kosher as long as the walls are lined up with the roof, or are within 3 tefachim of being lined up with the roof. This works based on the principle of gud asik mechitzta, which means that once you have a halakhic wall (minimum of ten tefachim), we view the walls as extending to the top and meeting the roof.<ref>Mishna Brurah 630:43, Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 12.

*Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:9 teaches based on the Gemara (Sukkah 16a) that the walls don’t have to reach the schach, as long as they line up within three tefachim of the schach. Mishna Brurah 630:43 and Chazon Ovadia p. 12 write that this is based on the concept of gud asik, that is, we view the walls as extending upward.
*The Gemara (Sukkah 6b) mentions that gud asik is a halacha limoshe misinai. The Gemara (Sukkah 4b) records a dispute as to whether one can build a sukkah without walls on the top of a flat roof utilizing the principle of gud asik. Rambam (Hilchot Sukkah 4:11) rules like R’ Yaakov who holds that if the schach is aligned with the walls of the house, the sukkah is valid because we view it as if the walls of the building extend upward. If the schach is not aligned with the walls of the house, the sukkah is invalid. Rosh (Sukkah 1:6) disagrees and rules like the Chachamim, that in either case the sukkah built without walls on a roof is invalid. Shulchan Aruch 630:6 quotes both opinions, but Mishna Brurah 630:30 is machmir for the Rosh.
*The question then comes up, that if we do not accept the application of gud asik in the case of the roof, then why do we accept gud asik in general, to extend the walls of a ten tefach wall up to the roof? The Steipler (Kehilot Yaakov Siman 4) suggests that it's possible that there is no requirement for the walls of a Sukkah to reach its roof. The only requirement is that you have a wall of ten tefachim, and once you have that, the Sukkah is Kosher, even though we don't view the walls as extending upwards. Therefore, the reason why the Sukkah on the roof is invalid, is because the Sukkah lacks walls, and we can't count the walls of the house, as we don't view them as extending upwards. Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani Sukkot p. 228) explains that even though the Mishna Brurah was machmir for the Rosh, that's when the sukkah itself has no walls and we want to extend the walls of the building beyond the roof. However, in this case, the sukkah itself has defined walls and we are extending them.
*Rabbi Akiva Eiger (responsa 12) questions the psak of the Shulchan Aruch based on a Ran (Sukkah 9a), who says that one cannot use lavud with another leniency. Therefore, in this case, one cannot combine both the kula of lavud as well as that of gud asik. However, the above approach of the Steipler resolves this issue. The Steipler's whole point is that once the walls are ten tefachim, that's sufficient, and you don't need to apply gud asik to view the walls as extending upwards. Since there's no need for gud asik, we can apply lavud and stil be consistent with the aforementioned Ran. See also Chazon Ish 77:7 for another solution to Rabbi Akiva Eiger’s question. Mishna Brurah 632:4 allows combining lavud and gud asik, but quotes a dispute about whether or not it's permitted to combine gud asik and dofen akuma.</ref> The walls are kosher, even if they don't touch the ground, as long as they begin within 3 tefachim of the ground. Also, even if the walls are both within 3 tefachim of the ground and don't reach the schach above, the Sukkah is still valid.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:9</ref>
#There is no maximum to the width or length of a Sukkah. However, the maximum height of a Sukkah is 20 [[Amot]]. If it is higher than 20 Amot then it's invalid.<ref>Mishna Sukkah 1:1, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 633:1, 634:1. Gemara 2a-2b offers a number of reasons for the why the maximum height is 20 amot. Rabbah suggests that a person needs to be cognizant of the fact that he's in a sukkah, and if the skach is over 20 amot, then he won't be able to see it easily and maintain this awareness. R' Zera suggests that a person needs to be under the shade of the skach, and once the walls are so high that they're above 20 amot, he's under the shade of the walls, not the skach. Rava posits that once a sukkah is over 20 amot, it's a dirat keva, a permanent structure, while a sukkah needs to be a dirat aray, a temporary structure.

</ref>
#If a sukkah is only 7x7 tefachim, and its height is just under 20 Amot, it is valid.<ref>Tashbetz 1:126 writes that even though according to Rabbi Zeira any sukkah in which one doesn't sit in the shade of the schach but in the shade of the walls it is invalid. He extends the idea of the gemara that if it is 4x4 amot wide and more than 20 amot tall to a sukkah that is 2x2 wide and more than 10 amot tall. In conclusion he rules that we don't follow the opinion of Rabbi Zeira.</ref>
#The walls of the sukkah must be built within 3 [[Tefachim]] of the ground.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 630:9, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Halichot Shlomo (7:5, p. 100), Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 12 </ref>

===Arrangement of the Walls===
===Two L-Shaped Walls with 1 Tefach Protrusion===
[[File:L 1 Tefach Sukkah.png|110px|right]]

#It is possible to make a Sukkah with two connected walls and a third wall of slightly more than a tefach. That protrusion has to be placed at the end of slightly less than 3 tefachim from one of the walls. Then a pole that is 4 tefachim away from the 1 tefach wall and a string on top of the pole and one tefach wall to indicate that there's an appearance of a doorway (''Tzurat Hapetach'') between the wall and pole.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:2</ref>

===Two L-Shaped Walls with Parallel Wall===
[[Image:L I Sukkah.png|110px|right]]

#It is perfectly kosher to have three walls two of which are parallel and two are adjacent in an L shape as such as long as each is 7 tefachim.<ref>Chut Shani p. 225</ref>

===Two Parallel Walls with 4 Tefach Protrusion===
[[Image:4 Tefach Sukkah.png|right|110px]]

#If one has two walls facing one another and the third is four [[Tefachim]] it must be within 3 [[Tefachim]] of one side and within 3 of the other or at least have a tzurat hapetach to the second side.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:3 </ref>

===Two Parallel Walls with 7 Tefach Protrusion===
[[Image:2 Parallel Walls with 7 Tefach Protrusion.png|right|110px]]

#If the third wall is a complete wall of 7 tefachim the sukkah is valid even if it is far from the other walls.<ref>Chut Shani (Sukkah p. 225). Chut Shani implies that the only time that Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:5 requires a tzurat hapetach is when there is a a third wall of a tefach that is completed by a tzurat hapetach. However, if the third wall is 7 tefachim you don't need a tzurat hapetach even if it is more than 10 amot of a break. See Mishna Brurah 630:18 who implies otherwise. </ref>
#If a Sukkah has two walls parallel to each other, it can be made kosher with a third wall that is only slightly more than 4 tefachim and is placed within 3 tefachim of one of the other walls. The Sukkah should have a Tzurat Hapetach (appearance of a door) connecting the 4 tefach wall with the opposite wall.<ref>Gemara Sukkah 7a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:3. Mishna Brurah 630:15 quotes the Magen Avraham who wasn't sure if this case is effective unless it is a small Sukkah of 7 tefachim by 7 tefachim and there is no gap between the 4 tefach wall and the other parallel wall. However, he concludes that most disagree with the Magen Avraham and validate this Sukkah. Kaf HaChayim on Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 630:29:1 and Hilchot Chag Bchag (Sukkah 5:9 p. 119) are lenient. </ref>
#If the Sukkah has two parallel walls and a 7 tefachim or more protrusion from one side then it is valid without any Tzurat Hapetach. If there is a gap of more than 10 amot there should be a tzurat hapetach connecting the 7 tefach wall with the opposite wall.<ref>Rama O.C. 630:3, Mishna Brurah 630:18, Hilchot Chag Bchag (Sukkah 5:9 p. 119)</ref>
#If a Sukkah has 2 walls and a third wall of 4 tefachim that needs to be completed with a tzurat hapetach, it is acceptable even if the doorframe has something in the way blocking access to actually walking through the doorframe. An example of this is with a porch that has a lintel as the doorframe connecting the 4 tefach wall to another wall and beneath the doorframe is a banister.<ref>Chut Shani p. 225 explains based on Chazon Ish Eruvin 70:19 that a doorframe is valid even if it isn't accessible to be used as a door because the space beneath it is cluttered since it is accessible on the other side. Even though one couldn't actually go through the door but it is seen as a door since on the inside it stands as a door.</ref> (This is assuming that the banister is not the dimensions of a wall itself.)
[[Image:Porch_with_Tzurat_Hapetach.png|right|150px]]

===Completely Lavud===

#Sephardim hold that one may create the walls of the sukkah by placing several poles within three tefachim of each other. This is true whether the poles are placed horizontally or vertically.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 630:18 writes that one may create a sukkah with three walls by placing poles within 3 tefachim of each other, either horizontally or vertically. Chazon Ovadia pp. 5-6 agrees and thus allows building a sukkah on a porch enclosed on three sides by bars with less than three tefachim space between them.</ref>
#Ashkenazim only allow using lavud for all the walls if one makes 4 walls with lavud, or if one has cloth walls in addition to the 3 lavud walls.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Halichot Shlomo (7:2, p. 98). However, Tosfot (Sukkah 16b s.v. bifachot) holds that one cannot create a wall completely based on lavud. In other words, one cannot make entire walls of either vertical or horizontal beams within three tefachim of each other. Magen Avraham 630:1 writes that Tosfot would validate a sukkah with walls made of only vertical or horizontal beams if the sukkah has four walls. Mishna Brurah 630:7 rules like this Magen Avraham, but in Shaar Hatziyun 630:49 he allows the use of vertical or horizontal beams to construct a three-walled sukkah when clothes are used to form the walls. In this case, even if one is strict to not use cloth, one can be lenient because the lavud walls would serve as backup if the cloth did untie. Chazon Ish 75:12 is strict even if one builds four walls with these beams, against the Magen Avraham and Mishna Brurah. Bikkurei Yakov 630:4 also disagrees with the Magen Avraham and disallows lavud walls even if there are four walls. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/972040/rabbi-hershel-schachter/inyonei-succos-5781/ Rav Hershel Schachter (Inyonei Succos 5781 min 36-8)] explained that we follow that the Mishna Brurah that if there are four walls it is sufficient with lavud in one direction. Therefore, in the days of corona those who want to use sukkah's with no walls so that there's less of a health concern can do so with lavud of four walls.

*Chut Shani Sukkot p. 229 adds that even according to the Magen Avraham a wall of four tefachim can be joined to two L shaped walls with lavud even if there isn't four walls. Creating a wall with lavud is impermissible, but attaching walls can have lavud.</ref>
#If the walls have lavud in both the horizontal and vertical directions, it is permissible even with three walls according to everyone.<ref>Magen Avraham 630:1, Chut Shani Sukkot p. 229</ref>
===Schach That Extends Beyond the Walls===
[[File:S%27chach_Beyond_Sukkah.png|150px|right]]
#If there are 3 walls of 7 tefachim which are all attached, and one of the protruding walls is longer than the other, the schach that extends along that longer wall is valid and included in the sukkah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 631:7, Mishna Brurah 631:15 </ref>
# One cannot eat nor sleep under Schach that extends beyond the Sukkah walls, unless that area has the dimensions of a Sukkah (7x7 tefachim) and has three walls.<ref>Sukkah 19a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 631:6. The only nuance that it is valid once it has the dimensions of a sukkah and has three walls is that the middle wall wasn't built for the outer Sukkah, it was only built for the inner sukkah and nonetheless that is acceptable.</ref>

==Building a Sukkah in the street==

#If there's no room on private property to build a [[Sukkah]], it's permissible to build it in a public street, provided that the city leaders (mayor) give permission to do so. However, one should make sure that the [[Sukkah]] doesn't block walkers (traffic).<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Halichot Shlomo (7:11, pg 109) </ref>

==Materials for walls of Sukkah==

#All materials may be used for the walls of a [[Sukkah]] (see next halacha). Some say that that a pious person should preferably only use materials that aren't biblically unfit for [[S'chach]].<ref>The Mishna Sukkah 12a declares that all materials are valid for the walls. Shulchan Aruch 630:1 codifies this. Interestingly, the Bach OC 630:1 writes that a pious person should be strict for the Or Zarua (Hilchot Sukkah 2:289:2 quoted by Hagahot Ashri 1:24) who holds that one should not use materials that one may not use for schach for the walls of the sukkah, such as materials that are susceptible to impurity. The Biur Hagra 630:1 questions the Hagahot Ashri, since the Yerushalmi he quotes as a proof, in fact says exactly the opposite. Beiur Halacha s.v. Kol quotes two reasons that a pious person should be strict only to use materials that are not unfit biblically for [[S'chach]] based on the Bach siman 630, but quotes others who reject this stringency. See Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] 1-2 for a list of poskim as well even though he allows the use of these materials. Chazon Ovadia pp. 1-2 as well as Aruch Hashulchan 630:1-2 both say that most achronim do not hold of this stringency and allow one to use materials that are mekabel tumah for the walls. </ref> Nonetheless, one should avoid using any material that emits a foul odor.<ref>Rama 630:1</ref>
#Accordingly, one may even form a sukkah outside of one’s car by opening the doors on one side of the car and placing schach over them.<ref>R’ Moshe Heinemann permits this (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1000/sukkah.car.html) . When building one’s sukkah in this manner he should also ensure that 1) the doors of the sukkah reach within three tefachim of the ground, to accomplish this it may help to park near the curb (see section titled “Lavud”) 2) the door on the opposite side of the car remains closed, 3) one may not use the seat of the car as one’s table even if he only plans to eat under the schach. </ref>
#Many authorities hold that plastic curtains (tarp, canvas) are unfit for walls of a [[Sukkah]], while others permit. [This is not because of an issue with the material itself but because of an issue with it blowing in the wind.] <ref>Rav Ovadiah Yosef in Chazon Ovadyah (pg 1-5), Yabia Omer OC 9:59, and Yechave Daat 3:46, Rav Menashe Klein Mishnah Halachot 512, Rav Chaim Zonnenfeld in Salmat Chaim 254 and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Halichot Shlomo ([[Sukkah]] 7:1 pg 97) hold that plastic curtains that sway in the wind even slightly are unfit for walls of a [[Sukkah]]. [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/764662/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/%D7%A2%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99_%D7%99%D7%95%D7%94%D7%9B'%D7%A4_%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%AA Rav Hershel Schachter] (min 72-80) explains that even though the Chazon Ish (hilchot eruvin 13:6) was lenient, most poskim are strict. In a situation of extreme need Rav Schachter thought one could rely on the Chazon Ish to eat in such a sukkah. 
'''Background'''
*In Gemara Sukkah 24b, Rav Acha Bar Yaakov states that a wall that cannot stand in the wind is not considered a valid wall. The Chazon Ish (Hilchot Eruvin 13:6) suggests that a wall is not valid only if it falls or sways more than three tefachim in normal wind. However, Rav Ovadia Yosef in Chazon Ovadia pp. 1-5 and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo Sukkah 7:1 p. 97) hold that plastic curtains that sway in the wind even slightly are unfit for walls of a Sukkah. Rav Ovadia adds, based on Shulchan Aruch 630:10, that this is true even if one ties down the ends because we are concerned that the ties will loosen and that he will not notice. Rav Moshe Feinstein in Sh”t Iggrot Moshe 5:40:2 writes that one should not misinterpret the prevalence of these canvas sukkot as an endorsement of their validity. On the other hand, some achronim (Rav Sonnenfeld, Rav Menashe Klein, and Rav Shternbuch all cited in Piskei Teshuvot 630:9) justify the common practice to use canvas Sukkot since nowadays they are put together well, so the concern of the Shulchan Aruch that the ties may become loose no longer applies.
*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/764662/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/%D7%A2%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99_%D7%99%D7%95%D7%94%D7%9B'%D7%A4_%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%AA Rav Hershel Schachter] (“Inyonei Yom Kippur VeSukkot” min 72-80) explains that even though the Chazon Ish (Hilchot Eruvin 13:6) was lenient, most poskim are strict.
*Rav Moshe Feinstein writes that if the canvas walls wouldn't move in the wind more than 3 tefachim without being tied down, then they are acceptable when they are tied down to the top and bottom of the frame. His reasoning is that Shulchan Aruch was only strict about a cloth that could become untied and sway more than 3 tefachim but if the cloth even if untied wouldn't sway more than 3 tefachim is permitted if tied. However, it still needs to be tied so that it doesn't move in a normal wind so that it is similar to an established house wall. Yet, since the Shulchan Aruch was strict about using cloths for walls of a Sukkah and the achronim don't distinguish between using different types of cloths one shouldn't use a canvas sukkah unless there's nothing else available. [It is questionable if today's canvas sukkah's would fit the standards of Rav Moshe of not swaying 3 tefachim in the wind without being tied down.]
*Hilchot Chag Bichag pp. 87-90 and Rav Menashe Klein (Mishneh Halachot 5:77) recommend, therefore, to place poles or cords horizontally across the sukkah within three tefachim of each other up to a height of ten tefachim, and, combined with the canvas, this would be a perfectly valid sukkah.</ref>
#Even though a Tzurat Hapetach is considered a wall for the halachos of Kilayim and Eruvin, it isn’t considered a wall for the critical walls of a Sukkah.<ref>Korban Netanel 1:8:60 quoting Ran</ref>

==When should one build the Sukkah?==

#The pious are careful to build to begin building the [[Sukkah]] on Motzei [[Yom Kippur]] and finish it the next day in order to go from one mitzvah ([[Yom Kippur]]) to another ([[Sukkot]]).<ref>Rama 624:5, Mishna Brurah 624:19, Yalkut Yosef Moadim page 118, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] page 99 </ref>
#If there is a [[shabbat]] between [[Yom Kippur]] and [[Sukkot]] some poskim say that there is an obligation to build it before that [[shabbat]].<ref>Avnei Nezer 459 writes that this obligation isn't just because of zrizin makdimin limitzvot and therefore it is an obligation. However, the Minchat Elazar 4:55 writes that this is not an obligation but just the preferred option, and this is the conclusion of Yalkut Yosef page 118 and Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] page 99.</ref>
#Preferably, one should build it for himself, but if this isn't possible he should appoint an agent to do it for him and strive to at least take part in the building in some form even if this means missing out on more learning time.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Moadim page 199, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] page 99 </ref>
#If a [[Sukkah]] was set up with the [[S'chach]] from before 30 days before [[sukkot]] and it wasn't made for the purpose of the mitzvah of [[Sukkot]] one must change or improve one thing (such as putting down [[S'chach]]) of an area a [[Tefach]] by a [[Tefach]] or the whole width even if it's of minimal length (or vice versa). However, if it was made within 30 days of [[Sukkot]] or was made for the express purpose of [[Sukkot]] it's fit even without any change. However, if the [[Sukkah]] was originally built for [[Sukkot]] and stands unchanged year to year it requires some change the each year. This is only if the [[S'chach]] was put in advance but if just the walls were putup in advance and not the [[S'chach]] there's no issue.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 636:1, Mishna Brurah 636:1, 5-7. Mishna Brurah 636:4 also points out that this is only the preferable course of action (but after the fact isn't absolutely necessary). </ref>
#If one forgot intentionally or unintentionally to build a [[Sukkah]] before [[Sukkot]] one can build it on [[chol hamoed]]. One may, however, not build it or fix it on [[Yom Tov]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 637:1, Mishna Brurah 637:1. See [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/782407/_Shay_Schachter/Building_a_Succah_on_Chol_Hamoed_and_Being_Usable_for_Seven_Days Rabbi Shay Schachter in a shiur on yutorah.org] who discusses the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer who wouldn't allow building a [[Sukkah]] on [[Chol HaMoed]].</ref>
##If one builds a [[Sukkah]] on [[Chol HaMoed]], one should recite a [[Shehechiyanu]] the first time one sits in the newly built [[Sukkah]].<ref>Yalkut Yosef 637:1 and Rivevot Efraim 6:337:1. See, however, Az Nidbaru 13:39 who argues that the shehechiyanu is made upon the building the sukkah as it is a preparation for a mitzvah but once one made shehechiyanu upon the primary mitzvah, sitting in the sukkah, there is no more of a reason to recite when building a sukkah in the middle of sukkot. Yalkut Yosef Sukkah p. 487 supports this ruling from the Masat Moshe 1:5 and Mikrei Kodesh 1:25 unlike the Betzel Chachma 5:171, Shraga Hameir 5:72, and Kinyan Torah 4:76 who hold not to recite shehechiyanu in the middle of Sukkot.</ref>
#On Friday afternoon, ideally one should build the Sukkah before midday. However, many poskim hold that it is permissible to do so even in the afternoon until nine and a half hours into the day.<ref>Pesachim 50b establishes that someone who works after mincha on Friday will not see any bracha to see work. Mordechai (Pesachim 5:603) quotes the Maharam who explains that it is after mincha gedola, meaning after midday, which is a half hour beforehand. However, Rashi (Pesachim 50b s.v. min) says that the gemara refers to mincha ketana, which is nine and a half hours into the day. Both opinions are cited in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 251:1. Mishna Brurah 251:2 writes that someone who is lenient doesn't lose out. The Pri Megadim E"A 625:1 writes that it is forbidden to build a sukkah after midday on Friday based on siman 251. Mishna Brurah 625:2 cites the Pri Megadim and agrees. However, the Bikkurei Yakov 625:5 disputes this because the achronim, including the Magen Avraham, Taz, and Eliya Rabba in siman 251 are lenient to follow Rashi. Therefore, he allows building the sukkah until mincha ketana.</ref>

==Decorations of the Sukkah==

#It is a mitzvah to decorate and beautify the [[sukkah]].<ref>Gemara [[Shabbat]] 133b, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 74). Mishna Brurah 638:11 writes that it's a mitzvah to decorate the [[sukkah]] with important fruit and clothes, however, one should not hang nice fruit if one has children and one knows that the children will rip them down and eat them. The concept of hidur mitzva, beautification of mitzvot is brought down in Shabbat 133b based on the pasuk “Zeh Eli VeAnvehu” - “This is my God and I will Beautify His Mitzvot”. The Raavad (cited in Chidushei Anshei Shem, Brachos 38a, no. 2) suggests that Hiddur Mitzvah is a biblical commandment, whereas the Ritva (Sukkah 11b s.v. Vi’ee) holds that it is only rabbinic. </ref>
#On Shabbat and Yom Tov one must ensure not to move any of the sukkah decorations because they are muktzah.<ref>Rama 638:2, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 83) </ref>
#If one needs to remove a decoration because of fear of rain or thieves on [[Shabbat]] or [[Yom Tov]] preferably one should stipulate (as above). Nonetheless, if one forgot then he may remove them.<ref>Mishna Brurah 638:24, Chazon Ovadia ([[Sukkot]] pg 92), Shalmei Moed (pg 107) </ref> On [[Chol Ha'moed]] the decorations may always be removed even without a stipulation.<ref>Piskei Tshuvot page 361 </ref>
#The decorations of the [[Sukkah]] are forbidden from benefit from the first day of [[Sukkot]] until after [[Simchat Torah]] unless one stipulates before [[Yom Tov]] that I want to be able to eat and get benefit from these decorations at any time during the holiday.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 638:2, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 77) , mishna brura 638:2</ref> This is true about decorations on the walls as well.<ref>Although the Shulchan Aruch 638:2 writes that anything “hanging in the sukkah” is forbidden to derive benefit from, the Mishna Brurah 638:10 writes that this status also extends to other decorations hanging from the walls of the sukkah.</ref>
#If the decorations fell on [[Chol HaMoed]] one may move them and put them back up. However, one may not benefit from it (if it's food one may not eat it) unless one stipulated as above.<ref>Mishna Brurah 638:14, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 83)</ref>
#One who hangs hadasim or other things which smell nice in the Sukkah, is allowed to smell them and recite a beracha.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 87, Bikkurei Yaakov 638:19, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 638:5. Ritva Sukkah 37b d"h Hadas Shel Mitzva explains that even though you are not allowed to smell the hadas which you are using for the mitzva of Arbaa Minim, you are allowed to smell ones that are hanging in the sukkah. </ref>
#One should make sure to keep the decorations hanging from the [[S'chach]] within 4 [[Tefachim]] of the [[S'chach]].<ref>Rama 627:4</ref> Some say that the decorations only need to begin within 4 [[Tefachim]] of the S'chach.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah (Sukkot pg 76) writes that it's only lechatchila to have the decorations within 4 tefachim of the s'chach. Then he says perhaps it only needs to start within 4 tefachim of the s'chach. Rav Yacov Kamenetsky in Emet LeYacov Shulchan Aruch 627 writes that the beginning of the decoration has to be within 4 tefachim of the s'chach. </ref>

===Types of Decorations===

#One who makes colored paper chains as a decoration of the [[Sukkah]] should make sure that it is within 4 [[Tefachim]] of the [[S'chach]]. After the fact, it is, nonetheless, fit to sit, eat, and sleep under.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 76) </ref>
#If one places an artistic covering underneath his schach within four tefachim of the schach and his intention is to beautify the sukkah the sukkah is kosher. However, if the covering is placed above the schach or if it isn’t to beautify the sukkah, the sukkah is invalid.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 627:4. Chazon Ovadia p. 84 writes that if one’s intention is to both beautify the sukkah and to protect oneself from the sun and rain the sukkah is kosher. </ref>
#One must avoid writing any pesukim for the sole purpose of decorating his sukkah because it is forbidden to write pesukim unless it is a whole sefer.<ref>S”A 638:2, Magen Avraham 638, Ginat Veradim OC 2:25. Rambam Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:14 and Shulchan Aruch YD 283</ref> Nonetheless, one may purchase printed pesukim to hang in his sukkah.<ref>Piskei Teshuvot p. 363, Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 92 </ref>
#One who hangs pictures of rabbis in his home, are permitted to hang them in the sukkah for decorations as well.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 77, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=1717 Rabbi Eli Mansour] </ref>
#Decorations that are really made for non-Jewish holidays, are still allowed to be used as sukkah decorations, because the designation for non-Jewish holidays alone is not of consequence (Hazmana Lav Milta Hi) <ref>Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 77, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=1717 Rabbi Eli Mansour], Shu"t Shevet Halevi 2:57, Shu"t Shevet Hakehati 2:215</ref>

==Miscellaneous==

#A [[sukkah]] built for [[sukkot]] is exempt from a [[mezuza]] since it is a temporary structure.<ref>Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] page 94, Shulchan Aruch YD 286:11 based on Yoma 10b. </ref>
#A [[sukkah]] built on a wagon, car, ship, etc. is kosher, and one who sits in it can recite the beracha of leshev basukkah even while it is moving.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Moadim page 121, Yechave Daat 3:47, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] page 169. </ref>
#Throughout the entire holiday, it is biblically forbidden to derive benefit from any of the essential materials used in building the sukkah. Regarding these materials, a stipulation will not permit one to derive benefit from them.<ref>Mishna Brurah 638:1 explaining Shulchan Aruch there. See Tosfot (Sukkah 9a s.v. minayin). The Rama 638:1 notes that the essential materials of the sukkah can’t be used even if makes a stipulation that they should not be designated for a mitzvah. However, one may derive benefit from the noyai sukkah, the decorations of the sukkah, if one makes a stipulation.</ref>

==Covering the Sukkah in case of Rain==

#It's permissible to cover the [[Sukkah]] on Shabbat and Yom Tov with a plastic tarp to prevent it from getting wet if one places the tarp directly above the Schach and not a [[tefach]] above the Schach and one has in mind to remove the tarp when one next uses the [[Sukkah]] for the mitzvah.<ref>Sh"t Igrot Moshe 5:39(4) writes that it's permissible to cover the [[Sukkah]] with a plastic sheet on [[Shabbat]] and [[Yom Tov]] without an issue of Boneh by making an Ohel nor the issue of [[muktzeh]]. </ref>

==Using Someone Else's Sukkah without their Permission==

#One shouldn't use someone's sukkah without their permission.<ref>Rama 637:3, Halachos of Other People's pg. 67 

*Mishna Brura 637:9 quotes the Taz 637:4 that the reason for this is that it would be an invasion of the owner's privacy
*Mishna Brura 637:9 quotes Eliya Rabba 637:3 who explains that you might not finish eating before the owner wants to enter, and the owner will be too embarrassed to ask you to leave
*Mekor Chaim 637 says because you might leave a mess.
*Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 68 note 184 writes that the practical difference between these reasons is that according to the first two, one who is certain that the owner is not around would be permitted to use it, but he would not be allowed to use it according to the third reason.</ref>

==Fixing a Sukkah That Fell on Yom Tov==

#It is permissible to ask a non-Jew to fix sachach that fell down on Yom Tov.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 8:50, Rivevot Efraim 1:424:1</ref>

==Links==

*[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/55400 Yalkut Yosef Hilchot Sukkah (Hebrew 5776)]
*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/818863/Rabbi_Zvi_Sobolofsky/Halacha_l-Moshe_Misinai_Laws_in_relation_to_the_walls_of_a_Sukkah Halacha liMoshe Misinai Laws in relation to the walls of a Sukkah] by Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky
*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/776490/Rabbi_Zvi_Sobolofsky/The_Laws_of_Building_a_Sukka_-_Walls_and_Schach The Laws of Building a Sukka-Walls and Schach] by Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky

==Sources==
{{Reflist|30em}}
[[Category:Holidays]]
[[Category:Sukkot]]
<references />

Building the Sukkah

2024-08-22T01:45:45Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

[[Image:BuildingSukkah.png|right|200px]]
==Building the Sukkah==

#One should try to begin building the [[sukkah]] immediately after [[Yom Kippur]], so that he goes from one mitzvah to another.<ref>Rama 624:5 and 625:1 </ref>
#One should try to personally be involved in the construction of his [[sukkah]].<ref>Rav Reuven Margolis (Nefesh Chaya 625:1) writes that even one who cannot sit in the [[Sukkah]] for whatever reason, and has no male family members that are required to sit in the [[Sukkah]], should nonetheless have a [[Sukkah]] built to at least perform the mitzvah of "Building" a [[Sukkah]]. He cites the Gemara Makkot 8a, Shvuot 29a, and Yerushalmi [[Berachot]] 9:3 that a beracha is recited on the construction of a [[sukkah]]. </ref> If one is unable to build a [[Sukkah]] on his own and has someone else do it for him, it is proper for the builder to leave off a small amount of Schach for the owner of the [[Sukkah]] to put up by himself.<ref>Kaf HaChaim 625:11. See also [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=684&txtSearch=build%20succah Rabbi Eli Mansour's Dailyhalacha] for a longer discussion </ref>
#Although it's permitted for any person to place the [[schach]]<ref>Shulchan Aruch 635:1 </ref>, it is preferable to be stringent and have an adult Jewish male place it on the [[sukkah]].<ref>Kaf Hachayim 635:8, Chida in Sefer Kaf Achat 24:2 </ref> Others hold that it is totally permitted to have women or children put up the skach.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Sukkot p. 64)</ref>
#When one appoints someone else to build their [[Sukkah]], it is proper to say to them "You are my messenger to do this Mitzvah of putting up my [[Sukkah]] and Schach for the Mitzvah".<ref>Kaf HaChaim 625:11 </ref>

===Taaseh Vilo Min Haasuy===

#One should try to build the walls of the sukkah before putting up the schach.<ref>Rama O.C. 635:1</ref> According to some poskim, if one puts the sechach up on the poles and only afterwards fills in the kosher walls, it is still kosher.<ref>Bach 635, Birkei Yosef 635:2, Maamar Mordechai 635:4, Moed Likol Chai 21:12. Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 38 even allows reciting a beracha on such a sukkah </ref> Others are strict and invalidate the sukkah if this was done.<ref>Levush 638, Taz 635:4, Mishna Brurah 635:10 </ref>
#If one builds a kosher sukkah, and then the walls fall down, whether they fall before Sukkot or during Sukkot, the Sukkah is still kosher when you put the walls back up, and this is not a violation of taaseh vilo min Haasuy.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 40, Kaf Hachaim 635:18; Pekudat Elazer 630, Mikraei Kodesh Sukkot 1:11; Shevet Halevi 7:56 and 8:146 </ref> However, some Poskim rule that if this occurred before Sukkot, one is required to replace the Sechach.<ref>Sh"t Rav Pealim OC 1:34; 3:40</ref>

==Number of Walls of the Sukkah==
<div style="float:right"></div>

#[[File:3D Sukkah Model.jpg|thumb|A kosher sukkah with 2.5 walls.]]A [[Sukkah]] requires a minimum of three walls, each with a length of 7 [[Tefachim]].<ref>The Mishna Sukkah 2a states that a sukkah requires only three walls. The Gemara (Sukkah 6b) quotes a Tosefta (Sukkah 1:9) which records a dispute about how many walls are needed for a sukkah. The Rabbis hold that a sukkah requires two full walls and a third wall of at least a tefach, while Rabbi Shimon holds that a sukkah requires three full walls and a fourth wall of at least a tefach. The Shulchan Aruch 630:2 rules in accordance with the Rabbis. The Chaye Adam (146:3) writes that it is preferable to construct a sukkah with four complete walls, but admits that this is not required.</ref> It's possible to build the third wall without having to complete it, but see footnote for details.<ref>Mishna Brurah 630:6 understands Shulchan Aruch 630:2 as holding that the third wall doesn't need to be a full wall of 7 [[Tefachim]], but must nevertheless still look like a wall. It's therefore permissible to build two walls next to each other at a right angle (say one is from southwest to southeast and the other is southeast to northeast), and then a third wall (from northeast to northwest) that is slightly over one [[Tefach]] thick, and within 3 [[Tefachim]] to one of the two other walls (within 3 [[Tefachim]] of the northeast corner), and also a pole at the end of 7 [[Tefachim]] (7 [[Tefachim]] from the northeast corner) and a pole on top of the more than one [[tefach]] wall and the pole at the end of 7 [[Tefachim]]. See picture. [[Image:Minimum_sukkah.png | 100px | right]]</ref>

===Dimensions===

#The minimum measure of a [[Sukkah]] is 7 [[Tefachim]] in length by 7 [[Tefachim]] in width and 10 [[Tefachim]] in height.<ref>Gemara Sukkah 3a, Shulchan Aruch 633:8, 634:1, Chazon Ovadia [[sukkot]] page 9.

*The Gemara records three opinions regarding the minimum area of a sukkah. Rebbe believes that the minimum area is four amot by four amot. (This is the shiur needed for the definition of a "bayit" (house) in halacha. Thus, the minimum size house needed to be obligated in mezuzah, building a fence, and tzara'at on the house, is four amot by four amot). Beit Hillel maintains that a sukkah only needs to fit one’s head and body, which is estimated to be about six by six tefachim. Beit Shammai rules that the sukkah must also be able to fit a small table, and thus must be at least seven by seven tefachim. The Gemara rules in accordance with Beit Shamai, and this is codified in the Shulchan Aruch 634:1. See Tosfot 3a s.v. di’amar for a list of six cases where the halacha is in accordance with Beit Shammai.</ref> If the decorations cause the sukkah to be smaller than 7x7, it is invalid.<ref>Gemara 10b, Shulchan Aruch 634:3</ref>
#It is permitted to make a sukkah in different shapes, provided that it's big enough to fit a sukkah of 7 x 7 tefachim. However, according to most poskim, a sukkah which is narrower than 7 tefachim but longer than 7 tefachim (so that it's at least 49 square tefachim), is invalid.<ref>This issue is discussed by the Achronim. The Bach 634:2 learns from Tosfot 3a said that such a sukkah is kosher. However, the Magen Avraham 634:1 and Taz 634:1 argue that it is invalid, and think that the Bach's version of Tosfot is incorrect. From the Tosfot Rosh s.v. baneha and Tosfot Rabbenu Peretz s.v. lo, it is clear that the Magen Avraham and Taz's version of Tosfot are correct. The Mishna Brurah 634:1 writes that most Achronim agree that this sukkah is invalid. Chazon Ovadia p. 11 agrees. Shulchan Aruch 634:2 writes that one may construct a sukkah of other shapes, such as a circle, as long as a sukkah of 7x7 tefachim can fit inside it. </ref>
#A sukkah must be at least ten tefachim tall.<ref>Mishna (Sukkah 2a), Rambam Hilchot Sukkah 4:1, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 633:8 </ref> If a sukkah is ten tefachim tall but there are branches of schach hanging down within the ten tefachim, the sukkah is invalid since it isn't fit for living. However, if there are decorations hanging from the ceiling, they are considered part of the sukkah and the sukkah is valid.<ref>Rava (Gemara Sukkah 4a) says that if there are branches hanging down into a ten tefach sukkah, it's invalid since it isn't livable. On the other hand, on 10b, the Gemara establishes that the decorations of a sukkah don't minimize its area. Shulchan Aruch 633:10 codifies this halacha. The Taz 633:10 explains that as long as the decorations don't bother you, it doesn't minimize the sukkah. </ref>
#If the walls of the sukkah are 10 tefachim tall, but do not reach all the way up to the sechach, the sukkah is kosher as long as the walls are lined up with the roof, or are within 3 tefachim of being lined up with the roof. This works based on the principle of gud asik mechitzta, which means that once you have a halakhic wall (minimum of ten tefachim), we view the walls as extending to the top and meeting the roof.<ref>Mishna Brurah 630:43, Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 12.

*Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:9 teaches based on the Gemara (Sukkah 16a) that the walls don’t have to reach the schach, as long as they line up within three tefachim of the schach. Mishna Brurah 630:43 and Chazon Ovadia p. 12 write that this is based on the concept of gud asik, that is, we view the walls as extending upward.
*The Gemara (Sukkah 6b) mentions that gud asik is a halacha limoshe misinai. The Gemara (Sukkah 4b) records a dispute as to whether one can build a sukkah without walls on the top of a flat roof utilizing the principle of gud asik. Rambam (Hilchot Sukkah 4:11) rules like R’ Yaakov who holds that if the schach is aligned with the walls of the house, the sukkah is valid because we view it as if the walls of the building extend upward. If the schach is not aligned with the walls of the house, the sukkah is invalid. Rosh (Sukkah 1:6) disagrees and rules like the Chachamim, that in either case the sukkah built without walls on a roof is invalid. Shulchan Aruch 630:6 quotes both opinions, but Mishna Brurah 630:30 is machmir for the Rosh.
*The question then comes up, that if we do not accept the application of gud asik in the case of the roof, then why do we accept gud asik in general, to extend the walls of a ten tefach wall up to the roof? The Steipler (Kehilot Yaakov Siman 4) suggests that it's possible that there is no requirement for the walls of a Sukkah to reach its roof. The only requirement is that you have a wall of ten tefachim, and once you have that, the Sukkah is Kosher, even though we don't view the walls as extending upwards. Therefore, the reason why the Sukkah on the roof is invalid, is because the Sukkah lacks walls, and we can't count the walls of the house, as we don't view them as extending upwards. Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani Sukkot p. 228) explains that even though the Mishna Brurah was machmir for the Rosh, that's when the sukkah itself has no walls and we want to extend the walls of the building beyond the roof. However, in this case, the sukkah itself has defined walls and we are extending them.
*Rabbi Akiva Eiger (responsa 12) questions the psak of the Shulchan Aruch based on a Ran (Sukkah 9a), who says that one cannot use lavud with another leniency. Therefore, in this case, one cannot combine both the kula of lavud as well as that of gud asik. However, the above approach of the Steipler resolves this issue. The Steipler's whole point is that once the walls are ten tefachim, that's sufficient, and you don't need to apply gud asik to view the walls as extending upwards. Since there's no need for gud asik, we can apply lavud and stil be consistent with the aforementioned Ran. See also Chazon Ish 77:7 for another solution to Rabbi Akiva Eiger’s question. Mishna Brurah 632:4 allows combining lavud and gud asik, but quotes a dispute about whether or not it's permitted to combine gud asik and dofen akuma.</ref> The walls are kosher, even if they don't touch the ground, as long as they begin within 3 tefachim of the ground. Also, even if the walls are both within 3 tefachim of the ground and don't reach the schach above, the Sukkah is still valid.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:9</ref>
#There is no maximum to the width or length of a Sukkah. However, the maximum height of a Sukkah is 20 [[Amot]]. If it is higher than 20 Amot then it's invalid.<ref>Mishna Sukkah 1:1, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 633:1, 634:1. Gemara 2a-2b offers a number of reasons for the why the maximum height is 20 amot. Rabbah suggests that a person needs to be cognizant of the fact that he's in a sukkah, and if the skach is over 20 amot, then he won't be able to see it easily and maintain this awareness. R' Zera suggests that a person needs to be under the shade of the skach, and once the walls are so high that they're above 20 amot, he's under the shade of the walls, not the skach. Rava posits that once a sukkah is over 20 amot, it's a dirat keva, a permanent structure, while a sukkah needs to be a dirat aray, a temporary structure.

</ref>
#If a sukkah is only 7x7 tefachim, and its height is just under 20 Amot, it is valid.<ref>Tashbetz 1:126 writes that even though according to Rabbi Zeira any sukkah in which one doesn't sit in the shade of the schach but in the shade of the walls it is invalid. He extends the idea of the gemara that if it is 4x4 amot wide and more than 20 amot tall to a sukkah that is 2x2 wide and more than 10 amot tall. In conclusion he rules that we don't follow the opinion of Rabbi Zeira.</ref>
#The walls of the sukkah must be built within 3 [[Tefachim]] of the ground.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 630:9, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Halichot Shlomo (7:5, p. 100), Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 12 </ref>

===Arrangement of the Walls===
===Two L-Shaped Walls with 1 Tefach Protrusion===
[[File:L 1 Tefach Sukkah.png|110px|right]]

#It is possible to make a Sukkah with two connected walls and a third wall of slightly more than a tefach. That protrusion has to be placed at the end of slightly less than 3 tefachim from one of the walls. Then a pole that is 4 tefachim away from the 1 tefach wall and a string on top of the pole and one tefach wall to indicate that there's an appearance of a doorway (''Tzurat Hapetach'') between the wall and pole.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:2</ref>

===Two L-Shaped Walls with Parallel Wall===
[[Image:L I Sukkah.png|110px|right]]

#It is perfectly kosher to have three walls two of which are parallel and two are adjacent in an L shape as such as long as each is 7 tefachim.<ref>Chut Shani p. 225</ref>

===Two Parallel Walls with 4 Tefach Protrusion===
[[Image:4 Tefach Sukkah.png|right|110px]]

#If one has two walls facing one another and the third is four [[Tefachim]] it must be within 3 [[Tefachim]] of one side and within 3 of the other or at least have a tzurat hapetach to the second side.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:3 </ref>

===Two Parallel Walls with 7 Tefach Protrusion===
[[Image:2 Parallel Walls with 7 Tefach Protrusion.png|right|110px]]

#If the third wall is a complete wall of 7 tefachim the sukkah is valid even if it is far from the other walls.<ref>Chut Shani (Sukkah p. 225). Chut Shani implies that the only time that Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:5 requires a tzurat hapetach is when there is a a third wall of a tefach that is completed by a tzurat hapetach. However, if the third wall is 7 tefachim you don't need a tzurat hapetach even if it is more than 10 amot of a break. See Mishna Brurah 630:18 who implies otherwise. </ref>
#If a Sukkah has two walls parallel to each other, it can be made kosher with a third wall that is only slightly more than 4 tefachim and is placed within 3 tefachim of one of the other walls. The Sukkah should have a Tzurat Hapetach (appearance of a door) connecting the 4 tefach wall with the opposite wall.<ref>Gemara Sukkah 7a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 630:3. Mishna Brurah 630:15 quotes the Magen Avraham who wasn't sure if this case is effective unless it is a small Sukkah of 7 tefachim by 7 tefachim and there is no gap between the 4 tefach wall and the other parallel wall. However, he concludes that most disagree with the Magen Avraham and validate this Sukkah. Kaf HaChayim on Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 630:29:1 and Hilchot Chag Bchag (Sukkah 5:9 p. 119) are lenient. </ref>
#If the Sukkah has two parallel walls and a 7 tefachim or more protrusion from one side then it is valid without any Tzurat Hapetach. If there is a gap of more than 10 amot there should be a tzurat hapetach connecting the 7 tefach wall with the opposite wall.<ref>Rama O.C. 630:3, Mishna Brurah 630:18, Hilchot Chag Bchag (Sukkah 5:9 p. 119)</ref>
#If a Sukkah has 2 walls and a third wall of 4 tefachim that needs to be completed with a tzurat hapetach, it is acceptable even if the doorframe has something in the way blocking access to actually walking through the doorframe. An example of this is with a porch that has a lintel as the doorframe connecting the 4 tefach wall to another wall and beneath the doorframe is a banister.<ref>Chut Shani p. 225 explains based on Chazon Ish Eruvin 70:19 that a doorframe is valid even if it isn't accessible to be used as a door because the space beneath it is cluttered since it is accessible on the other side. Even though one couldn't actually go through the door but it is seen as a door since on the inside it stands as a door.</ref> (This is assuming that the banister is not the dimensions of a wall itself.)
[[Image:Porch_with_Tzurat_Hapetach.png|right|150px]]

===Completely Lavud===

#Sephardim hold that one may create the walls of the sukkah by placing several poles within three tefachim of each other. This is true whether the poles are placed horizontally or vertically.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 630:18 writes that one may create a sukkah with three walls by placing poles within 3 tefachim of each other, either horizontally or vertically. Chazon Ovadia pp. 5-6 agrees and thus allows building a sukkah on a porch enclosed on three sides by bars with less than three tefachim space between them.</ref>
#Ashkenazim only allow using lavud for all the walls if one makes 4 walls with lavud, or if one has cloth walls in addition to the 3 lavud walls.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Halichot Shlomo (7:2, p. 98). However, Tosfot (Sukkah 16b s.v. bifachot) holds that one cannot create a wall completely based on lavud. In other words, one cannot make entire walls of either vertical or horizontal beams within three tefachim of each other. Magen Avraham 630:1 writes that Tosfot would validate a sukkah with walls made of only vertical or horizontal beams if the sukkah has four walls. Mishna Brurah 630:7 rules like this Magen Avraham, but in Shaar Hatziyun 630:49 he allows the use of vertical or horizontal beams to construct a three-walled sukkah when clothes are used to form the walls. In this case, even if one is strict to not use cloth, one can be lenient because the lavud walls would serve as backup if the cloth did untie. Chazon Ish 75:12 is strict even if one builds four walls with these beams, against the Magen Avraham and Mishna Brurah. Bikkurei Yakov 630:4 also disagrees with the Magen Avraham and disallows lavud walls even if there are four walls. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/972040/rabbi-hershel-schachter/inyonei-succos-5781/ Rav Hershel Schachter (Inyonei Succos 5781 min 36-8)] explained that we follow that the Mishna Brurah that if there are four walls it is sufficient with lavud in one direction. Therefore, in the days of corona those who want to use sukkah's with no walls so that there's less of a health concern can do so with lavud of four walls.

*Chut Shani Sukkot p. 229 adds that even according to the Magen Avraham a wall of four tefachim can be joined to two L shaped walls with lavud even if there isn't four walls. Creating a wall with lavud is impermissible, but attaching walls can have lavud.</ref>
#If the walls have lavud in both the horizontal and vertical directions, it is permissible even with three walls according to everyone.<ref>Magen Avraham 630:1, Chut Shani Sukkot p. 229</ref>
===Schach That Extends Beyond the Walls===
[[File:S%27chach_Beyond_Sukkah.png|150px|right]]
#If there are 3 walls of 7 tefachim which are all attached, and one of the protruding walls is longer than the other, the schach that extends along that longer wall is valid and included in the sukkah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 631:7, Mishna Brurah 631:15 </ref>
# One cannot eat nor sleep under Schach that extends beyond the Sukkah walls, unless that area has the dimensions of a Sukkah (7x7 tefachim) and has three walls.<ref>Sukkah 19a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 631:6. The only nuance that it is valid once it has the dimensions of a sukkah and has three walls is that the middle wall wasn't built for the outer Sukkah, it was only built for the inner sukkah and nonetheless that is acceptable.</ref>

==Building a Sukkah in the street==

#If there's no room on private property to build a [[Sukkah]], it's permissible to build it in a public street, provided that the city leaders (mayor) give permission to do so. However, one should make sure that the [[Sukkah]] doesn't block walkers (traffic).<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Halichot Shlomo (7:11, pg 109) </ref>

==Materials for walls of Sukkah==

#All materials may be used for the walls of a [[Sukkah]] (see next halacha). Some say that that a pious person should preferably only use materials that aren't biblically unfit for [[S'chach]].<ref>The Mishna Sukkah 12a declares that all materials are valid for the walls. Shulchan Aruch 630:1 codifies this. Interestingly, the Bach OC 630:1 writes that a pious person should be strict for the Or Zarua (Hilchot Sukkah 2:289:2 quoted by Hagahot Ashri 1:24) who holds that one should not use materials that one may not use for schach for the walls of the sukkah, such as materials that are susceptible to impurity. The Biur Hagra 630:1 questions the Hagahot Ashri, since the Yerushalmi he quotes as a proof, in fact says exactly the opposite. Beiur Halacha s.v. Kol quotes two reasons that a pious person should be strict only to use materials that are not unfit biblically for [[S'chach]] based on the Bach siman 630, but quotes others who reject this stringency. See Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] 1-2 for a list of poskim as well even though he allows the use of these materials. Chazon Ovadia pp. 1-2 as well as Aruch Hashulchan 630:1-2 both say that most achronim do not hold of this stringency and allow one to use materials that are mekabel tumah for the walls. </ref> Nonetheless, one should avoid using any material that emits a foul odor.<ref>Rama 630:1</ref>
#Accordingly, one may even form a sukkah outside of one’s car by opening the doors on one side of the car and placing schach over them.<ref>R’ Moshe Heinemann permits this (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1000/sukkah.car.html) . When building one’s sukkah in this manner he should also ensure that 1) the doors of the sukkah reach within three tefachim of the ground, to accomplish this it may help to park near the curb (see section titled “Lavud”) 2) the door on the opposite side of the car remains closed, 3) one may not use the seat of the car as one’s table even if he only plans to eat under the schach. </ref>
#Many authorities hold that plastic curtains (tarp, canvas) are unfit for walls of a [[Sukkah]], while others permit. [This is not because of an issue with the material itself but because of an issue with it blowing in the wind.] <ref>Rav Ovadiah Yosef in Chazon Ovadyah (pg 1-5), Yabia Omer OC 9:59, and Yechave Daat 3:46, Rav Menashe Klein Mishnah Halachot 512, Rav Chaim Zonnenfeld in Salmat Chaim 254 and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Halichot Shlomo ([[Sukkah]] 7:1 pg 97) hold that plastic curtains that sway in the wind even slightly are unfit for walls of a [[Sukkah]]. [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/764662/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/%D7%A2%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99_%D7%99%D7%95%D7%94%D7%9B'%D7%A4_%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%AA Rav Hershel Schachter] (min 72-80) explains that even though the Chazon Ish (hilchot eruvin 13:6) was lenient, most poskim are strict. In a situation of extreme need Rav Schachter thought one could rely on the Chazon Ish to eat in such a sukkah. 
'''Background'''
*In Gemara Sukkah 24b, Rav Acha Bar Yaakov states that a wall that cannot stand in the wind is not considered a valid wall. The Chazon Ish (Hilchot Eruvin 13:6) suggests that a wall is not valid only if it falls or sways more than three tefachim in normal wind. However, Rav Ovadia Yosef in Chazon Ovadia pp. 1-5 and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo Sukkah 7:1 p. 97) hold that plastic curtains that sway in the wind even slightly are unfit for walls of a Sukkah. Rav Ovadia adds, based on Shulchan Aruch 630:10, that this is true even if one ties down the ends because we are concerned that the ties will loosen and that he will not notice. Rav Moshe Feinstein in Sh”t Iggrot Moshe 5:40:2 writes that one should not misinterpret the prevalence of these canvas sukkot as an endorsement of their validity. On the other hand, some achronim (Rav Sonnenfeld, Rav Menashe Klein, and Rav Shternbuch all cited in Piskei Teshuvot 630:9) justify the common practice to use canvas Sukkot since nowadays they are put together well, so the concern of the Shulchan Aruch that the ties may become loose no longer applies.
*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/764662/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/%D7%A2%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99_%D7%99%D7%95%D7%94%D7%9B'%D7%A4_%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%95%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%AA Rav Hershel Schachter] (“Inyonei Yom Kippur VeSukkot” min 72-80) explains that even though the Chazon Ish (Hilchot Eruvin 13:6) was lenient, most poskim are strict.
*Rav Moshe Feinstein writes that if the canvas walls wouldn't move in the wind more than 3 tefachim without being tied down, then they are acceptable when they are tied down to the top and bottom of the frame. His reasoning is that Shulchan Aruch was only strict about a cloth that could become untied and sway more than 3 tefachim but if the cloth even if untied wouldn't sway more than 3 tefachim is permitted if tied. However, it still needs to be tied so that it doesn't move in a normal wind so that it is similar to an established house wall. Yet, since the Shulchan Aruch was strict about using cloths for walls of a Sukkah and the achronim don't distinguish between using different types of cloths one shouldn't use a canvas sukkah unless there's nothing else available. [It is questionable if today's canvas sukkah's would fit the standards of Rav Moshe of not swaying 3 tefachim in the wind without being tied down.]
*Hilchot Chag Bichag pp. 87-90 and Rav Menashe Klein (Mishneh Halachot 5:77) recommend, therefore, to place poles or cords horizontally across the sukkah within three tefachim of each other up to a height of ten tefachim, and, combined with the canvas, this would be a perfectly valid sukkah.</ref>
#Even though a Tzurat Hapetach is considered a wall for the halachos of Kilayim and Eruvin, it isn’t considered a wall for the critical walls of a Sukkah.<ref>Korban Netanel 1:8:60 quoting Ran</ref>

==When should one build the Sukkah?==

#The pious are careful to build to begin building the [[Sukkah]] on Motzei [[Yom Kippur]] and finish it the next day in order to go from one mitzvah ([[Yom Kippur]]) to another ([[Sukkot]]).<ref>Rama 624:5, Mishna Brurah 624:19, Yalkut Yosef Moadim page 118, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] page 99 </ref>
#If there is a [[shabbat]] between [[Yom Kippur]] and [[Sukkot]] some poskim say that there is an obligation to build it before that [[shabbat]].<ref>Avnei Nezer 459 writes that this obligation isn't just because of zrizin makdimin limitzvot and therefore it is an obligation. However, the Minchat Elazar 4:55 writes that this is not an obligation but just the preferred option, and this is the conclusion of Yalkut Yosef page 118 and Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] page 99.</ref>
#Preferably, one should build it for himself, but if this isn't possible he should appoint an agent to do it for him and strive to at least take part in the building in some form even if this means missing out on more learning time.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Moadim page 199, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] page 99 </ref>
#If a [[Sukkah]] was set up with the [[S'chach]] from before 30 days before [[sukkot]] and it wasn't made for the purpose of the mitzvah of [[Sukkot]] one must change or improve one thing (such as putting down [[S'chach]]) of an area a [[Tefach]] by a [[Tefach]] or the whole width even if it's of minimal length (or vice versa). However, if it was made within 30 days of [[Sukkot]] or was made for the express purpose of [[Sukkot]] it's fit even without any change. However, if the [[Sukkah]] was originally built for [[Sukkot]] and stands unchanged year to year it requires some change the each year. This is only if the [[S'chach]] was put in advance but if just the walls were putup in advance and not the [[S'chach]] there's no issue.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 636:1, Mishna Brurah 636:1, 5-7. Mishna Brurah 636:4 also points out that this is only the preferable course of action (but after the fact isn't absolutely necessary). </ref>
#If one forgot intentionally or unintentionally to build a [[Sukkah]] before [[Sukkot]] one can build it on [[chol hamoed]]. One may, however, not build it or fix it on [[Yom Tov]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 637:1, Mishna Brurah 637:1. See [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/782407/_Shay_Schachter/Building_a_Succah_on_Chol_Hamoed_and_Being_Usable_for_Seven_Days Rabbi Shay Schachter in a shiur on yutorah.org] who discusses the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer who wouldn't allow building a [[Sukkah]] on [[Chol HaMoed]].</ref>
##If one builds a [[Sukkah]] on [[Chol HaMoed]], one should recite a [[Shehechiyanu]] the first time one sits in the newly built [[Sukkah]].<ref>Yalkut Yosef 637:1 and Rivevot Efraim 6:337:1. See, however, Az Nidbaru 13:39 who argues that the shehechiyanu is made upon the building the sukkah as it is a preparation for a mitzvah but once one made shehechiyanu upon the primary mitzvah, sitting in the sukkah, there is no more of a reason to recite when building a sukkah in the middle of sukkot. Yalkut Yosef Sukkah p. 487 supports this ruling from the Masat Moshe 1:5 and Mikrei Kodesh 1:25 unlike the Betzel Chachma 5:171, Shraga Hameir 5:72, and Kinyan Torah 4:76 who hold not to recite shehechiyanu in the middle of Sukkot.</ref>
#On Friday afternoon, ideally one should build the Sukkah before midday. However, many poskim hold that it is permissible to do so even in the afternoon until nine and a half hours into the day.<ref>Pesachim 50b establishes that someone who works after mincha on Friday will not see any bracha to see work. Mordechai (Pesachim 5:603) quotes the Maharam who explains that it is after mincha gedola, meaning after midday, which is a half hour beforehand. However, Rashi (Pesachim 50b s.v. min) says that the gemara refers to mincha ketana, which is nine and a half hours into the day. Both opinions are cited in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 251:1. Mishna Brurah 251:2 writes that someone who is lenient doesn't lose out. The Pri Megadim E"A 625:1 writes that it is forbidden to build a sukkah after midday on Friday based on siman 251. Mishna Brurah 625:2 cites the Pri Megadim and agrees. However, the Bikkurei Yakov 625:5 disputes this because the achronim, including the Magen Avraham, Taz, and Eliya Rabba in siman 251 are lenient to follow Rashi. Therefore, he allows building the sukkah until mincha ketana.</ref>

==Decorations of the Sukkah==

#It is a mitzvah to decorate and beautify the [[sukkah]].<ref>Gemara [[Shabbat]] 133b, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 74). Mishna Brurah 638:11 writes that it's a mitzvah to decorate the [[sukkah]] with important fruit and clothes, however, one should not hang nice fruit if one has children and one knows that the children will rip them down and eat them. The concept of hidur mitzva, beautification of mitzvot is brought down in Shabbat 133b based on the pasuk “Zeh Eli VeAnvehu” - “This is my God and I will Beautify His Mitzvot”. The Raavad (cited in Chidushei Anshei Shem, Brachos 38a, no. 2) suggests that Hiddur Mitzvah is a biblical commandment, whereas the Ritva (Sukkah 11b s.v. Vi’ee) holds that it is only rabbinic. </ref>
#On Shabbat and Yom Tov one must ensure not to move any of the sukkah decorations because they are muktzah.<ref>Rama 638:2, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 83) </ref>
#If one needs to remove a decoration because of fear of rain or thieves on [[Shabbat]] or [[Yom Tov]] preferably one should stipulate (as above). Nonetheless, if one forgot then he may remove them.<ref>Mishna Brurah 638:24, Chazon Ovadia ([[Sukkot]] pg 92), Shalmei Moed (pg 107) </ref> On [[Chol Ha'moed]] the decorations may always be removed even without a stipulation.<ref>Piskei Tshuvot page 361 </ref>
#The decorations of the [[Sukkah]] are forbidden from benefit from the first day of [[Sukkot]] until after [[Simchat Torah]] unless one stipulates before [[Yom Tov]] that I want to be able to eat and get benefit from these decorations at any time during the holiday.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 638:2, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 77) , mishna brura 638:2</ref> This is true about decorations on the walls as well.<ref>Although the Shulchan Aruch 638:2 writes that anything “hanging in the sukkah” is forbidden to derive benefit from, the Mishna Brurah 638:10 writes that this status also extends to other decorations hanging from the walls of the sukkah.</ref>
#If the decorations fell on [[Chol HaMoed]] one may move them and put them back up. However, one may not benefit from it (if it's food one may not eat it) unless one stipulated as above.<ref>Mishna Brurah 638:14, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 83)</ref>
#One who hangs hadasim or other things which smell nice in the Sukkah, is allowed to smell them and recite a beracha.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 87, Bikkurei Yaakov 638:19, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 638:5. Ritva Sukkah 37b d"h Hadas Shel Mitzva explains that even though you are not allowed to smell the hadas which you are using for the mitzva of Arbaa Minim, you are allowed to smell ones that are hanging in the sukkah. </ref>
#One should make sure to keep the decorations hanging from the [[S'chach]] within 4 [[Tefachim]] of the [[S'chach]].<ref>Rama 627:4</ref> Some say that the decorations only need to begin within 4 [[Tefachim]] of the S'chach.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah (Sukkot pg 76) writes that it's only lechatchila to have the decorations within 4 tefachim of the s'chach. Then he says perhaps it only needs to start within 4 tefachim of the s'chach. Rav Yacov Kamenetsky in Emet LeYacov Shulchan Aruch 627 writes that the beginning of the decoration has to be within 4 tefachim of the s'chach. </ref>

===Types of Decorations===

#One who makes colored paper chains as a decoration of the [[Sukkah]] should make sure that it is within 4 [[Tefachim]] of the [[S'chach]]. After the fact, it is, nonetheless, fit to sit, eat, and sleep under.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah ([[Sukkot]] pg 76) </ref>
#If one places an artistic covering underneath his schach within four tefachim of the schach and his intention is to beautify the sukkah the sukkah is kosher. However, if the covering is placed above the schach or if it isn’t to beautify the sukkah, the sukkah is invalid.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 627:4. Chazon Ovadia p. 84 writes that if one’s intention is to both beautify the sukkah and to protect oneself from the sun and rain the sukkah is kosher. </ref>
#One must avoid writing any pesukim for the sole purpose of decorating his sukkah because it is forbidden to write pesukim unless it is a whole sefer.<ref>S”A 638:2, Magen Avraham 638, Ginat Veradim OC 2:25. Rambam Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:14 and Shulchan Aruch YD 283</ref> Nonetheless, one may purchase printed pesukim to hang in his sukkah.<ref>Piskei Teshuvot p. 363, Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 92 </ref>
#One who hangs pictures of rabbis in his home, are permitted to hang them in the sukkah for decorations as well.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 77, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=1717 Rabbi Eli Mansour] </ref>
#Decorations that are really made for non-Jewish holidays, are still allowed to be used as sukkah decorations, because the designation for non-Jewish holidays alone is not of consequence (Hazmana Lav Milta Hi) <ref>Chazon Ovadia Sukkot pg. 77, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=1717 Rabbi Eli Mansour], Shu"t Shevet Halevi 2:57, Shu"t Shevet Hakehati 2:215</ref>

==Miscellaneous==

#A [[sukkah]] built for [[sukkot]] is exempt from a [[mezuza]] since it is a temporary structure.<ref>Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] page 94, Shulchan Aruch YD 286:11 based on Yoma 10b. </ref>
#A [[sukkah]] built on a wagon, car, ship, etc. is kosher, and one who sits in it can recite the beracha of leshev basukkah even while it is moving.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Moadim page 121, Yechave Daat 3:47, Chazon Ovadia [[Sukkot]] page 169. </ref>
#Throughout the entire holiday, it is biblically forbidden to derive benefit from any of the essential materials used in building the sukkah. Regarding these materials, a stipulation will not permit one to derive benefit from them.<ref>Mishna Brurah 638:1 explaining Shulchan Aruch there. See Tosfot (Sukkah 9a s.v. minayin). The Rama 638:1 notes that the essential materials of the sukkah can’t be used even if makes a stipulation that they should not be designated for a mitzvah.</ref>

==Covering the Sukkah in case of Rain==

#It's permissible to cover the [[Sukkah]] on Shabbat and Yom Tov with a plastic tarp to prevent it from getting wet if one places the tarp directly above the Schach and not a [[tefach]] above the Schach and one has in mind to remove the tarp when one next uses the [[Sukkah]] for the mitzvah.<ref>Sh"t Igrot Moshe 5:39(4) writes that it's permissible to cover the [[Sukkah]] with a plastic sheet on [[Shabbat]] and [[Yom Tov]] without an issue of Boneh by making an Ohel nor the issue of [[muktzeh]]. </ref>

==Using Someone Else's Sukkah without their Permission==

#One shouldn't use someone's sukkah without their permission.<ref>Rama 637:3, Halachos of Other People's pg. 67 

*Mishna Brura 637:9 quotes the Taz 637:4 that the reason for this is that it would be an invasion of the owner's privacy
*Mishna Brura 637:9 quotes Eliya Rabba 637:3 who explains that you might not finish eating before the owner wants to enter, but the owner will be too embarrassed to ask you to leave
*Mekor Chaim 637 says because you might leave a mess.
*Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 68 note 184 writes that the practical difference between these reasons is that according to the first two, one who is certain that the owner is not around would be permitted to use it, but not according to the third reason.</ref>

==Fixing a Sukkah That Fell on Yom Tov==

#It is permissible to ask a non-Jew to fix sachach that fell down on Yom Tov.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 8:50, Rivevot Efraim 1:424:1</ref>

==Links==

*[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/55400 Yalkut Yosef Hilchot Sukkah (Hebrew 5776)]
*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/818863/Rabbi_Zvi_Sobolofsky/Halacha_l-Moshe_Misinai_Laws_in_relation_to_the_walls_of_a_Sukkah Halacha liMoshe Misinai Laws in relation to the walls of a Sukkah] by Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky
*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/776490/Rabbi_Zvi_Sobolofsky/The_Laws_of_Building_a_Sukka_-_Walls_and_Schach The Laws of Building a Sukka-Walls and Schach] by Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky

==Sources==
{{Reflist|30em}}
[[Category:Holidays]]
[[Category:Sukkot]]
<references />

Conversion

2024-08-21T21:37:02Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

While Judaism does not proselytize<ref>Part of the reason for our hesitancy to accept converts is rooted in a statement of the Gemara Kiddushin 70b: "converts are bad like sapachat (a form of Tzara'at) for the Jewish people". Gemara Yevamot 47b says that this is the reason why we discourage converts when they first appear before us, as we challenge their motivations for converting and attempt to dissuade them from doing so. Rashi Kiddushin 70b s.v. kashin explains that since they aren't meticulous in their observance of Mitzvot, naturally born Jews will inevitably be negatively influenced by them. Rashi Niddah 13b s.v. k'sapachat adds that because they aren't experts in Mitzvot, they'll bring about punishment (similar to when the King of Assyria exiled the people of Kutha to the Shomron, they converted to Judaism, and then Hashem punished them for their lack of observance by sending lions to ravage them. See Melachim II 17:25).

(As an aside, Rashi Niddah also has an interesting opinion that the concept of "kol yisrael arevim zeh b'zeh" (Shevuot 39a), that all Jews are guarantors for one another, doesn't apply to converts. This is not the accepted practice, as we usually allow a convert to be yotzaih (fulfill his obligation) Kiddush by hearing it from a naturally born Jew, and vice versa as well. However, Beit Yitzchak 2:100:11 seems to adopt this Rashi, that Jews aren't punished for the sins of converts.).

Tosfot Kiddushin 70b s.v. kashim quotes an interesting explanation of this Gemara from R' Avraham HaGer (a figure who lived in the days of the Baalai HaTosfot). He argues that converts are in fact more meticulous in their observance of mitzvot than naturally born Jews, and when Hashem sees their dedication, He recalls the shortcomings of the Jewish people and grows angry with them. He draws a parallel to a story in Navi (Melachim I:17) that the woman of Tzarfat accused Eliyahu as being the reason for her son's death, that his piety highlighted her lower spiritual state and incurred Hashem's wrath. Tosfot posits that another way of understanding why converts are bad for the Jewish people is because the Torah warns in twenty four places about oppressing them, and it is very difficult to be properly sensitive towards them and not violate this prohibition. </ref>, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert.

There is also a discussion as to whether or not there's a Mitzvah to perform conversions. Gemara Yevamot 47b says that once a prospective convert dedicates himself to keep the Mitzvot, we do Milah right away, because "we don't delay a Mitzvah". The simple understanding of this Gemara is that there is a Mitzvah element to converting people. Furthermore, the fact that Gemara Shabbat 137b records that when performing a Milah on a convert, the text of the beracha includes "who has commanded us to give a Milah to converts", indicates that there is a Mitzvah to convert people. Tashbetz (Zohar HaRakia, assin 40) thinks that accepting converts is a Mitzvah, but is unsure under which Mitzvah it would be included. Interestingly, he also thinks that the fact that Beit Din converts a Katan al da'at Beit Din (Ketubot 11a), indicates that there's a Mitzvah to accept converts.

Tosfot HaRosh (Shabbat 137b) suggests that accepting converts is included in the Mitzvah of loving the convert, as it's impossible to love him if he doesn't receive a Milah and is converted. Raavad in Sefer Baalai HaNefesh (end of Shaar HaTevilah) learns that the Mitzvah is derived from the fact that Avraham converted people (see Rashi Bereshit 12:5 s.v. asher asu). Another possibility is that it's included in the Mitzvah of loving Hashem, which according to Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot Asseh 3) includes making Hashem beloved unto others and drawing them to His service. </ref>. There are three basic components to conversion: the acceptance of mitzvot, milah and tevilah. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah, there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective. Therefore, if the tevilah was performed before the milah, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether bdiavad (after the fact) the order of milah and tevilah would invalidate the conversion. The Ramban posits that it wouldn't, while Raah believes that it would invalidate the conversion. The Shach 268:2 therefore says that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be performed during the day.<ref>Yevamot 46b</ref> If the acceptance of Mitzvot is performed at night, then this would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. If the milah or tevilah is performed at night, it's disputed if this would bdiavad invalidate the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. The anonymous view in Shulchan Aruch is that only if the acceptance of mitzvot is done at night does it invalidate the conversion. He also cites by name the view of Rambam, that if any stage of the conversion is done at night, then it invalidates the conversion.

Bach CM 5:6 writes that we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>
#The tevilah of a convert may not be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov.<ref>Rambam Issurei Biah 13:6 and Shulchan Aruch 268:4. They give the reason that since conversion is compared to Din (as Yevamot 46b notes that the word "mishpat" is used in association with conversion), it cannot be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov. (Mishnah Beitzah 36b notes that the Rabbis forbade having Din on Shabbat and Yom Tov, and the Gemara explains that we're concerned that a person will come to write things down).

Taz 268:11 raises the issue that the Gemara Yevamot 46b gives a different reason for this Halacha, namely that we don't "fix a person on Shabbat". (This a Rabbinic form of "fixing a vessel", similar to the prohibition mentioned in Beitzah 36b that one cannot separate Terumot and Maasarot on Shabbat and Yom Tov, as one is fixing the remainder of the produce). He suggests that since the Gemara Beitzah 18a permits a person who is impure (tameh) to immerse on Shabbat and Yom Tov, because it appears like he's cooling off and isn't trying to fix his impure state, the same logic should allow a convert to immerse as well. Thus, the Rambam paskens like the sugya in Beitzah over Yevamot 46b. Kesef Mishneh on Rambam offers the same approach.

Interestingly, Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 46b s.v. lefi'kach, suggests an answer to resolve the contradiction between Yevamot 46b and Beitzah 18a. He posits that the "fix" of a person going from impure to pure, is much less than the "fix" of a non-Jew becoming Jewish, and that's why the latter is forbidden.

</ref>

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
# Even though brachot on mitzvot are usually recited before the mitzvah is performed, the convert recites the beracha of "al ha'tevilah" after immersing<ref>Pesachim 7b. There is an interesting discussion regarding when the Beit Din recites the bracha of "al ha'tevilah" when they convert a baby (Ketubot 11a). According to the Gemara Pesachim's reasoning, they should do so beforehand, as the only reason why a convert typically says it afterwards, is because he cannot recite a bracha while he is still non-Jewish. This is the view of Raavad in Baalai HaNefesh (at the end of Shaar HaTevilah). Rav Schachter (Eretz HaTzvi p. 32) argues that the Bet Din should recite a bracha after the Tevilah in this case, as the bracha goes on the chalot (onset) of the conversion. </ref>.
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of Bet Din.<ref>Regarding whether or not the lack of Bet Din bdiavad (after the fact) invalidates the conversion: the anonymous opinion in Shulchan Aruch 268:3 is that it doesn't (in accordance with the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger and Tosfos Yevamot 45b s.v. mi), and the yesh omrim cites Rambam who thinks that it would invalidate the conversion. </ref> For purposes of modesty, women can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion, since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila. Furthermore, according to others it might be effective since the Bet Din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
*Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah, and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be a contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts, she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant, otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat, there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to the following Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes both in Christianity and Judaism, then his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid. There is a minority view held by Rav Ben Zion Uziel (Shut Piskei Uziel Siman 65), that the acceptance of mitzvot is not something that would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. This view is not accepted by the Poskim. </ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot, but didn't do so in front of a Bet Din, the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot, but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah, it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting mitzvot means that a person accepts that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah, it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. However, if he says that he accepts all mitzvot, yet knows that because of a certain desire, he won't be able to keep one mitzvah, it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he doesn't intend to violate a mitzvah because of a desire, but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah, that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue that if he doesn't intend to keep a mitzvah because of his desires, that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion, but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot, but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot, that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that the concept that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim''), is limited to interpersonal matters between two different people. However, conversion is between a person and Hashem, and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that he plans to keep Torah but his intentions are otherwise, then the conversion is invalid. Another salient point is the fact that Tosfot Kiddushin 49b s.v. devarim says that if something is so clear, even though it's not explictily stated, then in such a situation we'd consider it meaningful and significant (devarim shebelev havaih devarim). So too over here, if it's clear as day that someone doesn't intend to dedicate himself to Mitzvot, then we'd take that into account and invalidate the conversion.
*In a specific case of a woman who said that she accepted the mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism, she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim, unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot, but because of financial pressures she won't be able to practically keep all the mitzvot, then that is considered an acceptance of mitzvot. R' Moshe isn't certain about this last reason. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot, dvarim shebelev ainam devarim isn't relevant, since it is a matter between him and Heaven, regarding which intentions are critical. </ref> If it isn't clear if he accepted the mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that he accepts mitzvot, if the circumstances make it clear that this statement is dubious, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot aside from one of them, the Bet Din should not accept him as a convert.<ref>Bechorot 30b. The Gemara says that even if he only rejects a Rabbinic law, we don't accept him as a convert. See below if the rejection of a Rabbinic law would invalidate a conversion after the fact. </ref> After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
*Gemara Shabbat 31a describes a case in which Hillel converted someone, even though that individual didn't accept the legitimacy of the Oral Torah. Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel converted him because this fellow didn't deny the Oral Torah, but simply had a hard time believing that it was from Hashem. Hillel was confident that after he taught him, that he'd trust him that it came from Hashem. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that not accepting one mitzvah doesn't invalidate the conversion, but you shouldn't perform such a conversion unless you know that he will end accepting all of the mitzvot. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. The convert under question did accept the fact that the Oral Torah is binding, but wasn't necessarily convinced that it's Divine. Hillel was confident that he could correct this error later, and that's why he accepted him.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted his position, because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108, which are written after 3:106, he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila, but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case, and that it even invalidates the conversion after the fact.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he sees other "religious" Jews observing them , even though they don't properly keep all of the mitzvot, there is a discussion if this is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews, even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. R' Moshe compares this to someone who converts and lives amongst gentiles, which the Gemara (Shabbat 68a) considers to be a legitimate convert. Such a person is committed to mitzvot, even though he hasn't been properly educated in how to keep them. Similarly, this woman is committed to mitzvot, even though she hasn't been properly educated and is erroneously following a certain community's mistaken practices. Nonetheless, R' Moshe isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot except for a Rabbinic one, then after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it's a valid conversion on a Biblical level, or if it isn't a valid conversion at all. </ref>
#If the convert is converting for the sake of marriage, then after the fact the conversion is valid, as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 268:12. Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham. Interestingly, there's an opinion in the Tannaim (cited on Yevamot 24b) who holds that it isn't a valid conversion after the fact, but this isn't how we pasken. Either way, we ideally try to avoid accepting converts who are only doing so for the sake of marriage (see Shulchan Aruch ibid). </ref>
#If someone didn’t accept the mitzvot at the time of the tevilah, but planned on accepting them later, then we don't view him as having accepted the mitzvot until he actually accepts them. Additionally, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila, and the tevila needs to be repeated in this case.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# If a Bet Din converts people who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot, then it's causing a major obstacle to other Jews, as they will think that these people are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>The Achronim discuss if Bet Din violates Lifnai Ivair (placing a stumbling block before a blind person) if they convert someone who doesn't intend to keep the Mitzvot, as they are causing him to inevitably commit sins. R' Yitzchak Shmelkes in Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 offers a few arguments for why there would no issue of Lifnai Ivair. First, if he intends to keep the Mitzvot, then we can assume that he will follow through on his commitment. If he doesn't intend to keep the Mitzvot, then he's not Jewish, and he doesn't have to observe the Mitzvot. Second, it's better for him to be Jewish rather than non-Jewish, even if he will violate prohibitions, as all of Yisrael has a portion in Olam Habah (Sanhedrin 90a). However, he adds that converting people who don't intend to keep the mitzvot is a stumbling block to others who will think that they're Jewish, when they're actually non-Jewish. He therefore concludes that it isn't proper to accept convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees with R' Yitzchak Shmelkes and thinks that it's lifnei iver to cause someone who doesn't intend to keep halacha to become Jewish and then subsequently be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==A Person Who Claims to be Jewish==
#A person who is assumed to be a non-Jew (as he hasn't been behaving like a Jew), who now claims that his mother was Jewish, is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# If a convert previously had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised, then he needs hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds that he does, while Rabbeinu Chananel thinks that he does not. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who says that a non-Jew born without a foreskin doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, while a convert who already had a medical circumcision needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef cites the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 paskens that hatafat dam brit should be performed, but no bracha should be recited. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim (based on the general rule of safek berachot l'hakel, that whenever a doubt arises regarding brachot, the bracha is omitted). </ref>
# A non-Jew who is unable to have a milah for medical reasons cannot convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's reproductive organ was cut off, then he can still convert, as he becomes Jewish with tevilah alone, like women. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this position. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220.

Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma. If the milah is performed by a non-Jew, then it's invalid and the convert needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Using local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some even permit general anesthesia.<ref>R' Shternbuch in Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 permits local anthesia. However, he forbids using general anesthesia, because it's as if one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He argues that the milah is part of the process of gerut, and must therefore be done with intent to accept the Torah. When a person is under general anesthesia, he is unable to accept the mitzvot with the proper intent. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local as well as general anesthesia for an adult milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 forbids even local anesthesia, because milah should involve pain. Also, the minhag was to never use anesthesia, even though it was readily available.

Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves from the Gemara that one is able to fulfill mitzvot via a shliach (an agent) even when he's asleep.

Gemara Gittin 70b indicates that if a person appoints a shliach to divorce his wife, the shliach can go ahead and do so, even though the person who sent him is now asleep. This Gemara is codified by Bet Shmuel Even HaEzer 121:2.

Seridei Esh 3:96 only permitted local anesthesia. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) was lenient and even permitted general anesthesia. He bases himself on the view of Maharach Or Zaruah 11, who holds that the Mitzvah of Milah is fulfilled when a person is in a state of being circumcised (chalot milah), as opposed to the act of circumcision (maaseh milah). Chelkat Yaakov therefore argues that there's no need for someone to be conscious while the milah takes place, as the mitzvah is fulfilled afterwards when he wakes up and is circumcised. Chelkat Yaakov doesn't think that pain is a necessary component of Milah, disagreeing with the Koret Habrit (261:4), who believes that pain is an essential ingredient of Milah.

With regards to the above Maharch Ohr Zarua, he argues his point based on a story cited in the Gemara Menachot 43b. When King David entered the bathhouse, he was upset that he didn't have any Mitzvot with him, until he remembered that he still had his Milah with him. Maharach Ohr Zarua argues that if the mitzvah of milah is limited to the act of circumcision, then David didn't have any mitzvot with him. Rather, it must be that the mitzvah of milah is fulfilled when a person is in a state of being circumcised, and this is why David was happy.
</ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did, then it would be a problem of asufi. (An asufi a child who is found in the street, and we don't know the identity of its parents. We assume that it's a safek mamzer. See Mishna Kiddushin 69a and 74a). R' Moshe writes that we assume that he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Ideally (lechatchila), a person should not convert for the sake of marriage, but after the fact (bdiavad) it's acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that the reason it's acceptable after the fact, is because we assume that they authentically committed themselves to mitzvot, even though their marriage is what pressured them into doing so. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it's only valid if afterwards we see that they keep halacha properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the person who converts for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many people who convert for marriage don't really accept the mitzvot, one should be very wary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of people who converted for marriage in America during the 1950s are not valid converts, because they didn't actually accept the mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment with regards to Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting, and only accept him if he has pure intentions, or if they can assess that his intentions will eventually become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27. Shach 268-23 paskens like Tosfot 24b s.v. lo, who understands that the reason Hillel converted someone who wanted to become the Kohen Gadol (Shabbat 31a), even though we don't accept people who convert for ulterior motives, is because Hillel was confident that he would eventually be committed for the right reasons. Shach notes that this is the source that we follow Bet Din's evaluation, and that if they think the situation will turn out well, then we go by that. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it's evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure, then they can't lechatchila accept him as a convert . However, if his intentions aren't clear, even after their investigation, then they can accept him as a convert. </ref>
#Some poskim hold that if a couple intends on remaining married, irrespective of whether or not the non-Jewish spouse converts, then such a conversion is not considered for the sake of marriage .<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din, it's possible to accept a convert for marriage, if the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew, it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other, in order to differentiate between a child that was conceived when she was non-Jewish, and one conceived when she was Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test that checks if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana, because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable, and there's no need to wait three months. </ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and then converts is required to wait 3 months before getting remarried to her previous husband.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it's clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and then converts by herself, must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no room for leniency, even if it's clear that she’s not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava, but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion, some hold that a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 only relies on a pregnancy test for a single woman who converts, which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since according to Shulchan Aruch she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was performed, and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it's unknown, that is a serious issue needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle that a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown (Kiddushin 71a) does not apply to non-Jews. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews. Also see [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Conversion

2024-08-21T21:27:07Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

While Judaism does not proselytize<ref>Part of the reason for our hesitancy to accept converts is rooted in a statement of the Gemara Kiddushin 70b: "converts are bad like sapachat (a form of Tzara'at) for the Jewish people". Gemara Yevamot 47b says that this is the reason why we discourage converts when they first appear before us, as we challenge their motivations for converting and attempt to dissuade them from doing so. Rashi Kiddushin 70b s.v. kashin explains that since they aren't meticulous in their observance of Mitzvot, naturally born Jews will inevitably be negatively influenced by them. Rashi Niddah 13b s.v. k'sapachat adds that because they aren't experts in Mitzvot, they'll bring about punishment (similar to when the King of Assyria exiled the people of Kutha to the Shomron, they converted to Judaism, and then Hashem punished them for their lack of observance by sending lions to ravage them. See Melachim II 17:25).

(As an aside, Rashi Niddah also has an interesting opinion that the concept of "kol yisrael arevim zeh b'zeh" (Shevuot 39a), that all Jews are guarantors for one another, doesn't apply to converts. This is not the accepted practice, as we usually allow a convert to be yotzaih (fulfill his obligation) Kiddush by hearing it from a naturally born Jew, and vice versa as well. However, Beit Yitzchak 2:100:11 seems to adopt this Rashi, that Jews aren't punished for the sins of converts.).

Tosfot Kiddushin 70b s.v. kashim quotes an interesting explanation of this Gemara from R' Avraham HaGer (a figure who lived in the days of the Baalai HaTosfot). He argues that converts are in fact more meticulous in their observance of mitzvot than naturally born Jews, and when Hashem sees their dedication, He recalls the shortcomings of the Jewish people and grows angry with them. He draws a parallel to a story in Navi (Melachim I:17) that the woman of Tzarfat accused Eliyahu as being the reason for her son's death, that his piety highlighted her lower spiritual state and incurred Hashem's wrath. Tosfot posits that another way of understanding why converts are bad for the Jewish people is because the Torah warns in twenty four places about oppressing them, and it is very difficult to be properly sensitive towards them and not violate this prohibition. </ref>, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert.

There is also a discussion as to whether or not there's a Mitzvah to perform conversions. Gemara Yevamot 47b says that once a prospective convert dedicates himself to keep the Mitzvot, we do Milah right away, because "we don't delay a Mitzvah". The simple understanding of this Gemara is that there is a Mitzvah element to converting people. Furthermore, the fact that Gemara Shabbat 137b records that when performing a Milah on a convert, the text of the beracha includes "who has commanded us to give a Milah to converts", indicates that there is a Mitzvah to convert people. Tashbetz (Zohar HaRakia, assin 40) thinks that accepting converts is a Mitzvah, but is unsure under which Mitzvah it would be included. Interestingly, he also thinks that the fact that Beit Din converts a Katan al da'at Beit Din (Ketubot 11a), indicates that there's a Mitzvah to accept converts.

Tosfot HaRosh (Shabbat 137b) suggests that accepting converts is included in the Mitzvah of loving the convert, as it's impossible to love him if he doesn't receive a Milah and is converted. Raavad in Sefer Baalai HaNefesh (end of Shaar HaTevilah) learns that the Mitzvah is derived from the fact that Avraham converted people (see Rashi Bereshit 12:5 s.v. asher asu). Another possibility is that it's included in the Mitzvah of loving Hashem, which according to Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot Asseh 3) includes making Hashem beloved unto others and drawing them to His service. </ref>. There are three basic components to conversion: the acceptance of mitzvot, milah and tevilah. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah, there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective. Therefore, if the tevilah was performed before the milah, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether bdiavad (after the fact) the order of milah and tevilah would invalidate the conversion. The Ramban posits that it wouldn't, while Raah believes that it would invalidate the conversion. The Shach 268:2 therefore says that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be performed during the day.<ref>Yevamot 46b</ref> If the acceptance of Mitzvot is performed at night, then this would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. If the milah or tevilah is performed at night, it's disputed if this would bdiavad invalidate the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. The anonymous view in Shulchan Aruch is that only if the acceptance of mitzvot is done at night does it invalidate the conversion. He also cites by name the view of Rambam, that if any stage of the conversion is done at night, then it invalidates the conversion.

Bach CM 5:6 writes that we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>
#The tevilah of a convert may not be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov.<ref>Rambam Issurei Biah 13:6 and Shulchan Aruch 268:4. They give the reason that since conversion is compared to Din (as Yevamot 46b notes that the word "mishpat" is used in association with conversion), it cannot be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov. (Mishnah Beitzah 36b notes that the Rabbis forbade having Din on Shabbat and Yom Tov, and the Gemara explains that we're concerned that a person will come to write things down).

Taz 268:11 raises the issue that the Gemara Yevamot 46b gives a different reason for this Halacha, namely that we don't "fix a person on Shabbat". (This a Rabbinic form of "fixing a vessel", similar to the prohibition mentioned in Beitzah 36b that one cannot separate Terumot and Maasarot on Shabbat and Yom Tov, as one is fixing the remainder of the produce). He suggests that since the Gemara Beitzah 18a permits a person who is impure (tameh) to immerse on Shabbat and Yom Tov, because it appears like he's cooling off and isn't trying to fix his impure state, the same logic should allow a convert to immerse as well. Thus, the Rambam paskens like the sugya in Beitzah over Yevamot 46b. Kesef Mishneh on Rambam offers the same approach.

Interestingly, Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 46b s.v. lefi'kach, suggests an answer to resolve the contradiction between Yevamot 46b and Beitzah 18a. He posits that the "fix" of a person going from impure to pure, is much less than the "fix" of a non-Jew becoming Jewish, and that's why the latter is forbidden.

</ref>

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
# Even though brachot on mitzvot are usually recited before the mitzvah is performed, the convert recites the beracha of "al ha'tevilah" after immersing<ref>Pesachim 7b. There is an interesting discussion regarding when the Beit Din recites the bracha of "al ha'tevilah" when they convert a baby (Ketubot 11a). According to the Gemara Pesachim's reasoning, they should do so beforehand, as the only reason why a convert typically says it afterwards, is because he cannot recite a bracha while he is still non-Jewish. This is the view of Raavad in Baalai HaNefesh (at the end of Shaar HaTevilah). Rav Schachter (Eretz HaTzvi p. 32) argues that the Bet Din should recite a bracha after the Tevilah in this case, as the bracha goes on the chalot (onset) of the conversion. </ref>.
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of Bet Din.<ref>Regarding whether or not the lack of Bet Din bdiavad (after the fact) invalidates the conversion: the anonymous opinion in Shulchan Aruch 268:3 is that it doesn't (in accordance with the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger and Tosfos Yevamot 45b s.v. mi), and the yesh omrim cites Rambam who thinks that it would invalidate the conversion. </ref> For purposes of modesty, women can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion, since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila. Furthermore, according to others it might be effective since the Bet Din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
*Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah, and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be a contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts, she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant, otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat, there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to the following Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes both in Christianity and Judaism, then his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid. There is a minority view held by Rav Ben Zion Uziel (Shut Piskei Uziel Siman 65), that the acceptance of mitzvot is not something that would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. This view is not accepted by the Poskim. </ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot, but didn't do so in front of a Bet Din, the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot, but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah, it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting mitzvot means that a person accepts that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah, it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. However, if he says that he accepts all mitzvot, yet knows that because of a certain desire, he won't be able to keep one mitzvah, it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he doesn't intend to violate a mitzvah because of a desire, but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah, that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue that if he doesn't intend to keep a mitzvah because of his desires, that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion, but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot, but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot, that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that the concept that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim''), is limited to interpersonal matters between two different people. However, conversion is between a person and Hashem, and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that he plans to keep Torah but his intentions are otherwise, then the conversion is invalid. Another salient point is the fact that Tosfot Kiddushin 49b s.v. devarim says that if something is so clear, even though it's not explictily stated, then in such a situation we'd consider it meaningful and significant (devarim shebelev havaih devarim). So too over here, if it's clear as day that someone doesn't intend to dedicate himself to Mitzvot, then we'd take that into account and invalidate the conversion.
*In a specific case of a woman who said that she accepted the mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism, she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim, unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot, but because of financial pressures she won't be able to practically keep all the mitzvot, then that is considered an acceptance of mitzvot. R' Moshe isn't certain about this last reason. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot, dvarim shebelev ainam devarim isn't relevant, since it is a matter between him and Heaven, regarding which intentions are critical. </ref> If it isn't clear if he accepted the mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that he accepts mitzvot, if the circumstances make it clear that this statement is dubious, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot aside from one of them, the Bet Din should not accept him as a convert.<ref>Bechorot 30b. The Gemara says that even if he only rejects a Rabbinic law, we don't accept him as a convert. See below if the rejection of a Rabbinic law would invalidate a conversion after the fact. </ref> After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
*Gemara Shabbat 31a describes a case in which Hillel converted someone, even though that individual didn't accept the legitimacy of the Oral Torah. Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel converted him because this fellow didn't deny the Oral Torah, but simply had a hard time believing that it was from Hashem. Hillel was confident that after he taught him, that he'd trust him that it came from Hashem. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that not accepting one mitzvah doesn't invalidate the conversion, but you shouldn't perform such a conversion unless you know that he will end accepting all of the mitzvot. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. The convert under question did accept the fact that the Oral Torah is binding, but wasn't necessarily convinced that it's Divine. Hillel was confident that he could correct this error later, and that's why he accepted him.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted his position, because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108, which are written after 3:106, he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila, but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case, and that it even invalidates the conversion after the fact.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he sees other "religious" Jews observing them , even though they don't properly keep all of the mitzvot, there is a discussion if this is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews, even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. R' Moshe compares this to someone who converts and lives amongst gentiles, which the Gemara (Shabbat 68a) considers to be a legitimate convert. Such a person is committed to mitzvot, even though he hasn't been properly educated in how to keep them. Similarly, this woman is committed to mitzvot, even though she hasn't been properly educated and is erroneously following a certain community's mistaken practices. Nonetheless, R' Moshe isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot except for a Rabbinic one, then after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it's a valid conversion on a Biblical level, or if it isn't a valid conversion at all. </ref>
#If the convert is converting for the sake of marriage, then after the fact the conversion is valid, as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 268:12. Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham. Interestingly, there's an opinion in the Tannaim (cited on Yevamot 24b) who holds that it isn't a valid conversion after the fact, but this isn't how we pasken. Either way, we ideally try to avoid accepting converts who are only doing so for the sake of marriage (see Shulchan Aruch ibid). </ref>
#If someone didn’t accept the mitzvot at the time of the tevilah, but planned on accepting them later, then we don't view him as having accepted the mitzvot until he actually accepts them. Additionally, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila, and the tevila needs to be repeated in this case.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# If a Bet Din converts people who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot, then it's causing a major obstacle to other Jews, as they will think that these people are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>The Achronim discuss if Bet Din violates Lifnai Ivair (placing a stumbling block before a blind person) if they convert someone who doesn't intend to keep the Mitzvot, as they are causing him to inevitably commit sins. R' Yitzchak Shmelkes in Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 offers a few arguments for why there would no issue of Lifnai Ivair. First, if he intends to keep the Mitzvot, then we can assume that he will follow through on his commitment. If he doesn't intend to keep the Mitzvot, then he's not Jewish, and he doesn't have to observe the Mitzvot. Second, it's better for him to be Jewish rather than non-Jewish, even if he will violate prohibitions, as all of Yisrael has a portion in Olam Habah (Sanhedrin 90a). However, he adds that converting people who don't intend to keep the mitzvot is a stumbling block to others who will think that they're Jewish, when they're actually non-Jewish. He therefore concludes that it isn't proper to accept convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees with R' Yitzchak Shmelkes and thinks that it's lifnei iver to cause someone who doesn't intend to keep halacha to become Jewish and then subsequently be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==A Person Who Claims to be Jewish==
#A person who is assumed to be a non-Jew (as he hasn't been behaving like a Jew), who now claims that his mother was Jewish, is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# If a convert previously had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised, then he needs hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds that he does, while Rabbeinu Chananel thinks that he does not. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who says that a non-Jew born without a foreskin doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, while a convert who already had a medical circumcision needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef cites the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 paskens that hatafat dam brit should be performed, but no bracha should be recited. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim (based on the general rule of safek berachot l'hakel, that whenever a doubt arises regarding brachot, the bracha is omitted). </ref>
# A non-Jew who is unable to have a milah for medical reasons cannot convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's reproductive organ was cut off, then he can still convert, as he becomes Jewish with tevilah alone, like women. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this position. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220.

Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma. If the milah is performed by a non-Jew, then it's invalid and the convert needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Using local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some even permit general anesthesia.<ref>R' Shternbuch in Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 permits local anthesia. However, he forbids using general anesthesia, because it's as if one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He argues that the milah is part of the process of gerut, and must therefore be done with intent to accept the Torah. When a person is under general anesthesia, he is unable to accept the mitzvot with the proper intent. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local as well as general anesthesia for an adult milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 forbids even local anesthesia, because milah should involve pain. Also, the minhag was to never use anesthesia, even though it was readily available.

Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves from the Gemara that one is able to fulfill mitzvot via a shliach (an agent) even when he's asleep.

Gemara Gittin 70b indicates that if a person appoints a shliach to divorce his wife, the shliach can go ahead and do so, even though the person who sent him is now asleep. This Gemara is codified by Bet Shmuel Even HaEzer 121:2.

Seridei Esh 3:96 only permitted local anesthesia. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) was lenient and even permitted general anesthesia. He bases himself on the view of Maharach Or Zaruah 11, who holds that the Mitzvah of Milah is fulfilled when a person is in a state of being circumcised (chalot milah), as opposed to the act of circumcision (maaseh milah). Chelkat Yaakov therefore argues that there's no need for someone to be conscious while the milah takes place, as the mitzvah is fulfilled afterwards when he wakes up and is circumcised. Chelkat Yaakov doesn't think that pain is a necessary component of Milah, disagreeing with the Koret Habrit (261:4), who believes that pain is an essential ingredient of Milah.

With regards to the above Maharch Ohr Zarua, he argues his point based on a story cited in the Gemara Menachot 43b. When King David entered the bathhouse, he was upset that he didn't have any Mitzvot with him, until he remembered that he still had his Milah with him. Maharach Ohr Zarua argues that if the mitzvah of milah is limited to the act of circumcision, then David didn't have any mitzvot with him. Rather, it must be that the mitzvah of milah is fulfilled when a person is in a state of being circumcised, and this is why David was happy.
</ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did, then it would be a problem of asufi. (An asufi a child who is found in the street, and we don't know the identity of its parents. We assume that it's a safek mamzer. See Mishna Kiddushin 69a and 74a). R' Moshe writes that we assume that he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Ideally (lechatchila), a person should not convert for the sake of marriage, but after the fact (bdiavad) it's acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that the reason it's acceptable after the fact, is because we assume that they authentically committed themselves to mitzvot, even though their marriage is what pressured them into doing so. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it's only valid if afterwards we see that they keep halacha properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the person who converts for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many people who convert for marriage don't really accept the mitzvot, one should be very wary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of people who converted for marriage in America during the 1950s are not valid converts, because they didn't actually accept the mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment with regards to Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting, and only accept him if he has pure intentions, or if they can assess that his intentions will eventually become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27. Shach 268-23 paskens like Tosfot 24b s.v. lo, who understands that the reason Hillel converted someone who wanted to become the Kohen Gadol (Shabbat 31a), even though we don't accept people who convert for ulterior motives, is because Hillel was confident that he would eventually be committed for the right reasons. Shach notes that this is the source that we follow Bet Din's evaluation, and that if they think the situation will turn out well, then we go by that. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it's evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure, then they can't lechatchila accept him as a convert . However, if his intentions aren't clear, even after their investigation, then they can accept him as a convert. </ref>
#Some poskim hold that if a couple intends on remaining married, irrespective of whether or not the non-Jewish spouse converts, then such a conversion is not considered for the sake of marriage .<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din, it's possible to accept a convert for marriage, if the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew, it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other, in order to differentiate between a child that was conceived when she was non-Jewish, and one conceived when she was Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test that checks if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana, because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable, and there's no need to wait three months. </ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and then converts is required to wait 3 months before getting remarried to her previous husband.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it's clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and then converts by herself, must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no room for leniency, even if it's clear that she’s not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava, but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion, some hold that a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 only relies on a pregnancy test for a single woman who converts, which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since according to Shulchan Aruch she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was done and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it is unknown, nonetheless, that is a serious issue and needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle of a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown does not apply to non-Jews. A non-Jew women who married a Jew all the children are non-Jewish and can impact later generations. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews and [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Conversion

2024-08-21T19:48:54Z

Bchernigoff: added content

While Judaism does not proselytize<ref>Part of the reason for our hesitancy to accept converts is rooted in a statement of the Gemara Kiddushin 70b: "converts are bad like sapachat (a form of Tzara'at) for the Jewish people". Gemara Yevamot 47b says that this is the reason why we discourage converts when they first appear before us, as we challenge their motivations for converting and attempt to dissuade them from doing so. Rashi Kiddushin 70b s.v. kashin explains that since they aren't meticulous in their observance of Mitzvot, naturally born Jews will inevitably be negatively influenced by them. Rashi Niddah 13b s.v. k'sapachat adds that because they aren't experts in Mitzvot, they'll bring about punishment (similar to when the King of Assyria exiled the people of Kutha to the Shomron, they converted to Judaism, and then Hashem punished them for their lack of observance by sending lions to ravage them. See Melachim II 17:25).

(As an aside, Rashi Niddah also has an interesting opinion that the concept of "kol yisrael arevim zeh b'zeh" (Shevuot 39a), that all Jews are guarantors for one another, doesn't apply to converts. This is not the accepted practice, as we usually allow a convert to be yotzaih (fulfill his obligation) Kiddush by hearing it from a naturally born Jew, and vice versa as well. However, Beit Yitzchak 2:100:11 seems to adopt this Rashi, that Jews aren't punished for the sins of converts.).

Tosfot Kiddushin 70b s.v. kashim quotes an interesting explanation of this Gemara from R' Avraham HaGer (a figure who lived in the days of the Baalai HaTosfot). He argues that converts are in fact more meticulous in their observance of mitzvot than naturally born Jews, and when Hashem sees their dedication, He recalls the shortcomings of the Jewish people and grows angry with them. He draws a parallel to a story in Navi (Melachim I:17) that the woman of Tzarfat accused Eliyahu as being the reason for her son's death, that his piety highlighted her lower spiritual state and incurred Hashem's wrath. Tosfot posits that another way of understanding why converts are bad for the Jewish people is because the Torah warns in twenty four places about oppressing them, and it is very difficult to be properly sensitive towards them and not violate this prohibition. </ref>, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert.

There is also a discussion as to whether or not there's a Mitzvah to perform conversions. Gemara Yevamot 47b says that once a prospective convert dedicates himself to keep the Mitzvot, we do Milah right away, because "we don't delay a Mitzvah". The simple understanding of this Gemara is that there is a Mitzvah element to converting people. Furthermore, the fact that Gemara Shabbat 137b records that when performing a Milah on a convert, the text of the beracha includes "who has commanded us to give a Milah to converts", indicates that there is a Mitzvah to convert people. Tashbetz (Zohar HaRakia, assin 40) thinks that accepting converts is a Mitzvah, but is unsure under which Mitzvah it would be included. Interestingly, he also thinks that the fact that Beit Din converts a Katan al da'at Beit Din (Ketubot 11a), indicates that there's a Mitzvah to accept converts.

Tosfot HaRosh (Shabbat 137b) suggests that accepting converts is included in the Mitzvah of loving the convert, as it's impossible to love him if he doesn't receive a Milah and is converted. Raavad in Sefer Baalai HaNefesh (end of Shaar HaTevilah) learns that the Mitzvah is derived from the fact that Avraham converted people (see Rashi Bereshit 12:5 s.v. asher asu). Another possibility is that it's included in the Mitzvah of loving Hashem, which according to Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot Asseh 3) includes making Hashem beloved unto others and drawing them to His service. </ref>. There are three basic components to conversion: the acceptance of mitzvot, milah and tevilah. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah, there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective. Therefore, if the tevilah was performed before the milah, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether bdiavad (after the fact) the order of milah and tevilah would invalidate the conversion. The Ramban posits that it wouldn't, while Raah believes that it would invalidate the conversion. The Shach 268:2 therefore says that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be performed during the day.<ref>Yevamot 46b</ref> If the acceptance of Mitzvot is performed at night, then this would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. If the milah or tevilah is performed at night, it's disputed if this would bdiavad invalidate the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. The anonymous view in Shulchan Aruch is that only if the acceptance of mitzvot is done at night does it invalidate the conversion. He also cites by name the view of Rambam, that if any stage of the conversion is done at night, then it invalidates the conversion.

Bach CM 5:6 writes that we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>
#The tevilah of a convert may not be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov.<ref>Rambam Issurei Biah 13:6 and Shulchan Aruch 268:4. They give the reason that since conversion is compared to Din (as Yevamot 46b notes that the word "mishpat" is used in association with conversion), it cannot be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov. (Mishnah Beitzah 36b notes that the Rabbis forbade having Din on Shabbat and Yom Tov, and the Gemara explains that we're concerned that a person will come to write things down).

Taz 268:11 raises the issue that the Gemara Yevamot 46b gives a different reason for this Halacha, namely that we don't "fix a person on Shabbat". (This a Rabbinic form of "fixing a vessel", similar to the prohibition mentioned in Beitzah 36b that one cannot separate Terumot and Maasarot on Shabbat and Yom Tov, as one is fixing the remainder of the produce). He suggests that since the Gemara Beitzah 18a permits a person who is impure (tameh) to immerse on Shabbat and Yom Tov, because it appears like he's cooling off and isn't trying to fix his impure state, the same logic should allow a convert to immerse as well. Thus, the Rambam paskens like the sugya in Beitzah over Yevamot 46b. Kesef Mishneh on Rambam offers the same approach.

Interestingly, Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 46b s.v. lefi'kach, suggests an answer to resolve the contradiction between Yevamot 46b and Beitzah 18a. He posits that the "fix" of a person going from impure to pure, is much less than the "fix" of a non-Jew becoming Jewish, and that's why the latter is forbidden.

</ref>

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
# Even though brachot on mitzvot are usually recited before the mitzvah is performed, the convert recites the beracha of "al ha'tevilah" after immersing<ref>Pesachim 7b. There is an interesting discussion regarding when the Beit Din recites the bracha of "al ha'tevilah" when they convert a baby (Ketubot 11a). According to the Gemara Pesachim's reasoning, they should do so beforehand, as the only reason why a convert typically says it afterwards, is because he cannot recite a bracha while he is still non-Jewish. This is the view of Raavad in Baalai HaNefesh (at the end of Shaar HaTevilah). Rav Schachter (Eretz HaTzvi p. 32) argues that the Bet Din should recite a bracha after the Tevilah in this case, as the bracha goes on the chalot (onset) of the conversion. </ref>.
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of Bet Din.<ref>Regarding whether or not the lack of Bet Din bdiavad (after the fact) invalidates the conversion: the anonymous opinion in Shulchan Aruch 268:3 is that it doesn't (in accordance with the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger and Tosfos Yevamot 45b s.v. mi), and the yesh omrim cites Rambam who thinks that it would invalidate the conversion. </ref> For purposes of modesty, women can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion, since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila. Furthermore, according to others it might be effective since the Bet Din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
*Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah, and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be a contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts, she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant, otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat, there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to the following Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes both in Christianity and Judaism, then his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid. There is a minority view held by Rav Ben Zion Uziel (Shut Piskei Uziel Siman 65), that the acceptance of mitzvot is not something that would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. This view is not accepted by the Poskim. </ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot, but didn't do so in front of a Bet Din, the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot, but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah, it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting mitzvot means that a person accepts that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah, it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. However, if he says that he accepts all mitzvot, yet knows that because of a certain desire, he won't be able to keep one mitzvah, it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he doesn't intend to violate a mitzvah because of a desire, but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah, that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue that if he doesn't intend to keep a mitzvah because of his desires, that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion, but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot, but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot, that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that the concept that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim''), is limited to interpersonal matters between two different people. However, conversion is between a person and Hashem, and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that he plans to keep Torah but his intentions are otherwise, then the conversion is invalid. Another salient point is the fact that Tosfot Kiddushin 49b s.v. devarim says that if something is so clear, even though it's not explictily stated, then in such a situation we'd consider it meaningful and significant (devarim shebelev havaih devarim). So too over here, if it's clear as day that someone doesn't intend to dedicate himself to Mitzvot, then we'd take that into account and invalidate the conversion.
*In a specific case of a woman who said that she accepted the mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism, she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim, unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot, but because of financial pressures she won't be able to practically keep all the mitzvot, then that is considered an acceptance of mitzvot. R' Moshe isn't certain about this last reason. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot, dvarim shebelev ainam devarim isn't relevant, since it is a matter between him and Heaven, regarding which intentions are critical. </ref> If it isn't clear if he accepted the mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that he accepts mitzvot, if the circumstances make it clear that this statement is dubious, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot aside from one of them, the Bet Din should not accept him as a convert.<ref>Bechorot 30b. The Gemara says that even if he only rejects a Rabbinic law, we don't accept him as a convert. See below if the rejection of a Rabbinic law would invalidate a conversion after the fact. </ref> After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
*Gemara Shabbat 31a describes a case in which Hillel converted someone, even though that individual didn't accept the legitimacy of the Oral Torah. Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel converted him because this fellow didn't deny the Oral Torah, but simply had a hard time believing that it was from Hashem. Hillel was confident that after he taught him, that he'd trust him that it came from Hashem. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that not accepting one mitzvah doesn't invalidate the conversion, but you shouldn't perform such a conversion unless you know that he will end accepting all of the mitzvot. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. The convert under question did accept the fact that the Oral Torah is binding, but wasn't necessarily convinced that it's Divine. Hillel was confident that he could correct this error later, and that's why he accepted him.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted his position, because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108, which are written after 3:106, he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila, but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case, and that it even invalidates the conversion after the fact.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he sees other "religious" Jews observing them , even though they don't properly keep all of the mitzvot, there is a discussion if this is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews, even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. R' Moshe compares this to someone who converts and lives amongst gentiles, which the Gemara (Shabbat 68a) considers to be a legitimate convert. Such a person is committed to mitzvot, even though he hasn't been properly educated in how to keep them. Similarly, this woman is committed to mitzvot, even though she hasn't been properly educated and is erroneously following a certain community's mistaken practices. Nonetheless, R' Moshe isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot except for a Rabbinic one, then after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it's a valid conversion on a Biblical level, or if it isn't a valid conversion at all. </ref>
#If the convert is converting for the sake of marriage, then after the fact the conversion is valid, as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 268:12. Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham. Interestingly, there's an opinion in the Tannaim (cited on Yevamot 24b) who holds that it isn't a valid conversion after the fact, but this isn't how we pasken. Either way, we ideally try to avoid accepting converts who are only doing so for the sake of marriage (see Shulchan Aruch ibid). </ref>
#If someone didn’t accept the mitzvot at the time of the tevilah, but planned on accepting them later, then we don't view him as having accepted the mitzvot until he actually accepts them. Additionally, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila, and the tevila needs to be repeated in this case.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# If a Bet Din converts people who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot, then it's causing a major obstacle to other Jews, as they will think that these people are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>The Achronim discuss if Bet Din violates Lifnai Ivair (placing a stumbling block before a blind person) if they convert someone who doesn't intend to keep the Mitzvot, as they are causing him to inevitably commit sins. R' Yitzchak Shmelkes in Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 offers a few arguments for why there would no issue of Lifnai Ivair. First, if he intends to keep the Mitzvot, then we can assume that he will follow through on his commitment. If he doesn't intend to keep the Mitzvot, then he's not Jewish, and he doesn't have to observe the Mitzvot. Second, it's better for him to be Jewish rather than non-Jewish, even if he will violate prohibitions, as all of Yisrael has a portion in Olam Habah (Sanhedrin 90a). However, he adds that converting people who don't intend to keep the mitzvot is a stumbling block to others who will think that they're Jewish, when they're actually non-Jewish. He therefore concludes that it isn't proper to accept convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees with R' Yitzchak Shmelkes and thinks that it's lifnei iver to cause someone who doesn't intend to keep halacha to become Jewish and then subsequently be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==A Person Who Claims to be Jewish==
#A person who was assumed to be a non-Jew, as he wasn't behaving like a Jew, who now claims that his mother was Jewish, is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# If a convert previously had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised, then he needs hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds that he does, while Rabbeinu Chananel thinks that he does not. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who says that a non-Jew born without a foreskin doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, while a convert who already had a medical circumcision needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef cites the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 paskens that hatafat dam brit should be performed, but no bracha should be recited. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim (based on the general rule of safek berachot l'hakel, that whenever a doubt arises regarding brachot, the bracha is omitted). </ref>
# A non-Jew who is unable to have a milah for medical reasons cannot convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's reproductive organ was cut off, then he can still convert, as he becomes Jewish with tevilah alone, like women. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this position. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220.

Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma, and if done by a non-Jew is invalid and needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Doing local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some permit even general anesthesia.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 only allows local anthesia and writes that this is the minhag. Though they shouldn't do general anesthesia because it is like one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He says that the milah is part of the process of gerut and must be done with intent to accept the torah at that time and being under anesthesia disables a person from accepting the torah then. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local or general anesthesia when discussing an adult's milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 writes that the reason that one shouldn't use any anesthesia is because milah should involve pain and the minhag was never to use anesthesia even though it was available.
* Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves that being asleep is still able to fulfill mitzvot through his agency as the gemara Gittin 70b indicates and is codified by Bet Shmuel EH 121:2. Seridei Esh 3:96 only allowed local. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) lenient. According to Maharach Or Zaruah 11 the purpose of the milah is the result and isn't an action that you need to appoint someone with shelichut. He disagrees with the Koret Habrit (261:4) who holds that the milah shouldn't have anesthesia because it should involve pain. </ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did then it would be a problem of asufi. However, we assume he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Initially a bet din may not convert for marriage but after the fact it is acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that it is acceptable after the fact because of the extenuating circumstance of wanting to get married they decided to convert and that is binding. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it is valid only if afterwards we see that they keep Judaism properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the convert for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many who convert for marriage don't really accept mitzvot one should be very weary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of converts for marriage in the 1950s in America are invalid because they didn't actually accept mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment in Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting and only accept him if his intentions are pure or bet din can assess that they will become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 explains that the halacha that we check for the intentions didn't stop applying. The bet din has to decide if he's doing it for pure intent or for marriage or any other reason in which case they shouldn't accept him. If they can assess the situation and think that he will eventually accept Torah for pure intent it is acceptable to accept him even if his original intentions aren't pure. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it is evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure then they can't accept the convert initially. However, if it isn't clear even after investigation then they can.</ref>
#Some poskim hold that it isn't considered for marriage if either way they're going to continue to stay married even though she remains non-Jewish.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din it is possible to accept a convert for marriage if the consequences are that potentially the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other in order to differentiate between a child she would have while non-Jewish and while she’s Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<Ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test to check if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable to ensure that she's either pregnant or not pregnant not to require waiting 3 months.</ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and converts must wait 3 months before getting remarried after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it is clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and converts by herself must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no leniency even if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts and wants to get married does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion some hold a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 relies on a pregnancy test only for a convert which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was done and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it is unknown, nonetheless, that is a serious issue and needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle of a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown does not apply to non-Jews. A non-Jew women who married a Jew all the children are non-Jewish and can impact later generations. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews and [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Conversion

2024-08-21T18:04:56Z

Bchernigoff: added material and fixed up grammar

While Judaism does not proselytize<ref>Part of the reason for our hesitancy to accept converts is rooted in a statement of the Gemara Kiddushin 70b: "converts are bad like sapachat (a form of Tzara'at) for the Jewish people". Gemara Yevamot 47b says that this is the reason why we discourage converts when they first appear before us, as we challenge their motivations for converting and attempt to dissuade them from doing so. Rashi Kiddushin 70b s.v. kashin explains that since they aren't meticulous in their observance of Mitzvot, naturally born Jews will inevitably be negatively influenced by them. Rashi Niddah 13b s.v. k'sapachat adds that because they aren't experts in Mitzvot, they'll bring about punishment (similar to when the King of Assyria exiled the people of Kutha to the Shomron, they converted to Judaism, and then Hashem punished them for their lack of observance by sending lions to ravage them. See Melachim II 17:25).

(As an aside, Rashi Niddah also has an interesting opinion that the concept of "kol yisrael arevim zeh b'zeh" (Shevuot 39a), that all Jews are guarantors for one another, doesn't apply to converts. This is not the accepted practice, as we usually allow a convert to be yotzaih (fulfill his obligation) Kiddush by hearing it from a naturally born Jew, and vice versa as well).

Tosfot Kiddushin 70b s.v. kashim quotes an interesting explanation from a figure who lived in the days of the Baalai HaTosfot known as R' Avraham HaGer. He argues that converts are in fact more meticulous in their observance of mitzvot than naturally born Jews, and when Hashem sees their dedication, He recalls the shortcomings of the Jewish people and grows angry with them. He draws a parallel to a story in Navi (Melachim I:17) that the woman of Tzarfat accused Eliyahu as being the reason for her son's death, that his piety highlighted her lower spiritual state and incurred Hashem's wrath. Tosfot posits that another way of understanding why converts are bad for the Jewish people is because the Torah warns in twenty four places about oppressing them, and it is very difficult to be properly sensitive towards them and not violate this prohibition. </ref>, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert.

There is also a discussion as to whether or not there's a Mitzvah to perform conversions. Gemara Yevamot 47b says that once a prospective convert dedicates himself to keep the Mitzvot, we do Milah right away, because "we don't delay a Mitzvah". The simple understanding of this Gemara is that there is a Mitzvah element to converting people. Furthermore, the fact that Gemara Shabbat 137b records that when performing a Milah on a convert, the text of the beracha includes "who has commanded us to give a Milah to converts", indicates that there is a Mitzvah to convert people. Tashbetz (Zohar HaRakia, assin 40) thinks that accepting converts is a Mitzvah, but is unsure under which Mitzvah it would be included. Interestingly, he also thinks that the fact that Beit Din converts a Katan al da'at Beit Din (Ketubot 11a), indicates that there's a Mitzvah to accept converts.

Tosfot HaRosh (Shabbat 137b) suggests that accepting converts is included in the Mitzvah of loving the convert, as it's impossible to love him if he doesn't receive a Milah and is converted. Raavad in Sefer Baalai HaNefesh (end of Shaar HaTevilah) learns that the Mitzvah is derived from the fact that Avraham converted people (see Rashi Bereshit 12:5 s.v. asher asu). Another possibility is that it's included in the Mitzvah of loving Hashem, which according to Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot Asseh 3) includes making Hashem beloved unto others and drawing them to His service. </ref>. There are three basic components to conversion: the acceptance of mitzvot, milah and tevilah. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah, there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective. Therefore, if the tevilah was performed before the milah, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether bdiavad (after the fact) the order of milah and tevilah would invalidate the conversion. The Ramban posits that it wouldn't, while Raah believes that it would invalidate the conversion. The Shach 268:2 therefore says that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be performed during the day.<ref>Yevamot 46b</ref> If the acceptance of Mitzvot is performed at night, then this would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. If the milah or tevilah is performed at night, it's disputed if this would bdiavad invalidate the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. The anonymous view in Shulchan Aruch is that only if the acceptance of mitzvot is done at night does it invalidate the conversion. He also cites by name the view of Rambam, that if any stage of the conversion is done at night, then it invalidates the conversion.

Bach CM 5:6 writes that we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>
#The tevilah of a convert may not be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov.<ref>Rambam Issurei Biah 13:6 and Shulchan Aruch 268:4. They give the reason that since conversion is compared to Din (as Yevamot 46b notes that the word "mishpat" is used in association with conversion), it cannot be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov. (Mishnah Beitzah 36b notes that the Rabbis forbade having Din on Shabbat and Yom Tov, and the Gemara explains that we're concerned that a person will come to write things down).

Taz 268:11 raises the issue that the Gemara Yevamot 46b gives a different reason for this Halacha, namely that we don't "fix a person on Shabbat". (This a Rabbinic form of "fixing a vessel", similar to the prohibition mentioned in Beitzah 36b that one cannot separate Terumot and Maasarot on Shabbat and Yom Tov, as one is fixing the remainder of the produce). He suggests that since the Gemara Beitzah 18a permits a person who is impure (tameh) to immerse on Shabbat and Yom Tov, because it appears like he's cooling off and isn't trying to fix his impure state, the same logic should allow a convert to immerse as well. Thus, the Rambam paskens like the sugya in Beitzah over Yevamot 46b. Kesef Mishneh on Rambam offers the same approach.

Interestingly, Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 46b s.v. lefi'kach, suggests an answer to resolve the contradiction between Yevamot 46b and Beitzah 18a. He posits that the "fix" of a person going from impure to pure, is much less than the "fix" of a non-Jew becoming Jewish, and that's why the latter is forbidden.

</ref>

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
# Even though brachot on mitzvot are usually recited before the mitzvah is performed, the convert recites the beracha of "al ha'tevilah" after immersing<ref>Pesachim 7b. There is an interesting discussion regarding when the Beit Din recites the bracha of "al ha'tevilah" when they convert a baby (Ketubot 11a). According to the Gemara Pesachim's reasoning, they should do so beforehand, as the only reason why a convert typically says it afterwards, is because he cannot recite a bracha while he is still non-Jewish. This is the view of Raavad in Baalai HaNefesh (at the end of Shaar HaTevilah). Rav Schachter (Eretz HaTzvi p. 32) argues that the Bet Din should recite a bracha after the Tevilah in this case, as the bracha goes on the chalot (onset) of the conversion. </ref>.
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of Bet Din.<ref>Regarding whether or not the lack of Bet Din bdiavad (after the fact) invalidates the conversion: the anonymous opinion in Shulchan Aruch 268:3 is that it doesn't (in accordance with the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger and Tosfos Yevamot 45b s.v. mi), and the yesh omrim cites Rambam who thinks that it would invalidate the conversion. </ref> For purposes of modesty, women can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion, since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila. Furthermore, according to others it might be effective since the Bet Din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
*Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah, and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be a contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts, she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant, otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat, there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to the following Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes both in Christianity and Judaism, then his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid. There is a minority view held by Rav Ben Zion Uziel (Shut Piskei Uziel Siman 65), that the acceptance of mitzvot is not something that would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. This view is not accepted by the Poskim. </ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot, but didn't do so in front of a Bet Din, the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot, but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah, it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting mitzvot means that a person accepts that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah, it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. However, if he says that he accepts all mitzvot, yet knows that because of a certain desire, he won't be able to keep one mitzvah, it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he doesn't intend to violate a mitzvah because of a desire, but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah, that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue that if he doesn't intend to keep a mitzvah because of his desires, that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion, but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot, but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot, that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that the concept that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim''), is limited to interpersonal matters between two different people. However, conversion is between a person and Hashem, and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that he plans to keep Torah but his intentions are otherwise, then the conversion is invalid. Another salient point is the fact that Tosfot Kiddushin 49b s.v. devarim says that if something is so clear, even though it's not explictily stated, then in such a situation we'd consider it meaningful and significant (devarim shebelev havaih devarim). So too over here, if it's clear as day that someone doesn't intend to dedicate himself to Mitzvot, then we'd take that into account and invalidate the conversion.
*In a specific case of a woman who said that she accepted the mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism, she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim, unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot, but because of financial pressures she won't be able to practically keep all the mitzvot, then that is considered an acceptance of mitzvot. R' Moshe isn't certain about this last reason. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot, dvarim shebelev ainam devarim isn't relevant, since it is a matter between him and Heaven, regarding which intentions are critical. </ref> If it isn't clear if he accepted the mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that he accepts mitzvot, if the circumstances make it clear that this statement is dubious, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot aside from one of them, the Bet Din should not accept him as a convert. After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
*Gemara Shabbat 31a describes a case in which Hillel converted someone, even though that individual didn't accept the legitimacy of the Oral Torah. Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel converted him because this fellow didn't deny the Oral Torah, but simply had a hard time believing that it was from Hashem. Hillel was confident that after he taught him, that he'd trust him that it came from Hashem. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that not accepting one mitzvah doesn't invalidate the conversion, but you shouldn't perform such a conversion unless you know that he will end accepting all of the mitzvot. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. The convert under question did accept the fact that the Oral Torah is binding, but wasn't necessarily convinced that it's Divine. Hillel was confident that he could correct this error later, and that's why he accepted him.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108 which are written after 3:106 he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he observes other "religious" Jews observing even though it isn't in fact all the mitzvot properly there is a discussion if that is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. Though he isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides a rabbinic mitzvah after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it is a valid conversion on a biblical level or not at all.</ref>
#If the convert is converting for marriage after the fact the conversion is valid as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham</ref>
#If she didn’t accept mitzvot at the time of the tevilah but planned on accepting mitzvot later that isn’t considered an acceptance of mitzvot until the later time. However, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila and the tevila needs to be repeated.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# A bet din who accepts converts who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot are causing a major obstacle to other Jews who will think that they are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 writes that it isn't lifnei iver for the convert himself since it is the convert's obligation to keep Torah and he isn't responsible for his actions (Rashi Niddah 13a). However, he adds that it is a problem since others will think that they are Jewish and that is a major problem for them. Therefore, he says it isn't proper to accept such a convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees and holds that it is lifnei iver to cause him to become Jewish and be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==A Person Who Claims to be Jewish==
#A person who was assumed to be a non-Jew, as he wasn't behaving like a Jew, who now claims that his mother was Jewish, is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# If a convert previously had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised, then he needs hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds that he does, while Rabbeinu Chananel thinks that he does not. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who says that a non-Jew born without a foreskin doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, while a convert who already had a medical circumcision needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef cites the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 paskens that hatafat dam brit should be performed, but no bracha should be recited. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim (based on the general rule of safek berachot l'hakel, that whenever a doubt arises regarding brachot, the bracha is omitted). </ref>
# A non-Jew who is unable to have a milah for medical reasons cannot convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's reproductive organ was cut off, then he can still convert, as he becomes Jewish with tevilah alone, like women. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this position. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220.

Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma, and if done by a non-Jew is invalid and needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Doing local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some permit even general anesthesia.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 only allows local anthesia and writes that this is the minhag. Though they shouldn't do general anesthesia because it is like one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He says that the milah is part of the process of gerut and must be done with intent to accept the torah at that time and being under anesthesia disables a person from accepting the torah then. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local or general anesthesia when discussing an adult's milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 writes that the reason that one shouldn't use any anesthesia is because milah should involve pain and the minhag was never to use anesthesia even though it was available.
* Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves that being asleep is still able to fulfill mitzvot through his agency as the gemara Gittin 70b indicates and is codified by Bet Shmuel EH 121:2. Seridei Esh 3:96 only allowed local. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) lenient. According to Maharach Or Zaruah 11 the purpose of the milah is the result and isn't an action that you need to appoint someone with shelichut. He disagrees with the Koret Habrit (261:4) who holds that the milah shouldn't have anesthesia because it should involve pain. </ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did then it would be a problem of asufi. However, we assume he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Initially a bet din may not convert for marriage but after the fact it is acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that it is acceptable after the fact because of the extenuating circumstance of wanting to get married they decided to convert and that is binding. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it is valid only if afterwards we see that they keep Judaism properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the convert for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many who convert for marriage don't really accept mitzvot one should be very weary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of converts for marriage in the 1950s in America are invalid because they didn't actually accept mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment in Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting and only accept him if his intentions are pure or bet din can assess that they will become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 explains that the halacha that we check for the intentions didn't stop applying. The bet din has to decide if he's doing it for pure intent or for marriage or any other reason in which case they shouldn't accept him. If they can assess the situation and think that he will eventually accept Torah for pure intent it is acceptable to accept him even if his original intentions aren't pure. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it is evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure then they can't accept the convert initially. However, if it isn't clear even after investigation then they can.</ref>
#Some poskim hold that it isn't considered for marriage if either way they're going to continue to stay married even though she remains non-Jewish.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din it is possible to accept a convert for marriage if the consequences are that potentially the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other in order to differentiate between a child she would have while non-Jewish and while she’s Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<Ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test to check if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable to ensure that she's either pregnant or not pregnant not to require waiting 3 months.</ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and converts must wait 3 months before getting remarried after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it is clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and converts by herself must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no leniency even if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts and wants to get married does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion some hold a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 relies on a pregnancy test only for a convert which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was done and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it is unknown, nonetheless, that is a serious issue and needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle of a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown does not apply to non-Jews. A non-Jew women who married a Jew all the children are non-Jewish and can impact later generations. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews and [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Conversion

2024-08-21T17:33:27Z

Bchernigoff: added content

While Judaism does not proselytize<ref>Part of the reason for our hesitancy to accept converts is rooted in a statement of the Gemara Kiddushin 70b: "converts are bad like sapachat (a form of Tzara'at) for the Jewish people". Gemara Yevamot 47b says that this is the reason why we discourage converts when they first appear before us, as we challenge their motivations for converting and attempt to dissuade them from doing so. Rashi Kiddushin 70b s.v. kashin explains that since they aren't meticulous in their observance of Mitzvot, naturally born Jews will inevitably be negatively influenced by them. Rashi Niddah 13b s.v. k'sapachat adds that because they aren't experts in Mitzvot, they'll bring about punishment (similar to when the King of Assyria exiled the people of Kutha to the Shomron, they converted to Judaism, and then Hashem punished them for their lack of observance by sending lions to ravage them. See Melachim II 17:25).

(As an aside, Rashi Niddah also has an interesting opinion that the concept of "kol yisrael arevim zeh b'zeh" (Shevuot 39a), that all Jews are guarantors for one another, doesn't apply to converts. This is not the accepted practice, as we usually allow a convert to be yotzaih (fulfill his obligation) Kiddush by hearing it from a naturally born Jew, and vice versa as well).

Tosfot Kiddushin 70b s.v. kashim quotes an interesting explanation from a figure who lived in the days of the Baalai HaTosfot known as R' Avraham HaGer. He argues that converts are in fact more meticulous in their observance of mitzvot than naturally born Jews, and when Hashem sees their dedication, He recalls the shortcomings of the Jewish people and grows angry with them. He draws a parallel to a story in Navi (Melachim I:17) that the woman of Tzarfat accused Eliyahu as being the reason for her son's death, that his piety highlighted her lower spiritual state and incurred Hashem's wrath. Tosfot posits that another way of understanding why converts are bad for the Jewish people is because the Torah warns in twenty four places about oppressing them, and it is very difficult to be properly sensitive towards them and not violate this prohibition. </ref>, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert.

There is also a discussion as to whether or not there's a Mitzvah to perform conversions. Gemara Yevamot 47b says that once a prospective convert dedicates himself to keep the Mitzvot, we do Milah right away, because "we don't delay a Mitzvah". The simple understanding of this Gemara is that there is a Mitzvah element to converting people. Furthermore, the fact that Gemara Shabbat 137b records that when performing a Milah on a convert, the text of the beracha includes "who has commanded us to give a Milah to converts", indicates that there is a Mitzvah to convert people. Tashbetz (Zohar HaRakia, assin 40) thinks that accepting converts is a Mitzvah, but is unsure under which Mitzvah it would be included. Interestingly, he also thinks that the fact that Beit Din converts a Katan al da'at Beit Din (Ketubot 11a), indicates that there's a Mitzvah to accept converts.

Tosfot HaRosh (Shabbat 137b) suggests that accepting converts is included in the Mitzvah of loving the convert, as it's impossible to love him if he doesn't receive a Milah and is converted. Raavad in Sefer Baalai HaNefesh (end of Shaar HaTevilah) learns that the Mitzvah is derived from the fact that Avraham converted people (see Rashi Bereshit 12:5 s.v. asher asu). Another possibility is that it's included in the Mitzvah of loving Hashem, which according to Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot Asseh 3) includes making Hashem beloved unto others and drawing them to His service. </ref>. There are three basic components to conversion: the acceptance of mitzvot, milah and tevilah. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah, there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective. Therefore, if the tevilah was performed before the milah, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether bdiavad (after the fact) the order of milah and tevilah would invalidate the conversion. The Ramban posits that it wouldn't, while Raah believes that it would invalidate the conversion. The Shach 268:2 therefore says that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be performed during the day.<ref>Yevamot 46b</ref> If the acceptance of Mitzvot is performed at night, then this would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. If the milah or tevilah is performed at night, it's disputed if this would bdiavad invalidate the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. The anonymous view in Shulchan Aruch is that only if the acceptance of mitzvot is done at night does it invalidate the conversion. He also cites by name the view of Rambam, that if any stage of the conversion is done at night, then it invalidates the conversion.

Bach CM 5:6 writes that we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>
#The tevilah of a convert may not be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov.<ref>Rambam Issurei Biah 13:6 and Shulchan Aruch 268:4. They give the reason that since conversion is compared to Din (as Yevamot 46b notes that the word "mishpat" is used in association with conversion), it cannot be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov. (Mishnah Beitzah 36b notes that the Rabbis forbade having Din on Shabbat and Yom Tov, and the Gemara explains that we're concerned that a person will come to write things down).

Taz 268:11 raises the issue that the Gemara Yevamot 46b gives a different reason for this Halacha, namely that we don't "fix a person on Shabbat". (This a Rabbinic form of "fixing a vessel", similar to the prohibition mentioned in Beitzah 36b that one cannot separate Terumot and Maasarot on Shabbat and Yom Tov, as one is fixing the remainder of the produce). He suggests that since the Gemara Beitzah 18a permits a person who is impure (tameh) to immerse on Shabbat and Yom Tov, because it appears like he's cooling off and isn't trying to fix his impure state, the same logic should allow a convert to immerse as well. Thus, the Rambam paskens like the sugya in Beitzah over Yevamot 46b. Kesef Mishneh on Rambam offers the same approach.

Interestingly, Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 46b s.v. lefi'kach, suggests an answer to resolve the contradiction between Yevamot 46b and Beitzah 18a. He posits that the "fix" of a person going from impure to pure, is much less than the "fix" of a non-Jew becoming Jewish, and that's why the latter is forbidden.

</ref>

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
# Even though brachot on mitzvot are usually recited before the mitzvah is performed, the convert recites the beracha of "al ha'tevilah" after immersing<ref>Pesachim 7b. There is an interesting discussion regarding when the Beit Din recites the bracha of "al ha'tevilah" when they convert a baby (Ketubot 11a). According to the Gemara Pesachim's reasoning, they should do so beforehand, as the only reason why a convert typically says it afterwards, is because he cannot recite a bracha while he is still non-Jewish. This is the view of Raavad in Baalai HaNefesh (at the end of Shaar HaTevilah). Rav Schachter (Eretz HaTzvi p. 32) argues that the Bet Din should recite a bracha after the Tevilah in this case, as the bracha goes on the chalot (onset) of the conversion. </ref>.
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of Bet Din.<ref>Regarding whether or not the lack of Bet Din bdiavad (after the fact) invalidates the conversion: the anonymous opinion in Shulchan Aruch 268:3 is that it doesn't (in accordance with the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger and Tosfos Yevamot 45b s.v. mi), and the yesh omrim cites Rambam who thinks that it would invalidate the conversion. </ref> For purposes of modesty, women can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion, since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila. Furthermore, according to others it might be effective since the Bet Din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
*Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah, and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be a contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts, she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant, otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat, there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to the following Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes both in Christianity and Judaism, then his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid. There is a minority view held by Rav Ben Zion Uziel (Shut Piskei Uziel Siman 65), that the acceptance of mitzvot is not something that would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. This view is not accepted by the Poskim. </ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot, but didn't do so in front of a Bet Din, the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot, but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah, it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting mitzvot means that a person accepts that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah, it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. However, if he says that he accepts all mitzvot, yet knows that because of a certain desire, he won't be able to keep one mitzvah, it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he doesn't intend to violate a mitzvah because of a desire, but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah, that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue that if he doesn't intend to keep a mitzvah because of his desires, that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion, but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim'') for matters that relate to two people, however, conversion is between a person and Hashem and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that they plan to keep Torah but intends otherwise it is invalid.
* In a specific case of a woman who said she accepted mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot but because of financial pressures she won't be able to keep all the mitzvot under pressure that is an acceptance. The last reason he isn't certain about. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot dvarim shebelev isn't relevant since it is a matter between him and heaven. If he doesn't accept mitzvot it is invalid.</ref> If it isn't clear if they accepted mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that they accept mitzvot but the circumstances make it clear that this statement is questionable, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides one mitzvah the Bet Din should not accept such a convert. After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
* Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel did a conversion even though the convert said he didn't intend to accept one thing because he didn't deny the oral Torah but didn't believe it was from Hashem and Hillel knew he would convince him otherwise. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that excluding one thing doesn't invalidate the conversion but you shouldn't do such a conversion unless you know afterwards he will accept it. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. He did accept the oral Torah but wasn't convinced it was divine. That is considered like he accepted the Torah because he believed in the oral Torah and just didn't believe in the divine source of the oral Torah and for that Hillel knew he'd correct him later.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108 which are written after 3:106 he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he observes other "religious" Jews observing even though it isn't in fact all the mitzvot properly there is a discussion if that is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. Though he isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides a rabbinic mitzvah after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it is a valid conversion on a biblical level or not at all.</ref>
#If the convert is converting for marriage after the fact the conversion is valid as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham</ref>
#If she didn’t accept mitzvot at the time of the tevilah but planned on accepting mitzvot later that isn’t considered an acceptance of mitzvot until the later time. However, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila and the tevila needs to be repeated.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# A bet din who accepts converts who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot are causing a major obstacle to other Jews who will think that they are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 writes that it isn't lifnei iver for the convert himself since it is the convert's obligation to keep Torah and he isn't responsible for his actions (Rashi Niddah 13a). However, he adds that it is a problem since others will think that they are Jewish and that is a major problem for them. Therefore, he says it isn't proper to accept such a convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees and holds that it is lifnei iver to cause him to become Jewish and be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==A Person Who Claims to be Jewish==
#A person who was assumed to be a non-Jew, as he wasn't behaving like a Jew, who now claims that his mother was Jewish, is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# If a convert previously had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised, then he needs hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds that he does, while Rabbeinu Chananel thinks that he does not. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who says that a non-Jew born without a foreskin doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, while a convert who already had a medical circumcision needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef cites the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 paskens that hatafat dam brit should be performed, but no bracha should be recited. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim (based on the general rule of safek berachot l'hakel, that whenever a doubt arises regarding brachot, the bracha is omitted). </ref>
# A non-Jew who is unable to have a milah for medical reasons cannot convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's reproductive organ was cut off, then he can still convert, as he becomes Jewish with tevilah alone, like women. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this position. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220.

Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma, and if done by a non-Jew is invalid and needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Doing local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some permit even general anesthesia.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 only allows local anthesia and writes that this is the minhag. Though they shouldn't do general anesthesia because it is like one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He says that the milah is part of the process of gerut and must be done with intent to accept the torah at that time and being under anesthesia disables a person from accepting the torah then. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local or general anesthesia when discussing an adult's milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 writes that the reason that one shouldn't use any anesthesia is because milah should involve pain and the minhag was never to use anesthesia even though it was available.
* Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves that being asleep is still able to fulfill mitzvot through his agency as the gemara Gittin 70b indicates and is codified by Bet Shmuel EH 121:2. Seridei Esh 3:96 only allowed local. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) lenient. According to Maharach Or Zaruah 11 the purpose of the milah is the result and isn't an action that you need to appoint someone with shelichut. He disagrees with the Koret Habrit (261:4) who holds that the milah shouldn't have anesthesia because it should involve pain. </ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did then it would be a problem of asufi. However, we assume he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Initially a bet din may not convert for marriage but after the fact it is acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that it is acceptable after the fact because of the extenuating circumstance of wanting to get married they decided to convert and that is binding. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it is valid only if afterwards we see that they keep Judaism properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the convert for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many who convert for marriage don't really accept mitzvot one should be very weary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of converts for marriage in the 1950s in America are invalid because they didn't actually accept mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment in Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting and only accept him if his intentions are pure or bet din can assess that they will become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 explains that the halacha that we check for the intentions didn't stop applying. The bet din has to decide if he's doing it for pure intent or for marriage or any other reason in which case they shouldn't accept him. If they can assess the situation and think that he will eventually accept Torah for pure intent it is acceptable to accept him even if his original intentions aren't pure. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it is evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure then they can't accept the convert initially. However, if it isn't clear even after investigation then they can.</ref>
#Some poskim hold that it isn't considered for marriage if either way they're going to continue to stay married even though she remains non-Jewish.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din it is possible to accept a convert for marriage if the consequences are that potentially the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other in order to differentiate between a child she would have while non-Jewish and while she’s Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<Ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test to check if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable to ensure that she's either pregnant or not pregnant not to require waiting 3 months.</ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and converts must wait 3 months before getting remarried after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it is clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and converts by herself must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no leniency even if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts and wants to get married does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion some hold a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 relies on a pregnancy test only for a convert which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was done and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it is unknown, nonetheless, that is a serious issue and needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle of a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown does not apply to non-Jews. A non-Jew women who married a Jew all the children are non-Jewish and can impact later generations. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews and [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Conversion

2024-08-21T12:38:12Z

Bchernigoff: added material and fixed up grammar

While Judaism does not proselytize<ref>Part of the reason for our hesitancy to accept converts is rooted in a statement of the Gemara Kiddushin 70b: "converts are bad like sapachat (a form of Tzara'at) for the Jewish people". Rashi explains that since they aren't </ref>, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert.

There is also a discussion as to whether or not there's a Mitzvah to perform conversions. Gemara Yevamot 47b says that once a prospective convert dedicates himself to keep the Mitzvot, we do Milah right away, because "we don't delay a Mitzvah". The simple understanding of this Gemara is that there is a Mitzvah element to converting people. Furthermore, the fact that Gemara Shabbat 137b records that when performing a Milah on a convert, the text of the beracha includes "who has commanded us to give a Milah to converts", indicates that there is a Mitzvah to convert people. Tashbetz (Zohar HaRakia, assin 40) thinks that accepting converts is a Mitzvah, but is unsure under which Mitzvah it would be included. Interestingly, he also thinks that the fact that Beit Din converts a Katan al da'at Beit Din (Ketubot 11a), indicates that there's a Mitzvah to accept converts.

Tosfot HaRosh (Shabbat 137b) suggests that accepting converts is included in the Mitzvah of loving the convert, as it's impossible to love him if he doesn't receive a Milah and is converted. Raavad in Sefer Baalai HaNefesh (end of Shaar HaTevilah) learns that the Mitzvah is derived from the fact that Avraham converted people (see Rashi Bereshit 12:5 s.v. asher asu). Another possibility is that it's included in the Mitzvah of loving Hashem, which according to Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot Asseh 3) includes making Hashem beloved unto others and drawing them to His service. </ref>. There are three basic components to conversion: the acceptance of mitzvot, milah and tevilah. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah, there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective. Therefore, if the tevilah was performed before the milah, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether bdiavad (after the fact) the order of milah and tevilah would invalidate the conversion. The Ramban posits that it wouldn't, while Raah believes that it would invalidate the conversion. The Shach 268:2 therefore says that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be performed during the day.<ref>Yevamot 46b</ref> If the acceptance of Mitzvot is performed at night, then this would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. If the milah or tevilah is performed at night, it's disputed if this would bdiavad invalidate the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. The anonymous view in Shulchan Aruch is that only if the acceptance of mitzvot is done at night does it invalidate the conversion. He also cites by name the view of Rambam, that if any stage of the conversion is done at night, then it invalidates the conversion.

Bach CM 5:6 writes that we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>
#The tevilah of a convert may not be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov.<ref>Rambam Issurei Biah 13:6 and Shulchan Aruch 268:4. They give the reason that since conversion is compared to Din (as Yevamot 46b notes that the word "mishpat" is used in association with conversion), it cannot be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov. (Mishnah Beitzah 36b notes that the Rabbis forbade having Din on Shabbat and Yom Tov, and the Gemara explains that we're concerned that a person will come to write things down).

Taz 268:11 raises the issue that the Gemara Yevamot 46b gives a different reason for this Halacha, namely that we don't "fix a person on Shabbat". (This a Rabbinic form of "fixing a vessel", similar to the prohibition mentioned in Beitzah 36b that one cannot separate Terumot and Maasarot on Shabbat and Yom Tov, as one is fixing the remainder of the produce). He suggests that since the Gemara Beitzah 18a permits a person who is impure (tameh) to immerse on Shabbat and Yom Tov, because it appears like he's cooling off and isn't trying to fix his impure state, the same logic should allow a convert to immerse as well. Thus, the Rambam paskens like the sugya in Beitzah over Yevamot 46b. Kesef Mishneh on Rambam offers the same approach.

Interestingly, Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 46b s.v. lefi'kach, suggests an answer to resolve the contradiction between Yevamot 46b and Beitzah 18a. He posits that the "fix" of a person going from impure to pure, is much less than the "fix" of a non-Jew becoming Jewish, and that's why the latter is forbidden.

</ref>

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
# Even though brachot on mitzvot are usually recited before the mitzvah is performed, the convert recites the beracha of "al ha'tevilah" after immersing<ref>Pesachim 7b. There is an interesting discussion regarding when the Beit Din recites the bracha of "al ha'tevilah" when they convert a baby (Ketubot 11a). According to the Gemara Pesachim's reasoning, they should do so beforehand, as the only reason why a convert typically says it afterwards, is because he cannot recite a bracha while he is still non-Jewish. This is the view of Raavad in Baalai HaNefesh (at the end of Shaar HaTevilah). Rav Schachter (Eretz HaTzvi p. 32) argues that the Bet Din should recite a bracha after the Tevilah in this case, as the bracha goes on the chalot (onset) of the conversion. </ref>.
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of Bet Din.<ref>Regarding whether or not the lack of Bet Din bdiavad (after the fact) invalidates the conversion: the anonymous opinion in Shulchan Aruch 268:3 is that it doesn't (in accordance with the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger and Tosfos Yevamot 45b s.v. mi), and the yesh omrim cites Rambam who thinks that it would invalidate the conversion. </ref> For purposes of modesty, women can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion, since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila. Furthermore, according to others it might be effective since the Bet Din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
*Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah, and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be a contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts, she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant, otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat, there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to the following Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes both in Christianity and Judaism, then his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid. There is a minority view held by Rav Ben Zion Uziel (Shut Piskei Uziel Siman 65), that the acceptance of mitzvot is not something that would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. This view is not accepted by the Poskim. </ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot, but didn't do so in front of a Bet Din, the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot, but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah, it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting mitzvot means that a person accepts that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah, it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. However, if he says that he accepts all mitzvot, yet knows that because of a certain desire, he won't be able to keep one mitzvah, it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he doesn't intend to violate a mitzvah because of a desire, but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah, that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue that if he doesn't intend to keep a mitzvah because of his desires, that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion, but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim'') for matters that relate to two people, however, conversion is between a person and Hashem and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that they plan to keep Torah but intends otherwise it is invalid.
* In a specific case of a woman who said she accepted mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot but because of financial pressures she won't be able to keep all the mitzvot under pressure that is an acceptance. The last reason he isn't certain about. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot dvarim shebelev isn't relevant since it is a matter between him and heaven. If he doesn't accept mitzvot it is invalid.</ref> If it isn't clear if they accepted mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that they accept mitzvot but the circumstances make it clear that this statement is questionable, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides one mitzvah the Bet Din should not accept such a convert. After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
* Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel did a conversion even though the convert said he didn't intend to accept one thing because he didn't deny the oral Torah but didn't believe it was from Hashem and Hillel knew he would convince him otherwise. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that excluding one thing doesn't invalidate the conversion but you shouldn't do such a conversion unless you know afterwards he will accept it. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. He did accept the oral Torah but wasn't convinced it was divine. That is considered like he accepted the Torah because he believed in the oral Torah and just didn't believe in the divine source of the oral Torah and for that Hillel knew he'd correct him later.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108 which are written after 3:106 he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he observes other "religious" Jews observing even though it isn't in fact all the mitzvot properly there is a discussion if that is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. Though he isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides a rabbinic mitzvah after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it is a valid conversion on a biblical level or not at all.</ref>
#If the convert is converting for marriage after the fact the conversion is valid as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham</ref>
#If she didn’t accept mitzvot at the time of the tevilah but planned on accepting mitzvot later that isn’t considered an acceptance of mitzvot until the later time. However, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila and the tevila needs to be repeated.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# A bet din who accepts converts who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot are causing a major obstacle to other Jews who will think that they are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 writes that it isn't lifnei iver for the convert himself since it is the convert's obligation to keep Torah and he isn't responsible for his actions (Rashi Niddah 13a). However, he adds that it is a problem since others will think that they are Jewish and that is a major problem for them. Therefore, he says it isn't proper to accept such a convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees and holds that it is lifnei iver to cause him to become Jewish and be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==A Person Who Claims to be Jewish==
#A person who was assumed to be a non-Jew, as he wasn't behaving like a Jew, who now claims that his mother was Jewish, is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# If a convert previously had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised, then he needs hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds that he does, while Rabbeinu Chananel thinks that he does not. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who says that a non-Jew born without a foreskin doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, while a convert who already had a medical circumcision needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef cites the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 paskens that hatafat dam brit should be performed, but no bracha should be recited. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim (based on the general rule of safek berachot l'hakel, that whenever a doubt arises regarding brachot, the bracha is omitted). </ref>
# A non-Jew who is unable to have a milah for medical reasons cannot convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's reproductive organ was cut off, then he can still convert, as he becomes Jewish with tevilah alone, like women. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this position. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220.

Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma, and if done by a non-Jew is invalid and needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Doing local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some permit even general anesthesia.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 only allows local anthesia and writes that this is the minhag. Though they shouldn't do general anesthesia because it is like one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He says that the milah is part of the process of gerut and must be done with intent to accept the torah at that time and being under anesthesia disables a person from accepting the torah then. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local or general anesthesia when discussing an adult's milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 writes that the reason that one shouldn't use any anesthesia is because milah should involve pain and the minhag was never to use anesthesia even though it was available.
* Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves that being asleep is still able to fulfill mitzvot through his agency as the gemara Gittin 70b indicates and is codified by Bet Shmuel EH 121:2. Seridei Esh 3:96 only allowed local. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) lenient. According to Maharach Or Zaruah 11 the purpose of the milah is the result and isn't an action that you need to appoint someone with shelichut. He disagrees with the Koret Habrit (261:4) who holds that the milah shouldn't have anesthesia because it should involve pain. </ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did then it would be a problem of asufi. However, we assume he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Initially a bet din may not convert for marriage but after the fact it is acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that it is acceptable after the fact because of the extenuating circumstance of wanting to get married they decided to convert and that is binding. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it is valid only if afterwards we see that they keep Judaism properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the convert for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many who convert for marriage don't really accept mitzvot one should be very weary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of converts for marriage in the 1950s in America are invalid because they didn't actually accept mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment in Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting and only accept him if his intentions are pure or bet din can assess that they will become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 explains that the halacha that we check for the intentions didn't stop applying. The bet din has to decide if he's doing it for pure intent or for marriage or any other reason in which case they shouldn't accept him. If they can assess the situation and think that he will eventually accept Torah for pure intent it is acceptable to accept him even if his original intentions aren't pure. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it is evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure then they can't accept the convert initially. However, if it isn't clear even after investigation then they can.</ref>
#Some poskim hold that it isn't considered for marriage if either way they're going to continue to stay married even though she remains non-Jewish.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din it is possible to accept a convert for marriage if the consequences are that potentially the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other in order to differentiate between a child she would have while non-Jewish and while she’s Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<Ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test to check if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable to ensure that she's either pregnant or not pregnant not to require waiting 3 months.</ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and converts must wait 3 months before getting remarried after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it is clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and converts by herself must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no leniency even if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts and wants to get married does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion some hold a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 relies on a pregnancy test only for a convert which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was done and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it is unknown, nonetheless, that is a serious issue and needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle of a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown does not apply to non-Jews. A non-Jew women who married a Jew all the children are non-Jewish and can impact later generations. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews and [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Conversion

2024-08-21T11:09:33Z

Bchernigoff: added content

While Judaism does not proselytize, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert.

There is also a discussion as to whether or not there's a Mitzvah to perform conversions. Gemara Yevamot 47b says that once a prospective convert dedicates himself to keep the Mitzvot, we do Milah right away, because "we don't delay a Mitzvah". The simple understanding of this Gemara is that there is a Mitzvah element to converting people. Furthermore, the fact that Gemara Shabbat 137b records that when performing a Milah on a convert, the text of the beracha includes "who has commanded us to give a Milah to converts", indicates that there is a Mitzvah to convert people. Tashbetz (Zohar HaRakia, assin 40) thinks that accepting converts is a Mitzvah, but is unsure under which Mitzvah it would be included. Interestingly, he also thinks that the fact that Beit Din converts a Katan al da'at Beit Din (Ketubot 11a), indicates that there's a Mitzvah to accept converts.

Tosfot HaRosh (Shabbat 137b) suggests that accepting converts is included in the Mitzvah of loving the convert, as it's impossible to love him if he doesn't receive a Milah and is converted. Raavad in Sefer Baalai HaNefesh (end of Shaar HaTevilah) learns that the Mitzvah is derived from the fact that Avraham converted people (see Rashi Bereshit 12:5 s.v. asher asu). Another possibility is that it's included in the Mitzvah of loving Hashem, which according to Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot Asseh 3) includes making Hashem beloved unto others and drawing them to His service. </ref>. There are three basic components to conversion: the acceptance of mitzvot, milah and tevilah. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah, there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective. Therefore, if the tevilah was performed before the milah, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether bdiavad (after the fact) the order of milah and tevilah would invalidate the conversion. The Ramban posits that it wouldn't, while Raah believes that it would invalidate the conversion. The Shach 268:2 therefore says that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be performed during the day.<ref>Yevamot 46b</ref> If the acceptance of Mitzvot is performed at night, then this would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. If the milah or tevilah is performed at night, it's disputed if this would bdiavad invalidate the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. The anonymous view in Shulchan Aruch is that only if the acceptance of mitzvot is done at night does it invalidate the conversion. He also cites by name the view of Rambam, that if any stage of the conversion is done at night, then it invalidates the conversion.

Bach CM 5:6 writes that we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>
#The tevilah of a convert may not be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov.<ref>Rambam Issurei Biah 13:6 and Shulchan Aruch 268:4. They give the reason that since conversion is compared to Din (as Yevamot 46b notes that the word "mishpat" is used in association with conversion), it cannot be performed on Shabbat nor on Yom Tov. (Mishnah Beitzah 36b notes that the Rabbis forbade having Din on Shabbat and Yom Tov, and the Gemara explains that we're concerned that a person will come to write things down).

Taz 268:11 raises the issue that the Gemara Yevamot 46b gives a different reason for this Halacha, namely that we don't "fix a person on Shabbat". (This a Rabbinic form of "fixing a vessel", similar to the prohibition mentioned in Beitzah 36b that one cannot separate Terumot and Maasarot on Shabbat and Yom Tov, as one is fixing the remainder of the produce). He suggests that since the Gemara Beitzah 18a permits a person who is impure (tameh) to immerse on Shabbat and Yom Tov, because it appears like he's cooling off and isn't trying to fix his impure state, the same logic should allow a convert to immerse as well. Thus, the Rambam paskens like the sugya in Beitzah over Yevamot 46b. Kesef Mishneh on Rambam offers the same approach.

Interestingly, Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 46b s.v. lefi'kach, suggests an answer to resolve the contradiction between Yevamot 46b and Beitzah 18a. He posits that the "fix" of a person going from impure to pure, is much less than the "fix" of a non-Jew becoming Jewish, and that's why the latter is forbidden.

</ref>

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
# Even though brachot on mitzvot are usually recited before the mitzvah is performed, the convert recites the beracha of "al ha'tevilah" after immersing<ref>Pesachim 7b. There is an interesting discussion regarding when the Beit Din recites the bracha of "al ha'tevilah" when they convert a baby (Ketubot 11a). According to the Gemara Pesachim's reasoning, they should do so beforehand, as the only reason why a convert typically says it afterwards, is because he cannot recite a bracha while he is still non-Jewish. This is the view of Raavad in Baalai HaNefesh (at the end of Shaar HaTevilah). Rav Schachter (Eretz HaTzvi p. 32) argues that the Bet Din should recite a bracha after the Tevilah in this case, as the bracha goes on the chalot (onset) of the conversion. </ref>.
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of Bet Din.<ref>Regarding whether or not the lack of Bet Din bdiavad (after the fact) invalidates the conversion: the anonymous opinion in Shulchan Aruch 268:3 is that it doesn't (in accordance with the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger and Tosfos Yevamot 45b s.v. mi), and the yesh omrim cites Rambam who thinks that it would invalidate the conversion. </ref> For purposes of modesty, women can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila and also according to others it might be effective since the bet din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
* Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes in Christianity and Judaism his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid.</ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot but not in front of a Bet Din the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting to keep the mitzvot doesn’t mean that he must accept to actually practice all of them. Accepting mitzvot means accepting that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. But he says he accepts all mitzvot but because of a certain desire intends not to keep one mitzvah it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he isn’t intending to violate a mitzvah because of a desire but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue if he intends not to keep a mitzvah because of a desire that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim'') for matters that relate to two people, however, conversion is between a person and Hashem and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that they plan to keep Torah but intends otherwise it is invalid.
* In a specific case of a woman who said she accepted mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot but because of financial pressures she won't be able to keep all the mitzvot under pressure that is an acceptance. The last reason he isn't certain about. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot dvarim shebelev isn't relevant since it is a matter between him and heaven. If he doesn't accept mitzvot it is invalid.</ref> If it isn't clear if they accepted mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that they accept mitzvot but the circumstances make it clear that this statement is questionable, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides one mitzvah the Bet Din should not accept such a convert. After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
* Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel did a conversion even though the convert said he didn't intend to accept one thing because he didn't deny the oral Torah but didn't believe it was from Hashem and Hillel knew he would convince him otherwise. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that excluding one thing doesn't invalidate the conversion but you shouldn't do such a conversion unless you know afterwards he will accept it. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. He did accept the oral Torah but wasn't convinced it was divine. That is considered like he accepted the Torah because he believed in the oral Torah and just didn't believe in the divine source of the oral Torah and for that Hillel knew he'd correct him later.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108 which are written after 3:106 he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he observes other "religious" Jews observing even though it isn't in fact all the mitzvot properly there is a discussion if that is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. Though he isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides a rabbinic mitzvah after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it is a valid conversion on a biblical level or not at all.</ref>
#If the convert is converting for marriage after the fact the conversion is valid as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham</ref>
#If she didn’t accept mitzvot at the time of the tevilah but planned on accepting mitzvot later that isn’t considered an acceptance of mitzvot until the later time. However, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila and the tevila needs to be repeated.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# A bet din who accepts converts who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot are causing a major obstacle to other Jews who will think that they are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 writes that it isn't lifnei iver for the convert himself since it is the convert's obligation to keep Torah and he isn't responsible for his actions (Rashi Niddah 13a). However, he adds that it is a problem since others will think that they are Jewish and that is a major problem for them. Therefore, he says it isn't proper to accept such a convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees and holds that it is lifnei iver to cause him to become Jewish and be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==A Person Who Claims to be Jewish==
#A person who was assumed to be a non-Jew, as he wasn't behaving like a Jew, who now claims that his mother was Jewish, is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# If a convert previously had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised, then he needs hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds that he does, while Rabbeinu Chananel thinks that he does not. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who says that a non-Jew born without a foreskin doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, while a convert who already had a medical circumcision needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef cites the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 paskens that hatafat dam brit should be performed, but no bracha should be recited. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim (based on the general rule of safek berachot l'hakel, that whenever a doubt arises regarding brachot, the bracha is omitted). </ref>
# A non-Jew who is unable to have a milah for medical reasons cannot convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's reproductive organ was cut off, then he can still convert, as he becomes Jewish with tevilah alone, like women. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this position. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220.

Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma, and if done by a non-Jew is invalid and needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Doing local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some permit even general anesthesia.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 only allows local anthesia and writes that this is the minhag. Though they shouldn't do general anesthesia because it is like one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He says that the milah is part of the process of gerut and must be done with intent to accept the torah at that time and being under anesthesia disables a person from accepting the torah then. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local or general anesthesia when discussing an adult's milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 writes that the reason that one shouldn't use any anesthesia is because milah should involve pain and the minhag was never to use anesthesia even though it was available.
* Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves that being asleep is still able to fulfill mitzvot through his agency as the gemara Gittin 70b indicates and is codified by Bet Shmuel EH 121:2. Seridei Esh 3:96 only allowed local. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) lenient. According to Maharach Or Zaruah 11 the purpose of the milah is the result and isn't an action that you need to appoint someone with shelichut. He disagrees with the Koret Habrit (261:4) who holds that the milah shouldn't have anesthesia because it should involve pain. </ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did then it would be a problem of asufi. However, we assume he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Initially a bet din may not convert for marriage but after the fact it is acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that it is acceptable after the fact because of the extenuating circumstance of wanting to get married they decided to convert and that is binding. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it is valid only if afterwards we see that they keep Judaism properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the convert for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many who convert for marriage don't really accept mitzvot one should be very weary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of converts for marriage in the 1950s in America are invalid because they didn't actually accept mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment in Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting and only accept him if his intentions are pure or bet din can assess that they will become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 explains that the halacha that we check for the intentions didn't stop applying. The bet din has to decide if he's doing it for pure intent or for marriage or any other reason in which case they shouldn't accept him. If they can assess the situation and think that he will eventually accept Torah for pure intent it is acceptable to accept him even if his original intentions aren't pure. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it is evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure then they can't accept the convert initially. However, if it isn't clear even after investigation then they can.</ref>
#Some poskim hold that it isn't considered for marriage if either way they're going to continue to stay married even though she remains non-Jewish.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din it is possible to accept a convert for marriage if the consequences are that potentially the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other in order to differentiate between a child she would have while non-Jewish and while she’s Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<Ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test to check if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable to ensure that she's either pregnant or not pregnant not to require waiting 3 months.</ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and converts must wait 3 months before getting remarried after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it is clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and converts by herself must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no leniency even if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts and wants to get married does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion some hold a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 relies on a pregnancy test only for a convert which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was done and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it is unknown, nonetheless, that is a serious issue and needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle of a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown does not apply to non-Jews. A non-Jew women who married a Jew all the children are non-Jewish and can impact later generations. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews and [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Conversion

2024-08-21T10:45:41Z

Bchernigoff: added content

While Judaism does not proselytize, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert.

There is also a discussion as to whether or not there's a Mitzvah to perform conversions. Gemara Yevamot 47b says that once a prospective convert dedicates himself to keep the Mitzvot, we do Milah right away, because "we don't delay a Mitzvah". The simple understanding of this Gemara is that there is a Mitzvah element to converting people. Furthermore, the fact that Gemara Shabbat 137b records that when performing a Milah on a convert, the text of the beracha includes "who has commanded us to give a Milah to converts", indicates that there is a Mitzvah to convert people. Tashbetz (Zohar HaRakia, assin 40) thinks that accepting converts is a Mitzvah, but is unsure under which Mitzvah it would be included. Interestingly, he also thinks that the fact that Beit Din converts a Katan al da'at Beit Din (Ketubot 11a), indicates that there's a Mitzvah to accept converts.

Tosfot HaRosh (Shabbat 137b) suggests that accepting converts is included in the Mitzvah of loving the convert, as it's impossible to love him if he doesn't receive a Milah and is converted. Raavad in Sefer Baalai HaNefesh (end of Shaar HaTevilah) learns that the Mitzvah is derived from the fact that Avraham converted people (see Rashi Bereshit 12:5 s.v. asher asu). Another possibility is that it's included in the Mitzvah of loving Hashem, which according to Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot Asseh 3) includes making Hashem beloved unto others and drawing them to His service. </ref>. There are three basic components to conversion: the acceptance of mitzvot, milah and tevilah. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah, there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective. Therefore, if the tevilah was performed before the milah, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether bdiavad (after the fact) the order of milah and tevilah would invalidate the conversion. The Ramban posits that it wouldn't, while Raah believes that it would invalidate the conversion. The Shach 268:2 therefore says that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be performed during the day.<ref>Yevamot 46b</ref> If the acceptance of Mitzvot is performed at night, then this would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. If the milah or tevilah is performed at night, it's disputed if this would bdiavad invalidate the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. The anonymous view in Shulchan Aruch is that only if the acceptance of mitzvot is done at night does it invalidate the conversion. He also cites by name the view of Rambam, that if any stage of the conversion is done at night, then it invalidates the conversion.

Bach CM 5:6 writes that we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>
#

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
# Even though brachot on mitzvot are usually recited before the mitzvah is performed, the convert recites the beracha of "al ha'tevilah" after immersing<ref>Pesachim 7b. There is an interesting discussion regarding when the Beit Din recites the bracha of "al ha'tevilah" when they convert a baby (Ketubot 11a). According to the Gemara Pesachim's reasoning, they should do so beforehand, as the only reason why a convert typically says it afterwards, is because he cannot recite a bracha while he is still non-Jewish. This is the view of Raavad in Baalai HaNefesh (at the end of Shaar HaTevilah). Rav Schachter (Eretz HaTzvi p. 32) argues that the Bet Din should recite a bracha after the Tevilah in this case, as the bracha goes on the chalot (onset) of the conversion. </ref>.
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of bet din. For a woman they can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila and also according to others it might be effective since the bet din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
* Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes in Christianity and Judaism his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid.</ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot but not in front of a Bet Din the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting to keep the mitzvot doesn’t mean that he must accept to actually practice all of them. Accepting mitzvot means accepting that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. But he says he accepts all mitzvot but because of a certain desire intends not to keep one mitzvah it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he isn’t intending to violate a mitzvah because of a desire but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue if he intends not to keep a mitzvah because of a desire that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim'') for matters that relate to two people, however, conversion is between a person and Hashem and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that they plan to keep Torah but intends otherwise it is invalid.
* In a specific case of a woman who said she accepted mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot but because of financial pressures she won't be able to keep all the mitzvot under pressure that is an acceptance. The last reason he isn't certain about. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot dvarim shebelev isn't relevant since it is a matter between him and heaven. If he doesn't accept mitzvot it is invalid.</ref> If it isn't clear if they accepted mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that they accept mitzvot but the circumstances make it clear that this statement is questionable, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides one mitzvah the Bet Din should not accept such a convert. After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
* Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel did a conversion even though the convert said he didn't intend to accept one thing because he didn't deny the oral Torah but didn't believe it was from Hashem and Hillel knew he would convince him otherwise. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that excluding one thing doesn't invalidate the conversion but you shouldn't do such a conversion unless you know afterwards he will accept it. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. He did accept the oral Torah but wasn't convinced it was divine. That is considered like he accepted the Torah because he believed in the oral Torah and just didn't believe in the divine source of the oral Torah and for that Hillel knew he'd correct him later.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108 which are written after 3:106 he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he observes other "religious" Jews observing even though it isn't in fact all the mitzvot properly there is a discussion if that is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. Though he isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides a rabbinic mitzvah after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it is a valid conversion on a biblical level or not at all.</ref>
#If the convert is converting for marriage after the fact the conversion is valid as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham</ref>
#If she didn’t accept mitzvot at the time of the tevilah but planned on accepting mitzvot later that isn’t considered an acceptance of mitzvot until the later time. However, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila and the tevila needs to be repeated.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# A bet din who accepts converts who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot are causing a major obstacle to other Jews who will think that they are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 writes that it isn't lifnei iver for the convert himself since it is the convert's obligation to keep Torah and he isn't responsible for his actions (Rashi Niddah 13a). However, he adds that it is a problem since others will think that they are Jewish and that is a major problem for them. Therefore, he says it isn't proper to accept such a convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees and holds that it is lifnei iver to cause him to become Jewish and be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==A Person Who Claims to be Jewish==
#A person who was assumed to be a non-Jew, as he wasn't behaving like a Jew, who now claims that his mother was Jewish, is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# If a convert previously had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised, then he needs hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds that he does, while Rabbeinu Chananel thinks that he does not. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who says that a non-Jew born without a foreskin doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, while a convert who already had a medical circumcision needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef cites the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 paskens that hatafat dam brit should be performed, but no bracha should be recited. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim (based on the general rule of safek berachot l'hakel, that whenever a doubt arises regarding brachot, the bracha is omitted). </ref>
# A non-Jew who is unable to have a milah for medical reasons cannot convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's reproductive organ was cut off, then he can still convert, as he becomes Jewish with tevilah alone, like women. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this position. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220.

Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma, and if done by a non-Jew is invalid and needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Doing local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some permit even general anesthesia.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 only allows local anthesia and writes that this is the minhag. Though they shouldn't do general anesthesia because it is like one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He says that the milah is part of the process of gerut and must be done with intent to accept the torah at that time and being under anesthesia disables a person from accepting the torah then. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local or general anesthesia when discussing an adult's milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 writes that the reason that one shouldn't use any anesthesia is because milah should involve pain and the minhag was never to use anesthesia even though it was available.
* Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves that being asleep is still able to fulfill mitzvot through his agency as the gemara Gittin 70b indicates and is codified by Bet Shmuel EH 121:2. Seridei Esh 3:96 only allowed local. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) lenient. According to Maharach Or Zaruah 11 the purpose of the milah is the result and isn't an action that you need to appoint someone with shelichut. He disagrees with the Koret Habrit (261:4) who holds that the milah shouldn't have anesthesia because it should involve pain. </ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did then it would be a problem of asufi. However, we assume he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Initially a bet din may not convert for marriage but after the fact it is acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that it is acceptable after the fact because of the extenuating circumstance of wanting to get married they decided to convert and that is binding. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it is valid only if afterwards we see that they keep Judaism properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the convert for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many who convert for marriage don't really accept mitzvot one should be very weary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of converts for marriage in the 1950s in America are invalid because they didn't actually accept mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment in Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting and only accept him if his intentions are pure or bet din can assess that they will become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 explains that the halacha that we check for the intentions didn't stop applying. The bet din has to decide if he's doing it for pure intent or for marriage or any other reason in which case they shouldn't accept him. If they can assess the situation and think that he will eventually accept Torah for pure intent it is acceptable to accept him even if his original intentions aren't pure. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it is evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure then they can't accept the convert initially. However, if it isn't clear even after investigation then they can.</ref>
#Some poskim hold that it isn't considered for marriage if either way they're going to continue to stay married even though she remains non-Jewish.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din it is possible to accept a convert for marriage if the consequences are that potentially the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other in order to differentiate between a child she would have while non-Jewish and while she’s Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<Ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test to check if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable to ensure that she's either pregnant or not pregnant not to require waiting 3 months.</ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and converts must wait 3 months before getting remarried after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it is clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and converts by herself must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no leniency even if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts and wants to get married does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion some hold a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 relies on a pregnancy test only for a convert which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was done and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it is unknown, nonetheless, that is a serious issue and needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle of a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown does not apply to non-Jews. A non-Jew women who married a Jew all the children are non-Jewish and can impact later generations. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews and [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Conversion

2024-08-21T10:40:30Z

Bchernigoff: added content

While Judaism does not proselytize, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert.

There is also a discussion as to whether or not there's a Mitzvah to perform conversions. Gemara Yevamot 47b says that once a prospective convert dedicates himself to keep the Mitzvot, we do Milah right away, because "we don't delay a Mitzvah". The simple understanding of this Gemara is that there is a Mitzvah element to converting people. Furthermore, the fact that Gemara Shabbat 137b records that when performing a Milah on a convert, the text of the beracha includes "who has commanded us to give a Milah to converts", indicates that there is a Mitzvah to convert people. Tashbetz (Zohar HaRakia, assin 40) thinks that accepting converts is a Mitzvah, but is unsure under which Mitzvah it would be included. Interestingly, he also thinks that the fact that Beit Din converts a Katan al da'at Beit Din (Ketubot 11a), indicates that there's a Mitzvah to accept converts.

Tosfot HaRosh (Shabbat 137b) suggests that accepting converts is included in the Mitzvah of loving the convert, as it's impossible to love him if he doesn't receive a Milah and is converted. Raavad in Sefer Baalai HaNefesh (end of Shaar HaTevilah) learns that the Mitzvah is derived from the fact that Avraham converted people (see Rashi Bereshit 12:5 s.v. asher asu). Another possibility is that it's included in the Mitzvah of loving Hashem, which according to Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot Asseh 3) includes making Hashem beloved unto others and drawing them to His service. </ref>. There are three basic components to conversion: the acceptance of mitzvot, milah and tevilah. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah, there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective. Therefore, if the tevilah was performed before the milah, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether bdiavad (after the fact) the order of milah and tevilah would invalidate the conversion. The Ramban posits that it wouldn't, while Raah believes that it would invalidate the conversion. The Shach 268:2 therefore says that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be performed during the day. If the acceptance of Mitzvot is performed at night, then this would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. If the milah or tevilah is performed at night, it's disputed if this would bdiavad invalidate the conversion.<ref>Bach CM 5:6 we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
# Even though brachot on mitzvot are usually recited before the mitzvah is performed, the convert recites the beracha of "al ha'tevilah" after immersing<ref>Pesachim 7b. There is an interesting discussion regarding when the Beit Din recites the bracha of "al ha'tevilah" when they convert a baby (Ketubot 11a). According to the Gemara Pesachim's reasoning, they should do so beforehand, as the only reason why a convert typically says it afterwards, is because he cannot recite a bracha while he is still non-Jewish. This is the view of Raavad in Baalai HaNefesh (at the end of Shaar HaTevilah). Rav Schachter (Eretz HaTzvi p. 32) argues that the Bet Din should recite a bracha after the Tevilah in this case, as the bracha goes on the chalot (onset) of the conversion. </ref>.
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of bet din. For a woman they can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila and also according to others it might be effective since the bet din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
* Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes in Christianity and Judaism his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid.</ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot but not in front of a Bet Din the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting to keep the mitzvot doesn’t mean that he must accept to actually practice all of them. Accepting mitzvot means accepting that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. But he says he accepts all mitzvot but because of a certain desire intends not to keep one mitzvah it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he isn’t intending to violate a mitzvah because of a desire but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue if he intends not to keep a mitzvah because of a desire that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim'') for matters that relate to two people, however, conversion is between a person and Hashem and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that they plan to keep Torah but intends otherwise it is invalid.
* In a specific case of a woman who said she accepted mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot but because of financial pressures she won't be able to keep all the mitzvot under pressure that is an acceptance. The last reason he isn't certain about. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot dvarim shebelev isn't relevant since it is a matter between him and heaven. If he doesn't accept mitzvot it is invalid.</ref> If it isn't clear if they accepted mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that they accept mitzvot but the circumstances make it clear that this statement is questionable, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides one mitzvah the Bet Din should not accept such a convert. After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
* Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel did a conversion even though the convert said he didn't intend to accept one thing because he didn't deny the oral Torah but didn't believe it was from Hashem and Hillel knew he would convince him otherwise. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that excluding one thing doesn't invalidate the conversion but you shouldn't do such a conversion unless you know afterwards he will accept it. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. He did accept the oral Torah but wasn't convinced it was divine. That is considered like he accepted the Torah because he believed in the oral Torah and just didn't believe in the divine source of the oral Torah and for that Hillel knew he'd correct him later.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108 which are written after 3:106 he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he observes other "religious" Jews observing even though it isn't in fact all the mitzvot properly there is a discussion if that is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. Though he isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides a rabbinic mitzvah after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it is a valid conversion on a biblical level or not at all.</ref>
#If the convert is converting for marriage after the fact the conversion is valid as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham</ref>
#If she didn’t accept mitzvot at the time of the tevilah but planned on accepting mitzvot later that isn’t considered an acceptance of mitzvot until the later time. However, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila and the tevila needs to be repeated.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# A bet din who accepts converts who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot are causing a major obstacle to other Jews who will think that they are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 writes that it isn't lifnei iver for the convert himself since it is the convert's obligation to keep Torah and he isn't responsible for his actions (Rashi Niddah 13a). However, he adds that it is a problem since others will think that they are Jewish and that is a major problem for them. Therefore, he says it isn't proper to accept such a convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees and holds that it is lifnei iver to cause him to become Jewish and be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==A Person Who Claims to be Jewish==
#A person who was assumed to be a non-Jew, as he wasn't behaving like a Jew, who now claims that his mother was Jewish, is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# If a convert previously had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised, then he needs hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds that he does, while Rabbeinu Chananel thinks that he does not. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who says that a non-Jew born without a foreskin doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, while a convert who already had a medical circumcision needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef cites the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 paskens that hatafat dam brit should be performed, but no bracha should be recited. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim (based on the general rule of safek berachot l'hakel, that whenever a doubt arises regarding brachot, the bracha is omitted). </ref>
# A non-Jew who is unable to have a milah for medical reasons cannot convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's reproductive organ was cut off, then he can still convert, as he becomes Jewish with tevilah alone, like women. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this position. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220.

Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma, and if done by a non-Jew is invalid and needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Doing local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some permit even general anesthesia.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 only allows local anthesia and writes that this is the minhag. Though they shouldn't do general anesthesia because it is like one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He says that the milah is part of the process of gerut and must be done with intent to accept the torah at that time and being under anesthesia disables a person from accepting the torah then. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local or general anesthesia when discussing an adult's milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 writes that the reason that one shouldn't use any anesthesia is because milah should involve pain and the minhag was never to use anesthesia even though it was available.
* Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves that being asleep is still able to fulfill mitzvot through his agency as the gemara Gittin 70b indicates and is codified by Bet Shmuel EH 121:2. Seridei Esh 3:96 only allowed local. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) lenient. According to Maharach Or Zaruah 11 the purpose of the milah is the result and isn't an action that you need to appoint someone with shelichut. He disagrees with the Koret Habrit (261:4) who holds that the milah shouldn't have anesthesia because it should involve pain. </ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did then it would be a problem of asufi. However, we assume he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Initially a bet din may not convert for marriage but after the fact it is acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that it is acceptable after the fact because of the extenuating circumstance of wanting to get married they decided to convert and that is binding. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it is valid only if afterwards we see that they keep Judaism properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the convert for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many who convert for marriage don't really accept mitzvot one should be very weary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of converts for marriage in the 1950s in America are invalid because they didn't actually accept mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment in Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting and only accept him if his intentions are pure or bet din can assess that they will become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 explains that the halacha that we check for the intentions didn't stop applying. The bet din has to decide if he's doing it for pure intent or for marriage or any other reason in which case they shouldn't accept him. If they can assess the situation and think that he will eventually accept Torah for pure intent it is acceptable to accept him even if his original intentions aren't pure. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it is evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure then they can't accept the convert initially. However, if it isn't clear even after investigation then they can.</ref>
#Some poskim hold that it isn't considered for marriage if either way they're going to continue to stay married even though she remains non-Jewish.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din it is possible to accept a convert for marriage if the consequences are that potentially the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other in order to differentiate between a child she would have while non-Jewish and while she’s Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<Ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test to check if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable to ensure that she's either pregnant or not pregnant not to require waiting 3 months.</ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and converts must wait 3 months before getting remarried after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it is clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and converts by herself must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no leniency even if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts and wants to get married does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion some hold a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 relies on a pregnancy test only for a convert which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was done and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it is unknown, nonetheless, that is a serious issue and needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle of a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown does not apply to non-Jews. A non-Jew women who married a Jew all the children are non-Jewish and can impact later generations. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews and [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Conversion

2024-08-20T19:59:53Z

Bchernigoff: added content

While Judaism does not proselytize, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert.

There is also a discussion as to whether or not there's a Mitzvah to perform conversions. Gemara Yevamot 47b says that once a prospective convert dedicates himself to keep the Mitzvot, we do Milah right away, because "we don't delay a Mitzvah". The simple understanding of this Gemara is that there is a Mitzvah element to converting people. Furthermore, the fact that Gemara Shabbat 137b records that when performing a Milah on a convert, the text of the beracha includes "who has commanded us to give a Milah to converts", indicates that there is a Mitzvah to convert people. Tashbetz (Zohar HaRakia, assin 40) thinks that accepting converts is a Mitzvah, but is unsure under which Mitzvah it would be included. Interestingly, he also thinks that the fact that Beit Din converts a Katan al da'at Beit Din (Ketubot 11a), indicates that there's a Mitzvah to accept converts.

Tosfot HaRosh (Shabbat 137b) suggests that accepting converts is included in the Mitzvah of loving the convert, as it's impossible to love him if he doesn't receive a Milah and is converted. Raavad in Sefer Baalai HaNefesh (end of Shaar HaTevilah) learns that the Mitzvah is derived from the fact that Avraham converted people (see Rashi Bereshit 12:5 s.v. asher asu). Another possibility is that it's included in the Mitzvah of loving Hashem, which according to Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot Asseh 3) includes making Hashem beloved unto others and drawing them to His service. </ref>. There are three basic components to conversion: the acceptance of mitzvot, milah and tevilah. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah, there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective. Therefore, if the tevilah was performed before the milah, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether bdiavad (after the fact) the order of milah and tevilah would invalidate the conversion. The Ramban posits that it wouldn't, while Raah believes that it would invalidate the conversion. The Shach 268:2 therefore says that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be performed during the day. If the acceptance of Mitzvot is performed at night, then this would bdiavad (after the fact) invalidate the conversion. If the milah or tevilah is performed at night, it's disputed if this would bdiavad invalidate the conversion.<ref>Bach CM 5:6 we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
# Even though brachot on mitzvot are usually recited before the mitzvah is performed, the convert recites the beracha of "al ha'tevilah" after immersing<ref>Pesachim 7b. There is an interesting discussion regarding when the Beit Din recites the bracha of al ha'tevilah when they convert a baby (Ketubot 11a). According to the Gemara Pesachim's reasoning, </ref>.
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of bet din. For a woman they can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila and also according to others it might be effective since the bet din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
* Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes in Christianity and Judaism his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid.</ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot but not in front of a Bet Din the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting to keep the mitzvot doesn’t mean that he must accept to actually practice all of them. Accepting mitzvot means accepting that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. But he says he accepts all mitzvot but because of a certain desire intends not to keep one mitzvah it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he isn’t intending to violate a mitzvah because of a desire but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue if he intends not to keep a mitzvah because of a desire that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim'') for matters that relate to two people, however, conversion is between a person and Hashem and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that they plan to keep Torah but intends otherwise it is invalid.
* In a specific case of a woman who said she accepted mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot but because of financial pressures she won't be able to keep all the mitzvot under pressure that is an acceptance. The last reason he isn't certain about. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot dvarim shebelev isn't relevant since it is a matter between him and heaven. If he doesn't accept mitzvot it is invalid.</ref> If it isn't clear if they accepted mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that they accept mitzvot but the circumstances make it clear that this statement is questionable, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides one mitzvah the Bet Din should not accept such a convert. After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
* Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel did a conversion even though the convert said he didn't intend to accept one thing because he didn't deny the oral Torah but didn't believe it was from Hashem and Hillel knew he would convince him otherwise. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that excluding one thing doesn't invalidate the conversion but you shouldn't do such a conversion unless you know afterwards he will accept it. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. He did accept the oral Torah but wasn't convinced it was divine. That is considered like he accepted the Torah because he believed in the oral Torah and just didn't believe in the divine source of the oral Torah and for that Hillel knew he'd correct him later.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108 which are written after 3:106 he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he observes other "religious" Jews observing even though it isn't in fact all the mitzvot properly there is a discussion if that is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. Though he isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides a rabbinic mitzvah after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it is a valid conversion on a biblical level or not at all.</ref>
#If the convert is converting for marriage after the fact the conversion is valid as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham</ref>
#If she didn’t accept mitzvot at the time of the tevilah but planned on accepting mitzvot later that isn’t considered an acceptance of mitzvot until the later time. However, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila and the tevila needs to be repeated.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# A bet din who accepts converts who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot are causing a major obstacle to other Jews who will think that they are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 writes that it isn't lifnei iver for the convert himself since it is the convert's obligation to keep Torah and he isn't responsible for his actions (Rashi Niddah 13a). However, he adds that it is a problem since others will think that they are Jewish and that is a major problem for them. Therefore, he says it isn't proper to accept such a convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees and holds that it is lifnei iver to cause him to become Jewish and be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==Claiming Oneself is Jewish==
#If a person was assumed to be a non-Jew and wasn't acting Jewish and now he claims that his mother was Jewish he is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# A non-Jew who already had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised needs a hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds he does. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who distinguishes between a non-Jew born without a foreskin who doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, and a convert who had a medical circumcision previously who needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef culls the opinion of the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this opinion that he needs a hatafat dam brit without a bracha. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim.</ref>
# A non-Jew who can't have a milah for medical reasons can't convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's male organ was cut off he can still convert and he becomes Jewish with tevilah like a woman. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this opinion. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220. Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma and if done by a non-Jew is invalid and needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Doing local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some permit even general anesthesia.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 only allows local anthesia and writes that this is the minhag. Though they shouldn't do general anesthesia because it is like one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He says that the milah is part of the process of gerut and must be done with intent to accept the torah at that time and being under anesthesia disables a person from accepting the torah then. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local or general anesthesia when discussing an adult's milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 writes that the reason that one shouldn't use any anesthesia is because milah should involve pain and the minhag was never to use anesthesia even though it was available.
* Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves that being asleep is still able to fulfill mitzvot through his agency as the gemara Gittin 70b indicates and is codified by Bet Shmuel EH 121:2. Seridei Esh 3:96 only allowed local. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) lenient. According to Maharach Or Zaruah 11 the purpose of the milah is the result and isn't an action that you need to appoint someone with shelichut. He disagrees with the Koret Habrit (261:4) who holds that the milah shouldn't have anesthesia because it should involve pain. </ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did then it would be a problem of asufi. However, we assume he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Initially a bet din may not convert for marriage but after the fact it is acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that it is acceptable after the fact because of the extenuating circumstance of wanting to get married they decided to convert and that is binding. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it is valid only if afterwards we see that they keep Judaism properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the convert for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many who convert for marriage don't really accept mitzvot one should be very weary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of converts for marriage in the 1950s in America are invalid because they didn't actually accept mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment in Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting and only accept him if his intentions are pure or bet din can assess that they will become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 explains that the halacha that we check for the intentions didn't stop applying. The bet din has to decide if he's doing it for pure intent or for marriage or any other reason in which case they shouldn't accept him. If they can assess the situation and think that he will eventually accept Torah for pure intent it is acceptable to accept him even if his original intentions aren't pure. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it is evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure then they can't accept the convert initially. However, if it isn't clear even after investigation then they can.</ref>
#Some poskim hold that it isn't considered for marriage if either way they're going to continue to stay married even though she remains non-Jewish.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din it is possible to accept a convert for marriage if the consequences are that potentially the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other in order to differentiate between a child she would have while non-Jewish and while she’s Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<Ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test to check if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable to ensure that she's either pregnant or not pregnant not to require waiting 3 months.</ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and converts must wait 3 months before getting remarried after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it is clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and converts by herself must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no leniency even if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts and wants to get married does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion some hold a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 relies on a pregnancy test only for a convert which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was done and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it is unknown, nonetheless, that is a serious issue and needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle of a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown does not apply to non-Jews. A non-Jew women who married a Jew all the children are non-Jewish and can impact later generations. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews and [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Conversion

2024-08-20T19:19:27Z

Bchernigoff: added content

While Judaism does not proselytize, it does welcome converts who come on their own initiative<ref>Gm Yevamot 47a (and paskened in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 268:2) states that when an individual comes to convert, we discourage him by mentioning the fact that the Jews are a downtrodden and oppressed nation. If the person acknowledges this and nonetheless expresses his desire to convert, then we accept him as a convert. </ref>. The process is complex and briefly described below. The purpose of the summaries below are for educational purposes only.
==Bet Din for Conversion==
#All aspects of conversion need the presence of bet din.<ref>The Gemara Yevamot 46b establishes that conversion requires the supervision of a Bet Din of three judges based on the fact that the phrase "misphat" is used in the context of conversion. Tosfot s.v. mishpat offers two possibilities as to which passuk the Gemara is alluding to. Tosfot further explains that everyone agrees that three judges are required by conversion, even those who say that a Bet Din for hoda'ot v'hal'vaot, admissions and loans, only needs one judge, because we compare conversion to gzelot v'chavalot, theft and injury, regarding which everyone agrees that you need three judges. This is accepted by the Rambam (Isurei Biyah 13:6) and Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3. Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes that after the fact, the Bet Din is only necessary for the acceptance of mitzvot, while the Rambam and Rif hold it is necessary for the milah and tevilah as well.

Tosfot s.v. mishpat raises the issue that if conversion is compared to cases of theft and injury (see earlier in this footnote), then we should require the judges to have bona fide Semicha in an unbroken chain from Moshe Rabbeinu, something which we lack today. Tosfot answers that that even though we don’t have semicha, we can still perform Gerut nowadays, based on the principle of shelichutyahu (Gittin 88b), that the judges nowadays serve as the agents of the judges of old who possessed real Semicha.

Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger quotes another answer from Rabbeinu Netanel. He notes that Gemara Keritut 9a says that although a Ger must offer a Korban HaGer when converting, we can nevertheless accept converts nowadays that we don't have a Beit HaMikdash, as the Torah says that a Ger can live in "any of your generations", implying even after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Similarly, reasons Rabbeinu Netanel, based on the passuk of "any of your generations", we should be able to accept converts nowadays, even though the chain of Semicha has been broken.
</ref> After the fact, according to some opinions, the conversion is valid as long as the kabbalat mitzvot was performed in the presence of bet din. In such a case we'd be strict to require another conversion.<ref>What is the presence of Bet Din necessary for?
*Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi holds it is necessary for kabbalat mitzvot and not other aspects of the conversion. Nevertheless, three judges are lechatchila (ideally) required even for the Milah and Tevilah. This is also the view of Tosfot Kiddushin 62b s.v. ger. Tosfot's proof is the fact that the Gemara Yevamot 45b tells a story in which people used to refer to a certain person as "the son of a non-Jew". Rav Assi commented: "she certainly was Tovel for Niddah!". Tosfot understands that the Gemara is saying that her Tevilah which she did because she was a Niddah, even though there were no judges present, bdiavad (after the fact) counts for Gerut.
*Rambam Isurei Biya 13:9 hold that three judges are needed for all aspects of the conversion process, and if you don't have this, then the conversion is invalid. The challenge is how he deals with Tosfot's proof. One possibility is that they adopted Tosfot's second approach to the Gemara, that if everyone knows that a certain person did Tevilah, then it's as if they were present and witnessed it. Alternatively, the Gemara is saying that the fact that the woman is acting like she's Jewish by observing the laws of Niddah, is proof that she performed a valid conversion earlier.
*Ramban, Rashba, and Nemukei Yosef (his understanding of the Rif) hold that in order to assume that the children of the convert are the children of a Jewish man, kabbalat mitzvot is the only thing necessary to have in the presence of Bet Din. However, a convert can only marry a Jewish woman if all parts of the conversion process were performed in the presence of a Bet Din.
*Ritva 45b writes that Bet Din is necessary for everything, even after the fact. The Gemara (Tosfot's proof) means that even if you don’t intend for conversion, it is still valid.
*Hagahot Mordechai Yevamot 4:111 says that if a convert converted without a Bet Din, some say that the conversion is invalid, while others say that it's acceptable. Darkei Moshe 268:3 understands that this corresponds to the opinions of Tosfot and Rambam. Mordechai Yevamot 4:36 quotes Rabbenu Simcha and Rabbi Yehuda Bar Yom Tov who hold that a conversion only needs one judge.
*Shulchan Aruch YD 268:3 writes the opinion of Tosfot and Rosh as the anonymous opinion, and then notes the opinion of the Rif and Rambam by name. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 is strict, even though this is against the anonymous opinion cited by Shulchan Aruch. Achiezer 3:27 implies that even after the fact, not having Bet Din for milah or tevila is an issue, like the Rif and Rambam. Similarly, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=57989&pgnum=181 Perach Mateh Aharon 2:51] writes that we’re strict for Rif and Rambam. </ref>
#The Bet Din for conversions does not need to be comprised of three Torah scholars.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 clarifies that the three people who serve as a bet din don't all need to be torah scholars.</ref>

==Order of Procedure==
# The milah is done before the tevilah. If they did the tevilah before the milah there is a major dispute if the conversion is effective and therefore, they should repeat the tevilah.<ref>Rama YD 268:1 quotes a dispute between the Ramban and Raah whether the order is essential after the fact, the Ramban positing that it doesn't and the Raah holding it does. The Shach 268:2 adds that they should do the tevilah again because of this dispute.</ref>
==Time==
#A conversion should only be done during the day. After the fact, it is necessary for accepting mitvzot and it is a dispute if it is necessary only for accepting mitzvot or all parts of conversion.<ref>Bach CM 5:6 we should be strict about a din at night because of the Rashbam and Smag that a din at night is effective.</ref>

==Tevilah==
# Some say that shehechiyanu is recited after the tevilah and completion of conversion.<ref>Radvaz 1:434 holds that a shehechiyanu is recited at the completion of conversion (and not at the milah) since he is now joyous that he is now able to fulfill mitzvot.</ref>
===Tevilah of Women===
#Many poskim hold that tevilah needs to be done in the presence of bet din. For a woman they can wear a loosely fitted robe that covers her whole body while entering the mikveh in the presence of bet din.<ref>Rambam and Shulchan Aruch hold that the tevila of both men and women need to be in front of bet din. Minchat Yitzchak 4:34:3 writes that it is possible that after the fact it is an effective conversion since according to Tosfot a bet din isn't necessary for tevila and also according to others it might be effective since the bet din knows that she went into the mikveh. Yabia Omer YD 1:19 says that they need to do the gerut again because it might not have been a valid gerut at all. He would allow her to wear a loosely fitted robe or a sheet above the water to make it more modest.
* Igrot Moshe YD 2:127 agrees that it is an unresolved machloket and needs to be redone. However, in Igrot Moshe 3:112 (11 years after previous one) he says that even if only one of the judges saw the woman go into the mikvah and others were there and heard it, it is valid. There he explains that even according to the Rambam and Rif it is valid since the judges know she went to the mikveh properly even though they didn't see it. It seems to be contradiction to his earlier teshuva. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:621 also says that it needs to be redone if the tevila was done without the bet din watching in the room.</ref>

==Pregnant Woman Conversion==
#If a pregnant woman converts she should notify the bet din that she is pregnant otherwise it could be that the conversion for the baby is ineffective.<ref>Dagul Mirvava 268:6 notes that the presence of bet din is necessary for the tevila of the baby (since the baby doesn't have kabbalat mitzvot). If the bet din wasn't aware of the fetus it is like the bet din isn't present. Aruch Hashulchan 268:11 is lenient since we hold like the opinion that the fetus is part of the mother and the conversion of the mother works for the baby. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 says that it is proper to be strict for the dagul mirvava.</ref>
#If the fetus was a boy and is born on Shabbat there is a discussion if the milah can be done on the subsequent Shabbat or should be delayed to Sunday.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9137&pgnum=17 Rav Dovid Karliner (Piskei Halachot p. 7 fnt. 5)] writes that if a pregnant woman converted with her fetus and the fetus is a boy, it can have the milah on Shabbat. He argues with the Ramban that the milah is part of the gerut. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 4:44 agreed.</ref>

==Acceptance of Mitzvot==
#A prospective ger must accept all of the mitzvot and tenants of emunah<ref>Rambam Isurei Biyah 14:2, Maggid Mishna 14:1, Orchot Chaim (Hilchot Isurei Biya 9), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:2, Levush 268:2. Lhorot Natan 14:59 holds that if they converted with a warped idea of emunah, such as believing that the Christian New Testament is true, the conversion is invalid. Piskei Din Yerushalayim (Dinei Mamonot v. 14 p. 422 n. 4) agrees that if someone believes in Christianity and Judaism his conversion is invalid. Gerut Kehilchata 2:15 writes that he needs to accept mitzvot with the understanding that we keep mitzvot because they were commanded by Hashem through Moshe.</ref> in front of a Bet Din of three men during the day.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi clarifies that accepting mitzvot is a critical part of conversion and is invalid without it. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3 codifies Tosfot. Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Bet Meir, Achiezer, and Igrot Moshe all hold that acceptance of mitzvot is critical and without it the conversion isn’t valid.</ref> If the convert accepted the mitzvot but not in front of a Bet Din the conversion is invalid.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 45b s.v. mi, Ramban Yevamot 45b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:3</ref>
#If the convert accepted mitzvot but knows or even intends that due to certain desires he won’t be able to fulfill a certain mitzvah it is nonetheless absolutely considered acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:4 explains that accepting to keep the mitzvot doesn’t mean that he must accept to actually practice all of them. Accepting mitzvot means accepting that they’re all true and binding. If he says that he doesn’t want to accept one mitzvah it isn’t an acceptance of mitzvot. But he says he accepts all mitzvot but because of a certain desire intends not to keep one mitzvah it is nonetheless a valid conversion. Minchat Asher (Shabbat 34:1) writes that if he isn’t intending to violate a mitzvah because of a desire but rather just knows that likely because of the difficulty of mitzvot that he will be overcome with desire and not fulfill a mitzvah that is certainly considered a valid conversion. </ref> Others argue if he intends not to keep a mitzvah because of a desire that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Dvar Avraham argues that it shouldn’t be a valid conversion but isn’t completely convinced that after the fact it is invalid. Lhorot Natan is convinced that the Achiezer is incorrect. Accepting mitzvot means accepting actually practicing all the mitzvot. </ref>
#If the convert said that he accepted mitzvot but in his heart did not intend on keeping the mitzvot that is an invalid conversion.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9, Achiezer 3:26, Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 and 3:108, Minchat Yitzchak 6:107. Bet Yitzchak explains that intentions can't invalidate a statement (''dvarim shebelev einam dvarim'') for matters that relate to two people, however, conversion is between a person and Hashem and one's intentions certainly do count. Therefore, if the convert says that they plan to keep Torah but intends otherwise it is invalid.
* In a specific case of a woman who said she accepted mitzvot but had in mind to violate some halachot, Igrot Moshe 3:108 writes that it is a valid conversion. His reasons are (1) since her children are practicing Judaism she isn't trusted about them to say that they're not Jewish. (2) dvar shebelev einam dvarim unless there is a clear circumstance that everyone knew that contradicts her words. (3) If she accepts the mitzvot but because of financial pressures she won't be able to keep all the mitzvot under pressure that is an acceptance. The last reason he isn't certain about. However, regarding (1) Achiezer 3:26:2 argues that for the actual acceptance of mitzvot dvarim shebelev isn't relevant since it is a matter between him and heaven. If he doesn't accept mitzvot it is invalid.</ref> If it isn't clear if they accepted mitzvot, some say that it is a questionable conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106 writes that although the convert said that they accept mitzvot but the circumstances make it clear that this statement is questionable, the validity of the conversion is questionable. Kger Kezrach ch. 32 discusses this opinion and supports it.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides one mitzvah the Bet Din should not accept such a convert. After the fact, some say that it is a valid conversion,<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:106
* Rashi 31a s.v. gayrey says that Hillel did a conversion even though the convert said he didn't intend to accept one thing because he didn't deny the oral Torah but didn't believe it was from Hashem and Hillel knew he would convince him otherwise. Igrot Moshe 3:106 learns from Rashi that excluding one thing doesn't invalidate the conversion but you shouldn't do such a conversion unless you know afterwards he will accept it. Minchat Asher Shabbat 34:1 understands this Rashi differently. He did accept the oral Torah but wasn't convinced it was divine. That is considered like he accepted the Torah because he believed in the oral Torah and just didn't believe in the divine source of the oral Torah and for that Hillel knew he'd correct him later.</ref> while most poskim hold that the conversion is invalid.<ref>Bet Yitzchak, Biur Halacha 304. Achiezer 3:26 is uncertain. It seems that Rav Moshe retracted because both in Igrot Moshe YD 3:107 and 3:108 which are written after 3:106 he says that it isn’t a valid conversion. Igrot Moshe 3:106 holds that chutz mdvar echad is only lechatchila but in 3:107 and 3:108 he says that isn't the case.</ref>
#If the convert intends to keep the mitzvot as he observes other "religious" Jews observing even though it isn't in fact all the mitzvot properly there is a discussion if that is a valid acceptance of mitzvot.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:106 suggests that perhaps it is an acceptance of mitzvot if she plans on doing mitzvot like other "religious" Jews even though they violate certain halachot such as tzeniyut. Though he isn't ready to be lenient based on that logic.</ref>
#If the convert accepted all the mitzvot besides a rabbinic mitzvah after the fact the conversion is valid.<ref>Bet Meir, Biur Halacha. Achiezer 3:26 isn’t certain if it is a valid conversion on a biblical level or not at all.</ref>
#If the convert is converting for marriage after the fact the conversion is valid as long as they completely accepted all of the mitzvot.<ref>Yevamot 24b, Igrot Moshe, Achiezer, Dvar Avraham</ref>
#If she didn’t accept mitzvot at the time of the tevilah but planned on accepting mitzvot later that isn’t considered an acceptance of mitzvot until the later time. However, accepting mitzvot is a prerequisite for tevila and the tevila needs to be repeated.<ref>Igrot Moshe 3:108</ref>
# A bet din who accepts converts who don't intent to fulfill the mitzvot are causing a major obstacle to other Jews who will think that they are completely acceptable Jews.<ref>Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 writes that it isn't lifnei iver for the convert himself since it is the convert's obligation to keep Torah and he isn't responsible for his actions (Rashi Niddah 13a). However, he adds that it is a problem since others will think that they are Jewish and that is a major problem for them. Therefore, he says it isn't proper to accept such a convert who doesn't intend to keep mitzvot. Minchat Shlomo 1:35:3 disagrees and holds that it is lifnei iver to cause him to become Jewish and be punished for his sins. Igrot Moshe YD 1:157 writes that there is no reason to accept a convert who isn't going to practice mitzvot.</ref>

==Claiming Oneself is Jewish==
#If a person was assumed to be a non-Jew and wasn't acting Jewish and now he claims that his mother was Jewish he is not trusted.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
==Milah==
# A non-Jew who already had a medical circumcision or was born circumcised needs a hatafat dam brit, and no bracha is recited.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi quotes a dispute between the Bahag and Rabbenu Chananel whether a convert who already has a milah needs hatafat dam brit. Bahag holds he does. The Tur 268:1 cites the Itur who distinguishes between a non-Jew born without a foreskin who doesn't need a hatafat dam brit, and a convert who had a medical circumcision previously who needs a hatafat dam brit. Bet Yosef culls the opinion of the Rif Shabbat 55b, Rosh Shabbat 19:5, and Rambam Shabbat 1:7 as holding like the Bahag. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this opinion that he needs a hatafat dam brit without a bracha. Shach 268:1 explains that there is no bracha because it is a dispute in the rishonim.</ref>
# A non-Jew who can't have a milah for medical reasons can't convert.<ref>Tosfot Yevamot 46b s.v. drabbi yosi writes that if a male's male organ was cut off he can still convert and he becomes Jewish with tevilah like a woman. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1 codifies this opinion. Although someone who can't have a milah for medical reasons seems to be similar to that case, the Achiezer 4:45 and 4:46 rejects that comparison and holds that he can't convert. This is also the opinion of Zecher Yitzchak 3, Derech Pikudecha (Mitzchak Aseh 2, Dibbur 30), Rav Kook (Daat Kohen 150), and Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank YD 220. Rav Kook distinguishes between from the case of Tosfot since the medical situation could be temporary, it could be possible if they want to put themselves in danger, or that we don’t have shiluchutayhu for an uncommon situation.</ref>
===Milah by Non-Jew===
# The milah of gerut certainly needs to be lishma and if done by a non-Jew is invalid and needs hatafat dam brit.<ref>Achiezer 3:27</ref>
===Milah with Anesthesia===
#Doing local anesthesia is permitted for an adult milah. Some permit even general anesthesia.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:590 and 2:510 only allows local anthesia and writes that this is the minhag. Though they shouldn't do general anesthesia because it is like one is doing the mitzvah thoughtlessly (mitasek). He says that the milah is part of the process of gerut and must be done with intent to accept the torah at that time and being under anesthesia disables a person from accepting the torah then. Yabia Omer YD 5:22 disagrees and allows local or general anesthesia when discussing an adult's milah. Imrei Yosher 2:140 writes that the reason that one shouldn't use any anesthesia is because milah should involve pain and the minhag was never to use anesthesia even though it was available.
* Yabia Omer YD 5:22 proves that being asleep is still able to fulfill mitzvot through his agency as the gemara Gittin 70b indicates and is codified by Bet Shmuel EH 121:2. Seridei Esh 3:96 only allowed local. Chelkat Yoav (Ohel Moed 1:7 cited by Yabia Omer) lenient. According to Maharach Or Zaruah 11 the purpose of the milah is the result and isn't an action that you need to appoint someone with shelichut. He disagrees with the Koret Habrit (261:4) who holds that the milah shouldn't have anesthesia because it should involve pain. </ref>

==Adoption==
#An adopted child should be converted.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 writes that you can't trust the adoption agency that the baby is Jewish. If you did then it would be a problem of asufi. However, we assume he's non-Jewish and can convert.</ref>

==Conversion for Marriage==
#Initially a bet din may not convert for marriage but after the fact it is acceptable.<ref>Yevamot 24b. The Ritva writes that it is acceptable after the fact because of the extenuating circumstance of wanting to get married they decided to convert and that is binding. Hagahot Mordechai (Yevamot 4:101 s.v. katuv) seems to write that it is valid only if afterwards we see that they keep Judaism properly.</ref>
#Even in a circumstance where it is permitted to convert for marriage, the Bet Din should be vigilant in checking and ensuring that the convert for marriage accepts the mitzvot completely.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:159 notes that since many who convert for marriage don't really accept mitzvot one should be very weary of accepting such a convert. He says that the majority of converts for marriage in the 1950s in America are invalid because they didn't actually accept mitzvot. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:9 echoes this sentiment in Ashkenazic countries in the 1800s.</ref>
#The bet din should investigate why the convert is converting and only accept him if his intentions are pure or bet din can assess that they will become pure.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 explains that the halacha that we check for the intentions didn't stop applying. The bet din has to decide if he's doing it for pure intent or for marriage or any other reason in which case they shouldn't accept him. If they can assess the situation and think that he will eventually accept Torah for pure intent it is acceptable to accept him even if his original intentions aren't pure. Achiezer 3:26:2 suggests that if it is evident to the bet din that his intent isn't pure then they can't accept the convert initially. However, if it isn't clear even after investigation then they can.</ref>
#Some poskim hold that it isn't considered for marriage if either way they're going to continue to stay married even though she remains non-Jewish.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7</ref>
#Also, according to the decision of the bet din it is possible to accept a convert for marriage if the consequences are that potentially the husband might be turned away from religion altogether if his "wife" can't convert.<ref>Achiezer 3:26:7 based on Rav Shlomo Kluger. See Minchat Yitzchak 6:107 s.v. vheneh who writes that if a Jew married a non-Jew it is better to leave her as a non-Jew than have her convert and not keep the laws of niddah, which is worse.</ref>
==Marriage after Conversion==
#A husband and wife who converted together need to wait 3 months before remarrying each other in order to differentiate between a child she would have while non-Jewish and while she’s Jewish. They do not need to wait 3 months if there’s no doubt about whether she’s pregnant, such as if she’s already pregnant,<ref>Rav Shlomo Amar in Shma Shlomo 5:9-12 following the Dagul Mirvava</ref> she’s too old to have children,<ref>Dagul Mirvava 13:5</ref> or just had her period.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 2:5</ref> Regarding a pregnancy test see footnote.<Ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21253&st=&pgnum=101 Shemesh Umagen 2:41:5] writes that a blood test to check if she's pregnant is not sufficient evidence to exempt from havchana because it isn't always accurate. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/878591/rabbi-hershel-schachter/highlights-of-hilchos-meuberes-meinekes-chaveiro-and-havchana-even-haezer-siman-13/ Rav Schachter] quotes his father that a pregnancy test is reliable to ensure that she's either pregnant or not pregnant not to require waiting 3 months.</ref>
#A woman who was previously “married” to a Jew and converts must wait 3 months before getting remarried after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> However, they do not need to wait 3 months if it is clear that she’s pregnant or not pregnant, such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 3:150) writes that a non-Jewish woman married to a Jew who converted does not need havchana if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children. He writes that this is included in the leniency of the Dagul Mirvava since regarding two Jews this case is impossible. The only case that is comparable to two Jews who were married and got divorced is two non-Jews who were married and now she converted and married another Jew. In that case, there is no leniency even if it is known that she’s pregnant or not pregnant. Yabia Omer EH 9:12:1-2 quotes Isa Bracha who was lenient about a even case of a woman who was married to a Jew and wants to convert since it is similar to a woman who became pregnant out of wedlock (Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:6). However, he quotes that Rav Uziel and Melamed Lhoil who rejected that concept since she wants to be married to him and become pregnant from him. Nonetheless, he's lenient with a pregnancy test and doesn't explain further.</ref>
#A woman who was previously married to a non-Jew and converts by herself must wait 3 months before getting married to a Jewish man after the conversion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5</ref> There’s no leniency even if it is clear that she’s not pregnant such as if she’s too old to have children.<ref>Chelkat Mechokek 13:4 isn’t sure about this. Dagul Mirvava isn’t lenient against Chelkat Mechokek. Igrot Moshe YD 3:110 and EH 2:5 follows Dagul Mirvava but isn’t more lenient than that.</ref>
# A single woman who converts and wants to get married does not have to wait 3 months before getting married.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 13:5, Bet Shmuel 13:7, Yabia Omer EH 9:17:1-2</ref> Some hold she has to wait,<ref>Radvaz cited by Pitchei Teshuva 13:5</ref> but to satisfy this opinion some hold a pregnancy test is sufficient.<ref>Dibrot Eliyahu 7:119 relies on a pregnancy test only for a convert which according to Shulchan Aruch doesn't need havchana. He doesn't rely on it for a married woman who converts since she needs havchana.</ref>

==Milah for Baby Mistakenly Assumed to Be Jewish==
#The Mohel himself is not trusted to say that the milah was done for conversion, he would need witnesses for that.<ref>Igrot Moshe 2:128 writes that the mohel isn't trusted to say it was for gerut. He needs another witness so that there's at least two witnesses. Anyway, there should be three for a bet din. He doesn't rely on a safek safeka of the Rach and maybe the mohel did it for conversion.</ref> Anyway, a bet din of three is necessary.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 268:3. Igrot Moshe YD 2:126 implies that the three people constituting the bet din need to be aware that they're watching a process of conversion and not thinking it is just a regular milah. However, they don't need to formally think that they're doing the conversion as the bet din.</ref>
#If they did a brit milah mistakenly thinking that the baby was Jewish and did it as a mitzvah and then later realize the children wasn’t Jewish, many poskim hold that the original milah is effective, while others require a new hatafat dam brit.<ref>In terms of intent, Melamed Lhoil 2:82 writes that intent for a gerut of mitzvah is the same intent for milah of gerut and nothing else is necessary. Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 s.v. vheneh and Har Tzvi YD 2:219 agree. However, Gerut Khilchata 3:4 p. 25 quotes that Rav Elyashiv disagreed.
* In terms of having the presence of a Bet Din, Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 writes that there is room to be lenient for several reasons: (a) According to the Bach 268:7 a bet din isn’t necessary for milah. (b) According to the Bet Yosef a bet din is necessary for milah but perhaps that’s only if the milah is done second. (c) Even if a milah was done without a bet din according to Tosfot that is acceptable since the kabbalat mitzvot was in bet din. (d) If a convert had a milah without a bet din they don’t need to do hatafat dam brit according to the Rabbenu Chananel.
* * Igrot Moshe 2:126 is lenient not to require hatafat dam brit because likely the mohel knew that the baby was non-Jewish and there were another two religious people in attendance.
* Igrot Moshe YD 3:105 writes that in an extenuating circumstance it is permissible to rely on the opinion that hatafat dam brit isn't necessary if there was a milah done for a mitzvah and it could be assumed that there were 3 religious men at the brit or at least publicized to 3 religious men that there was going to be a brit. </ref>
==Disclosure of Mitzvot==
#If the Bet Din doesn’t tell the prospective convert about the mitzvot, the conversion is nonetheless valid if he accepted to keep the mitzvot when he’ll learn about them.<ref>Nemukei Yosef (Yevamot 16a s.v. tanu), Bet Yosef YD 268:2, Shach 268:3, Chemdat Shlomo 1:29, Igrot Moshe YD 1:159</ref>
==Non-Jew Mixed into Family==
#Many poskim hold that if an invalid conversion was done and the non-Jew married into a Jewish family and generations later it is unknown, nonetheless, that is a serious issue and needs to be investigated and revealed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 4:136) writes that the principle of a mamzer that got mixed into a family does not need to be revealed and is permitted when it is in later generations unknown does not apply to non-Jews. A non-Jew women who married a Jew all the children are non-Jewish and can impact later generations. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Ktzaruf Kesef p. 11 cited by R’ Yitzchaki cited below) agreed. See [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=20&id=815 Rav Yoel Amital]’s article in Hamaayan where he argues that the Dvar Yehoshua and Chazon Ish EH 1:18 think that it is applicable to non-Jews and [https://www.machonso.org/hamaayan/?gilayon=21&id=851 Rav Dovid Yitzchaki] who argues that the Chazon Ish does not mean that.</ref>
==Hatafat Dam Brit==
# A non-Jew who had a medical circumcision and know wants to become Jewish needs hatafat dam brit without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 268:1, Shach 268:2</ref>
#Hatafat dam brit is deoritta according to most poskim.<ref>Achiezer 3:27 unlike Yam Shel Shlomo</ref>
#Some say that scratching the area of the milah with a nail is sufficient for hatafat dam brit.<ref>Teshuvot Vehanhagot 2:510</ref>Others hold that it is necessary to extract a drop of blood.<Ref>Achiezer 3:27 writes that the hatafat dam brit is sufficient with a prick to make it only bleed a drop. </ref>
==Adoption and Child Conversions==
#If the parents aren't religious some say that it isn't considered a zachut for the child to be converted and therefore it is invalid even if the child later is religious. Others argue that it is still valid.<ref>
*Bet Yitzchak EH 1:29:8 suggests that for a child conversion with non-religious parents, the mother non-Jewish and father Jewish, it is possibly a benefit to the child since will merit a portion in olam haba, even if he will sin. Nonetheless, he says that since it isn't a clear benefit he would be able to protest later even according to the Chatom Sofer. Bet Yitzchak YD 2:100:11 reiterates this point.
*Igrot Moshe YD 1:158 implies that it isn't clear if it is a benefit to the child if he is going to be raised by non-religious parents, since he can have olam haba. Therefore, he thinks it would be proper for him to do another tevilah when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah and accept mitzvot. He raises this possibility again in Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:3. There he writes that if the children are going to a Jewish day school and the parents are intermarried they should convert the children and it will be a benefit to them since they go to a Jewish day school, even though it isn't a clear benefit.
* Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 writes that the conversion of a child for a non-religious couple would be invalid since it isn't a favor for the child since he could be non-Jewish and not be culpable for any Torah prohibitions, but now that he is Jewish he is obligated to follow the Torah and will be punished for not doing so. Since he isn't going to be brought up in a religious environment he is likely not going to be religious when he grows up. Even if it turns out that he is religious later it is still invalid since at the time of the conversion it didn't seem like a benefit to the child. Secondly, we couldn't assume he's Jewish until he is bar or bat mitzvah and accepted mitzvot because until then it won't be clear that he'll accept Judaism. Thirdly, in order to be Jewish later he must accept mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah (Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b). Minchat Yitzchak 6:105 reiterates this position. He notes the opinion of the Bach 268 and Ritva Ketubot 11a in understanding Rashi that the conversion is only for rabbinic purposes and wonders how he could marry a Jewish woman on that basis. Tosfot Ketubot 11a also assumes that the conversion is only rabbinic but nonetheless concludes that he is treated like a Jew in all respects even for biblical laws. The Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a though hold that the conversion is completely and unquestionably biblically valid.
* Seridei Esh 1:46 says it is ineffective even after the fact, but in 2:63 (written earlier) he says that initially you shouldn't convert a child for non-religious parents. Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:29) argues with Rav Moshe that it is not a zechut since even if he isn't aware of the sins he still needs atonement for them. Seemingly it would be ineffective even after the fact. Similarly, Rav Kook (Daat Kohen YD 147) writes 3 reasons why they can't accept a child convert for a non-religious couple: a) Every convert needs kabbalat mitzvot and the parents can express that their intention to accept mitzvot and raise him in that spirit. b) If the child himself want the conversion he needs to have his parents request the conversion (based on Ravyah) but if the parents don't plan to raise him to mitzvot it is like they're not asking for conversion. c) There is no mechanism of sheliychutahu for the bet din to perform the conversion since it isn't such an important spiritual loss for them to covert in such a case. Seemingly it should be ineffective even after the fact.
* However, Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21) writes that the bet din shouldn't initially accept such a convert if the parents aren't religious. Also, Piskei Din of Batei Din HaRabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 records the ruling of Rav Elyashiv, Rav Jolty, and Rav Yakov Ades that they shouldn't do such a conversion but after the fact the conversion is subject to doubt whether it is valid.
* Klalei Hagiyur of Rav Yitzchak Yosef pp. 53-64 collects many who hold that the conversion is only valid if the parents are religious and supports this from Rav Kook in Daat Kohen YD 147, Zecher Yitzchak 2, Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 1:103), Shevet Halevi 6:202, Chelkat Yakov 1:128:4, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan quoted by Mateh Levi 2:55, and Seridei Esh 2:61:3. He also says that he heard it from his father Rav Ovadia Yosef. However, he notes that this is in opposition to the Bet Yitzchak and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 1:158, EH 4:26:3) and Dibrot Moshe (Shabbat 64:11) where he is inclined to this possibility but not certain.</ref> Therefore, a bet din may not do such a conversion where the parents aren't religious.<ref>Yalkut Yosef concludes not to convert a child with non-religious parents. He adds that this was also the position of Rav Herzog (Heichal Yitzchak EH 1:21), Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Mishpatei Shaul 38), and Rav Massas (Shemesh Umagen 3:62).</ref> After the fact, if the child wants to be Jewish when he is bar or bat mitzvah they should do another tevilah and accept the mitzvot before bet din. If he doesn't want to be Jewish and protests, certainly the original conversion is uprooted. If he does want to be Jewish and not do another tevila and acceptance of mitzvot before bet din, there is no clear consensus if he is Jewish, though many hold he is not Jewish.<ref>Yalkut Yosef cites Piskei Din Harabbanim v. 1 pp. 375-379 by Rav Yakov Ades, Rav Elyashiv, and Rav Jolty that after the fact it isn't clear that it is ineffective.</ref>
#If the parents are religious it is a valid conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 writes that the child can protest even according to the Chatom Sofer since it could be that he would have preferred non-Jewish adopted parents. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Hagiyur p. 53) agrees that we would accept an adopted child for conversion if the parents are religious. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99 doesn't recommend it and only would allow it after the fact if they already did the adoption. Igrot Moshe concludes that he doesn't recommend adopting non-Jewish children and converting them since there is no mitzvah to do so.
*Issues with adoption: the parents need to be religious for the conversion to be valid, they need to tell the child before he becomes a bar or bat mitzvah and have him accept mitzvot. If he doesn't know his practicing Judaism isn't an implicit acceptance. Also, the entire concept of accepting a child convert when he is too young to choose to covert is a major question. The Ravyah cited by Mordechai (Yevamot 4:40) writes that would can't convert a child unless he explicit requests it. (This is also the opinion of the Raah cited by Shitah Mikubeset Ketubot 11a.) Minchat Yitzchak isn't certain if the Ravyah would allow the conversion after the fact if it wasn't against the child's will but the child didn't say anything, as is the case with a baby. He also notes that the Bach and Darkei Moshe understand that the Ran disagrees with this Ravyah. Additionally, the Rambam disagrees with the Ravyah. Nonetheless, the Shach cites the Ravyah and together with Shulchan Aruch would hold that it is only possible to convert a child if the parents agreed or the child requests it. Therefore, Minchat Yitzchak says that even for a religious couple it isn't advised to adopt and convert, though after the fact he thinks it is possible to rely on the Ran and Rambam and perhaps his understanding of the Ravyah. Similarly, Shevet Halevi 6:202 rules that even according to the Ravyah it is permitted in cases of adoption because it isn't against the will of the child. </ref>
#It is important to tell the children that they were converted and can accept or reject Judaism<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=22333&st=&pgnum=204 Meged Yehuda YD 28] writes that he needs to know he's Jewish otherwise he could protest later in life, but he doesn't not need to know that he can protest. Rav Soloveitchik in Mpeninei Harav p. 243 wasn't sure about this.</ref> before they become bar or bat mitzvah so that they can either accept Judaism or protest the conversion.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 s.v. ub'esem implies that even if the child never found out his entire life it is a valid conversion, however, it is ill-advised because he will likely find out and you wouldn't want him to protest the conversion at a later age. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 disagrees on the grounds that not protesting is accepting the mitzvot and if a child never did that he did not accept the mitzvot and is not Jewish. This position is evident in Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b.
* Kaneh Bosem YD 1:115 considers that according to the strict halacha it isn't necessary to tell the convert that he is a convert but after he asked Dayan Weiss he concludes that you must tell the convert. His reasoning was that according to Tosfot Sanhedrin 68b without telling the convert it isn't considered a valid acceptance of mitzvot and according to Tosfot Ketubot 11a without telling them it remains a rabbinic conversion instead of a biblical one. However, according to the Rashba and Ritva Ketubot 11a it might not be necessary ever to tell them. Also, according to the Chatom Sofer YD 253 since the child converted with the parents the child can't reject Judaism and accordingly wouldn't be necessary to tell them.</ref> If he weren't told, he would be able to protest or accept Judaism whenever he finds out.<ref> Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 thinks that since the only reason we can assume he is Jewish until he protests is because there is an assumption that when growing up in a Jewish family he is going to accept the mitzvot when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah. However, if they weren't told until they were teenagers or after it isn't such a clear presumption. Once he is independent and also has a greater temptation to sin there is no assumption he will accept mitzvot. Therefore it would even be questionable to allow him to marry a Jewish girl because of the concern that he will later find out that he was converted and protest it and become a non-Jew married to a Jewish woman. Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:13 agrees. Shevet Halevi 5:250 also concludes that it is necessary to tell the convert that he was converted as a child otherwise we can't assume that they're Jewish because they might later find out and protest it. Even in an extenuating circumstance it is necessary to tell the child.</ref>
# If a child is converted by bet din when he is bar or bat mitzvah he could protest the conversion or accept Torah and mitzvot. A child who converts with his parents might not to be able to protest the conversion when he becomes bar or bat mitzvah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 253 writes that a child who converted with his parents can't later protest the conversion. This is premised on the opinion of the Rif, who doesn't allow a child convert to protest later, and Bahag, who wouldn't allow a child conversion without parent's consent. He also believes this is the opinion of the Rambam that it is only possible for a child convert to protest the conversion if it wasn't done by the request of his parents. Pitchei Teshuva 268:8 cites this teshuva. Bet Yitzchak 1:29:8 notes that this position is against Shulchan Aruch and although the Chatom Sofer's view should be noted we don't accept it.</ref>
#There is no mitzvah to adopt and convert a non-Jewish child.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 3:99:1 quoting Rashba Ketubot 11a, Tosfot Ketubot 44a s.v. hagiyoret, and Ran Ketubot 44a. Igrot Moshe YD 1:162 agrees.</ref>
# There is a discussion whether the bracha for the tevila of a child convert is recited by the bet din or child.<ref>Gerut Kehilchata 6:12. See Shevet Halevi 6:194. Derech Pikudecha (Mitzvah Aseh 2, Dibbur 31) isn't sure if the bet din can recite a bracha at the conversion of a child because he might later decide not to accept Judaism. See Rashba Ketubot 11a.</ref>
# Yichud with children who are adopted is a serious halachic issue and should be dealt with a Rav in advance.<ref>Shevet Halevi 5:205:8 and 6:196 writes that there is no valid permit to violate yichud when adopting children. He says that just because they are brought by parents and feel close to them emotionally it isn't the same as natural parents. He clarifies that he isn't against adoption but it should be done in a way that avoid any question of yichud. Tzitz Eliezer 6:40:21 writes as a way of justifying the practice (limmud zechut) but doesn't actually endorse it. The main reason to be lenient is that since they're brought up by their adopted parent they don't feel any attraction to them.</ref>

==Russian and Ethiopian Jews==
# Regarding Ethiopians, Igrot Moshe EH 9:1, Tzitz Eliezer 12:66, 17:48, Yabia Omer EH 8:11, Minchat Avraham 1:16
# Radvaz 4:19 and in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&pgnum=12 Divrei Dovid 5] and [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=146&st=&pgnum=15&hilite= 9] writes that the Jews of Ethiopia are certainly Jewish and from the tribe of Dan. The Maharikash his student reiterated this point. Yabia Omer EH 8:11 thinks that on this basis we should not question the authenticity of the Jews from Ethiopia as being Jewish. He concludes that they should be accepted without conversion and there is no issue with mamzerut. His reasons that there is no issue of mamzerut are like the Radvaz described that it could be that both their kiddushin and gittin were invalid. Also, Rav Ovadia adds that according to their current tradition their kiddushin didn't involve any giving of money to effectuate the kiddushin which is certainly invalid. Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, in Igrot Moshe EH 5:1 questions the Radvaz that it isn't clear how the Radvaz knew that they were certainly Jewish since they didn't observe the Torah. He therefore treats them as questionably Jewish but says that there is no concern of mamzerut if they do convert. Either way they should be saved from trouble because they might be Jewish. Also, they should be accepted with open arms either as Jews from birth or converts. Tzitz Eliezer 12:66 also questions the authenticity of the Jewishness of the Ethiopian Jews. He thinks that they need to convert but also they would be questionably mamzerim if they want to marry into the Jewish people. His opinion is further clarified in 17:48. There he cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Elyashiv, and Minchat Yitzchak as agreeing that the Ethiopians would need to convert to be accepted as Jews. Rav Avraham Shapira in Minchat Avraham 1:16 and Barkay v. 3 writes that the chief rabbinate accepted the proof from the Radvaz but because there are some concerns that they aren't Jewish they should convert as a chumra. Yalkut Yosef (Klalei Giyur p. 105-6) writes that his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, accepted this ruling in practice so that there wouldn't be any disputes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/735695/rabbi-hershel-schachter/determining-jewish-identity-ethiopian-jewry/ Rav Hershel Schachter] describes the analytical background of this discussion.
# Yabia Omer EH 7:1 ruled that the Russian Jews who say that they're Jewish are believed, however, it is important that they clarify their definition of Jewish. If they know that Judaism depends on the mother then they can be believed. His primary source is that we trust someone who says he's Jewish since the majority of those who claim that they're Jewish are in fact Jewish as long as there wasn't any presumption that they are non-Jewish. He says that this majority applies whether or not they are observant of halacha when they make this claim. This principle that we can rely on majority even if the person currently isn't religious is the subject of debate of rishonim and achronim. Piskei Din Shel Batei Hadin Harabanim v. 9 p. 357 describes this at length. The case they're discussing is about a son who claims he's Jewish but his mother claims she and by extension he are not. In summary, most rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 47a, Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar, Ramban, Rashba, etc) hold that claiming that you're Jewish is enough to presume that you're Jewish even if there is no other evidence to support that claim unless there is a presumption that previously he was assumed to be a non-Jew. However, the Meiri and Maggid Mishna hold that further proof is necessary in order to get married. The Bach YD 268 and Shach sides with the lenient rishonim, while the Bet Hillel EH 2 sides with the strict rishonim. Rav Chaim Ozer 3:27 does seem to support the strict approach. Rav Ovadia sided with the Bach who is lenient unlike the Bet Hillel. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 also seems to be strict.

==Shabbat==
# A non-Jew should not observe Shabbat.<ref>Sanhedrin 58b. According to Rashi Sanhedrin 58b s.v. amar writes that it is forbidden even if one doesn't intend to abstain from melacha for religious purposes and it is just to rest. The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) holds that it is only forbidden if they intend to do so for a religious purpose since it is like creating a new religion. Yad Ramah Sanhedrin 58b s.v. v'amar identifies this dispute. Meiri 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew can't observe another day of the week as Shabbat because Jews might mistakenly learn from him.
* The Rambam (Melachim 10:9) implies that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to keep Shabbat or even another day during the week as a day of rest but only if it is for religious reasons. If it is for leisure it is permitted. This is further implied by Yad Ramah 58b s.v. vamar who contrasts the opinion of the Rambam with another opinion (either Rashi or one similar to Rashi) that holds keeping Shabbat purely for leisure is also forbidden. Meiri 59a s.v. ben seems to follow the approach of the Rambam in this respect. Rashi Sanhedrin 58b is of the opinion that for leisure is also forbidden. Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that the Rambam agrees with Rashi. </ref>
# A convert who did milah and didn't do tevilah, according to some poskim should specifically do melacha on Shabbat.<ref>Avnei Nezer YD 351:4-5 writes that according to the Zohar the Jews kept Shabbat after Marah because that's when they completed their milah with priya, even though they didn't complete their conversion at matan torah. Though, he thinks that the rishonim (Tosfot Yevamot 46b, Rashba Yevamot 71a, Ran a"z 26b) sound like this is incorrect and a convert with milah without tevilah is still a complete non-Jew. [http://download.yutorah.org/2008/1053/727378.pdf Rav Zevulun Charlop] cites Pachad Yitzchak (Igrot 56) who distinguishes between Shabbat at marah and Shabbat today for someone who has milah. </ref> However, most poskim hold that it isn't necessary and shouldn't do melacha.<ref>In April 1848, a non-Jew from Morocco came to Yerushalayim to convert. While recovering from the milah before the tevilah, on Shabbat Rav Asher Lemel was asked whether or not this perspective convert should keep Shabbat. Rav Lamel told him not to keep Shabbat. Afterwards the rabbis of Yerushalayim all disagreed with Rav Lamel on the grounds that the minhag previously was not to be concerned about this and let the perspective convert keep Shabbat. The Binyan Tzion 91 writes that according to his investigations the minhag in Germany was like it was in Yerushalayim. Also, he held that a non-Jew who did milah and not yet tevila should keep Shabbat. 1) Brit milah is a covenant and Shabbat is a covenant; once one forged one covenant with Hashem it isn't reasonable that one needs to break the other. 2) Tosfot Keritut 9a implies that brit milah causes a person to become separated from the other nations even before completing the conversion. He concludes that he is obligated to keep Shabbat.
* Lhorot Natan 1:38:15 writes that there is a great proof from Tosfot Yeshanim Yevamot 48b and Midrash Rabba (Devarim 1:27) that it is permitted for a convert who do milah to keep Shabbat even though he didn't finish converting.</ref>
# A Jew who isn't certain that he is going to convert to be strict, between when he is aware of this doubt and when he converts, he has a dillema whether he should keep Shabbat. If he's non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he can. See note for some solutions.<ref>Chashukei Chemed Sanhedrin 58b writes about someone from Russian extraction and isn't sure if he is Jewish. Between when he became aware of this and his conversion, can he keep Shabbat? If he is non-Jewish he can't keep Shabbat, but if he's Jewish he should keep Shabbat? Solutions that Chashukei Chemed quotes include: wearing tzitzit in the public domain (Maharam Shik OC 145 quoting the Chatom Sofer), asking a non-Jew to work for him (Maharam Shik), or working on Saturday night (Panim Yafot Beresheet 8:22).</ref>

==Teaching Torah==
#Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben writes that a non-Jew who is interested in converting can learn Torah.
==Volunteering Mitzvot as a Non-Jew==
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligationi that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>

==Conservative Conversions==
#Conservative conversions are generally considered invalid by Orthodox halacha.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 3:77:2. Minchat Yitzchak 6:108 writes that you shouldn't let Conservative rabbis use your mikveh for a conversion.</ref>

==Baal Teshuva==
#There is a rabbinic tevilah for someone who completely left Jewish practice and wants to do teshuva.<ref>Rama 268:12. The Gra cites the source for the Tevilah in [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%93%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%97#%D7%97 Avot D'Rabbi Natan 8:8].</ref>
# The general halacha is that if the mother is Jewish the child is Jewish.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:8 has a fascinating nuance in some rishonim that if the father wasn't Jewish and the mother was completely not religious the child is considered not Jewish. However, Rashbash cited by Bedek Habayit YD 268:12 disagrees that Jewishness is decided by the mother even if she is not religious and the father was non-Jewish.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Yoreh Deah]]
A

Brit Milah

2024-08-19T20:02:08Z

Bchernigoff: grammar

==Importance of the Mitzva of Milah==

#The mitzva of milah is equivalent to all other mitzvot in the Torah combined.<ref>Nedarim 32a </ref>
#Without the mitzva of milah, the world would not exist.<ref>Nedarim 32a </ref>
#In the merit of brit milah, Hashem split the sea for the Jewish people <ref>Yalkut Shimoni Yirmiyahu 33 [321] </ref>
#In the merit of brit milah, Aharon Hakohen entered the Kodesh Hakodashim every year.<ref>Vayikra Rabba 21:5</ref>

==The Night Before==
===Berit Yitzchak===

#In Sephardic communities, it is customary on the night before a Berit Mila to assemble ten men in the home, as well as Torah scholars, to read special passages from the Zohar, in order to give the baby protection.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 5, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Shulchan Aruch Kitzur 163:8, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2334 Rabbi Eli Mansour]</ref> There is value to reading Zohar even if one doesn't understand it.<ref>Chaim Shaal 1:75:2, Yabia Omer 1:26:10</ref>
#During this event, the mother should come to the side room and recite Birkat Ha’gomel.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 10, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2334 Rabbi Eli Mansour]</ref>
#One does not need to eat bread at the meal for the night of the bris, and if one chooses to do so, it would not qualify as a seudat mitzva, and thus would not allow for eating meat during the nine days.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 8</ref>
#If the brit is pushed off past the 8th day, one should do the learning the night before the bris instead of on the 8th night.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 11</ref>
#If the brit is on Shabbat morning, one should do the learning on Thursday night, and if possible to gather ten people to learn on Friday night.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 11 </ref>

==Obligation of the Mitzvah of Brit Milah==

#A father is obligated to perform a Brit Milah (circumcision) on his son or to appoint a pious Mohel to do so on his behalf.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1, Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 12.

*The Gemara Kiddushin 29a states that a father is obligated to perform a Brit Milah for his son. Some Rishonim assume that the entire obligation on the father is to make sure that the Milah takes place, but he doesn't need to personally perform it nor even appoint a Mohel, as long as it is taken care of. These rishonim include the Maharach Or Zaruah (responsa n. 11) and Tosfot Rid (Kiddushin 29a s.v. Otto). However, most rishonim assume that there is an obligation upon the father to actually perform the Milah, and if he doesn't know how, then he should appoint a Mohel to do it for him. These Rishonim include the Rambam (Milah 1:1), Darkei Moshe (YD 264:1), and Rosh Chullin 6:8.
*The Ohr Zaruah (v. 2, Siman 107) writes that if the father knows how to do the Milah, but nonetheless asks a Mohel to do it for him, he is losing out on his mitzvah. Shach CM 382:4 agrees. The Darkei Moshe 264:1 argues that we always use the principle of agency (Shaliach Adam KeMoto, Kiddushin 41a), and that this mitzvah should be no different. The Kesot CM 382:2 defends the Ohr Zaruah saying that Brit Milah is a mitzvah that needs to be done with your body, and can't be delegated to be done by someone else.</ref>
#The father of the baby should stand near the Mohel (the one who is performing the circumcision) in order to show that the Mohel is his proxy.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>

==When a Brit Milah should take place==

#The Brit Milah is performed on the eighth day after the baby's birth.<ref>Vayikra 12:3, Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 262:1</ref> It may not be performed before the eighth day. If it is done before the eighth day, there is a dispute if the child should have a hatafat dam brit ceremony on the eighth day.<ref>Rama Y.D. 262:1 rules that bdiavad (after the fact), a milah performed during the day before the eighth day is acceptable. However, if the Milah is performed at night before the eighth day, even if it's the eighth night, then hatafat dam brit would be required. Shach 262:2 disagrees and requires a hatafat dam brit in all cases if the Milah was performed before the eighth day. Shach notes that Hatafah in this case wouldn't be performed on Shabbat. Bear Heitiv 262:1 cites the Shach.</ref>
#It is permitted for a Jewish doctor to perform a hospital circumcision for a non-religious Jew before the eighth day.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/931524/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-hospital-circumcision/ Rabbi Lebowitz] explained that according to the aforementioned Rama, the Milah would bdiavad (after the fact) acceptable in this case. Nonetheless, even according to Shach who believes it to be ineffective, that doesn't make it forbidden to do. Since it might make the child not an arel it is permitted for the doctor to do it. They should be aware that they cut the necessary amount that it would be a valid circumcision according to the halacha, the anesthesia and the clamps used today that allow for a little bleeding wouldn't invalidate the circumcision. He concluded by quoting Rav Mordechai Willig as permitting this.</ref>
#The Brit Milah may be performed any time during the day, after [[HaNetz HaChama]], however, one should make an effort to fulfill the mitzvah of Brit Milah early in the morning because of "Zarizin Makdimin LeMitzvot".<ref>Pesachim 4a says that the Brit Milah may be performed any time during the day but those who have alacrity in fulfilling mitzvot will do it early. The gemara learns this concept of Zarizin Makdimin LeMitzvot from Avraham Avinu when he went to perform the Akeda early in the morning. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 262:1 codifies this as halacha.</ref>
#If one performed the Brit Milah before [[HaNetz HaChama]] after [[Olot HaShachar]] one fulfills one's obligation.<ref>[[Megillah]] 20a, Rama 262:1</ref>
#If it will cause a fight among the family to perform the Brit Milah very early, one may delay it, but one should still try to make it as early as possible.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>
#If there is a concern of a health risk to the baby, the Brit Milah should be delayed until the baby is healthy. Once the baby is healthy, in the case of some illnesses the Brit Milah should be performed without delay, while in other cases, the Brit Milah is only performed after 8 days after the baby became healthy.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 262:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:4</ref> Needless to say, because of the complexity of these issues, it is incumbent for a person to consult an Orthodox Rabbi to assess the situation. For more details about a delayed Milah, see the [[#A Delayed Milah]] section.
#If a baby is born during [[Bein HaShemashot]], since there is a doubt whether it was day or night, the Brit Milah is performed on the ninth day from the baby's birth.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 162:4</ref>Because of the complexity involved in practically determining [[Bein HaShemashot]] an Orthodox Rabbi should be consulted.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:6</ref>

==Brachot for the Brit Milah==

#The father of the baby makes the Bracha "ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם אשר קידשנו במצותיו וציונו להכניסו בבריתו של אברהם אבינו" (“Baruch Atta Hashem Elokenu Melech HaOlam Asher Kiddeshanu BeMitzvotav VeTzivanu LeHachniso BeBrito Shel Avraham Avinu”) before the Milah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1 writes that this Bracha should be made after the cutting of the Orlah before the Periyah, however, Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot vol 2 pg 60) writes that the minhag is to make it before the Milah and the Birchat Hamilah altogether. Yalkut Yosef Milah p. 77 writes that the minhag of Israel, Bavel, and Eastern Sephardi countries is to recite Lhachniso before the Milah. Even though Shulchan Aruch holds like the Rosh (Shabbat 14:10, Teshuva 26:1) that it can be said afterwards, the Rambam (Rav Avraham Ben HaRambam cited by Yabia Omer OC 2:17:7) and Rif (Teshuva 293) hold it should be said beforehand.</ref> This bracha should be said while standing.<ref>Rama YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:7 </ref>
#The Mohel makes the Bracha "ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם אשר קידשנו במצותיו וציונו על המילה" (“Baruch Atta Hashem Elokenu Melech HaOlam Asher Kiddeshanu BeMitzvotav VeTzivanu Al HaMilah”) prior to the Milah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef 8:4 </ref> The text is the same whether it is the father or the mohel reciting it.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:3. The Rambam's view, cited by Shulchan Aruch 265:2, is that if the father is the mohel, then the phrase למול את הבן is recited. </ref> This bracha should be said while standing.<ref>Rama YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:7 </ref>
#According to Sephardim, a Shehechiyanu is recited at the Brit Milah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:7, Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot vol 2 pg 72). This is based on the view of Rambam (Milah 3:3 and Berachot 11:9). </ref> According to Ashkenazim, a [[Shehecheyanu]] is not said at the Brit Milah<ref>Gemara Shabbat 137b enumerates the two berachot cited above, but makes no mentions of Shehechiyanu by a Brit Milah. Rambam (cited in previous footnote) reasons that since it's a Mitzvah that isn't applicable all the time, it's fit to recite a Shehechiyanu, as we find by Pidyon HaBen (which is explicit on Pesachim 121b that a Shehechiyanu is recited).

Hagahot Maimonit (Milah 3:4) gives a few different justifications for the Minhag of the Ashkenazim not to say Shehechiyanu. The first is based on Ketubot 8a, which states that the phrase "She'Ha'Simcha B'Meono" is only said in the Zimmun of a Sheva Berachot and not a Milah, because there is no Simcha while the baby is in pain. Similarly, Shehechiyanu should not be recited while the baby is in pain. The challenge to this explanation, raised by Shut Rashba (1:245), is that Berachot 59b discusses a case in which one loses a family member, and then recites Dayan HaEmet for the loss, and Shehechiyanu for receiving a big inheritance. We see that Shehechiyanu can be recited, even though a person is in pain.

Hagahot Maimonit cites the second explanation from Rokeach, who says that since the baby is a nefel (non-viable) until it becomes 30 days old (Shabbat 135b), we don't say Shehechiyanu. Beit Yosef (265-7) quotes R' Yerucham who argues with this reasoning, saying that we should follow the majority of babies who are viable and will survive. Beit Yosef cites a third explanation from Tosafot (Bechorot 49a s.v. l'achar) that Chazal only institued a Shehechiyanu on Pidyon HaBen which isn't so common, as opposed to Milah which comes up much more frequently.

</ref>, except when a father is doing a Brit Milah for a firstborn son who is obligated in [[Pidyon HaBen]].<ref>Rama YD 265:7 </ref> Today, the Ashkenazic minhag is not to recite Shechiyanu outside of Israel.<ref>Otzar Habrit 3:15:21</ref>
#After this, the Hagefen is made on wine, and then the bracha of Asher Kidesh Yedid<ref>There is a discussion in the Rishonim as to the identity of this "Yedid". Rashi (Shabbat 137b s.v. asher) thinks that it refers to Yitzchak, while Rabbenu Tam (s.v. yedid) thinks that it refers to Avraham. </ref> MeBeten is recited.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:18 </ref> The text is אשר קידש ידיד מבטן, אל חי חלקנו צורנו צוה להציל ידידות שארנו משחת.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:19</ref> The one who recited this bracha should taste the wine before the paragraph of "אלוקינו ואלוקי אבותינו קיים את הילד וכו'" and naming the baby.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:20, Yabia Omer 7:23</ref> It is sufficient to taste the wine and not drink a cheekful.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:22</ref>
#When the one reciting the bracha says ואומר לך בדמייך חיי, the mohel takes a drop of wine and places it on the lips of the baby.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:21</ref>
#When reciting the bracha of אשר קידש ידיד מבטן, Ashkenazim have the Sandak stand and hold the baby (Amidah Lbrachot)<ref>Otzar Habrit 3:15:23</ref>, while Sephardim have the Sandak continue to sit.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:26</ref>
#After the bracha of אשר קידש ידיד מבטן, there is a prayer said for the welfare of the baby and the mother, and in that paragraph the baby is named.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:27</ref>
#If the Brit Milah takes place on [[Shabbat]], if the one making the [[Brachot]] didn't yet make [[Kiddush]], he should drink from the cup of wine a Melo Lugmav (cheekful) and another [[Revi'it]].<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 77:14</ref> Sephardim hold that altogether he should drink a Reviyit or a Melo Lugmav.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:23</ref>
#The father of the baby and mohel don't need to close their eyes nor cover the nakedness of the baby when reciting the brachot.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 265:8 and Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:10. Beit Yosef cites a view in the Rishonim that the baby's nakedness does need to be covered while performing the Milah. Tur quotes the Baal HaIttur who says that as long as a Katan is not fit to have Bi'ah (marital relations), then his nakedness is not halakhically considered an Ervah. </ref> However, the baby should be clean from feces before the bracha is recited.<ref>Rama 265:8</ref>

==Mohel==

#Sephardim hold that a woman can be a mohel.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 264:1</ref> Ashkenazim hold that a woman shouldn't be a mohel. However, if there's no man available, then she should do the milah.<ref>Rama Y.D. 264:1 </ref>

==Sandakut (holding of the baby)==

#One should appoint a pious Sandak.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>
#The father of the baby should place the baby on the lap of the Sandak.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, one shouldn't appoint the same person as a Sandak if he was already a Sandak for another one of one's sons.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>

==Brit Milah Ceremony==

#When the baby is brought in, those in attendance should say Baruch Haba Beshem Hashem out loud. The father of the baby says the pasuk אשרי תבחר ותקרב ישכון חצריך and those standing there answer נשבעה בטוב ביתך קדוש היכלך.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:1</ref>
#Everyone in attendance of the Brit Milah should stand except for the Sandak who is holding the baby.<ref>Rama Y.D. 265:1 cites the Maharam who made n allusion to the concept of standing for a Brit Milah from ויעמד העם בברית (Melachim 2:23:3). This is codified by the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:2 and Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:2.</ref>
#After the Bracha of LeHachniso, those in attendance should answer [[Amen]] and add "כשם שנכנס לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה למצוות ולמעשים טובים" - "Keshem SheNichnas LaBrit Ken Yikanes LeTorah ULeChpah ULeMaasim Tovim".<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:2, Otzar Habrit 3:15:20</ref> Sephardim have the practice to say "כשם שהכנסתו לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה למצוות ולמעשים טובים" unless the father isn't there in which case they say "כשם שנכנס לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה למצוות ולמעשים טובים".<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:5</ref>
#The mohel places the baby on the Kiseh of Eliyahu and says זה כסא של אליהו הנביא מלאך הברית.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:8</ref>
#Some have the practice to have candles lit in honor of the Brit Milah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:9</ref>
#The minhag is to bury the orlah skin in dirt. Some say ונחש עפר לחמו when doing so.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:14</ref>
#Immediately after the brachot of the father the Sephardic minhag is to recite the 13 middot of Rachamim.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:17</ref>
#At the end of the milah the Sephardic minhag of Yerushalayim is to recite שיר המעלות אשרי כל ירא ה' and Kaddish Yemey Shelemah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:27</ref>

===Tallit and Tefillin for Brit Milah===

#The Ashkenazic minhag is for everyone involved and observing the milah to keep on Tefillin for the Brit Milah since the Brit Milah is a sign between us and Hashem and so is the Tefillin.<ref>Mishna Brurah 25:55, Piskei Teshuvot 25:29. Avnei Yishfeh 7:7:8 explains that unlike Shabbat or Yom Tov which are a day that is a sign between us and Hashem, brit milah is a temporary mitzvah and doesn't not require removing tefillin. Siach Tzadikim (Brit Milah p. 145) quotes the practice of the Satmer Rebbe to remove his tefillin for milah because the brit milah is a sign like Shabbat and tefillin is also a sign.</ref> Sephardim, however, have the practice not to keep on Tefillin, yet those who do have the practice to leave on Tefillin have what to rely upon.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:7:2)</ref>
#If the milah is on a Rosh Chodesh and the congregation already took off their tefillin many hold that they should not put it back on for the Brit Milah. The Ashkenazic minhag is that the father of the baby, the Mohel, and Sandak put back on their tefillin,<ref>Piskei Teshuvot 25:29</ref> while Sephardim have the practice not to put them back on.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:7:2)</ref>
#The minhag is for sandak and father of the baby to wear a tallit during the brit milah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:7:2)</ref>

===Minyan for Brit===

#When possible a Brit Milah should be done in the presence of a [[minyan]]<ref>Pirkei Drabbi Eliezer ch. 19, Maharil (Milah n. 2), Tur 265:6 citing Rav Sar Shalom, Piskei Maharach Or Zaruah (Milah n. 36), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 265:6. Pirkei Drabbi Eliezer ch. 19 postulates that Hashem always made public testimonies in the presence of ten people. It then applies this dictum to Brit Milah, Chalitza, and Sheva Brachot for a wedding.</ref> in order to publicize the fact that a crucial mitzvah is being performed to bring the child into the covenant of Avraham Avinu. Additionally, it is a opportune moment to thank Hashem in public for the healthy birth of a baby boy.<ref>[http://www.chabad.org.il/Magazines/Article.asp?ArticleID=9093&CategoryID=1683 chabad.org.il]. See Otzar Habrit p. 183 and 238</ref>
#Some say that one should not delay a brit milah in order to get a minyan for the milah, while others allow delaying.<ref>Mishna Halachot 19:196 responded to Az Nidbaru 14:46 who held that it is better to do the milah immediately and not wait for a minyan in order to fulfill zerizut. Mishna Halachot argues that it is better to wait for the minyan even if it means waiting until after chatzot. Obviously though he doesn't allow delaying the brit milah for no reason.</ref>
#One should not delay a brit milah in order to get a minyan for the seuda.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1495&pgnum=263 Maharam Shik YD 386] writes that to perform a mitzvah in a more enhanced manner it is permitted to delay it as we see by Birkat Halevana. However, having a minyan for the brit milah isn't a sufficient reason to delay the milah.</ref>
#A person doesn't have to mevatel Torah to participate in a brit milah unless there wouldn't be a minyan without him.<ref>Lhorot Natan YD 15:65</ref>

==The Meal of the Brit Milah==

#It is a proper practice to make a meal on the day of a Brit Milah and it is considered a Seudat Mitzvah. <ref>Pirkei DRabbi Eliezer ch. 29, Shulchan Aruch YD 265:12, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:8. See Gemara [[Shabbat]] 130a</ref>
#The practice is not to invite people to this meal because there is an issue for someone who was invited to a meal of Brit Milah and didn't attend.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Shulchan Aruch Kitzur 163:8, Bayit HaYehudah vol. 10 pg. 182, see also [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/750891/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Inviting_People_to_a_Bris Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz] </ref>

===Meat or Dairy===

#Ideally the meal should have meat but one fulfills the minhag even with chicken or fish.<ref>Magen Avraham 249:6 citing the Maharshal requires meat for a brit milah meal. Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot 2:11:3 based on Taamei Haminhagim writes that the meal should have meat initially but if that's not possible it could have chicken or fish. Rabbenu Bechay Beresheet 21:8 writes that the minhag to have a seuda after a Brit Milah is based on the party Avraham made for Yitzchak and the midrash writes that the party was for fact he was able to give Yitzchak a Milah. </ref>
#Those who are lenient to have dairy for the milah meal should at least serve wine.<ref>[http://www.torahweb.org/torah/docs/rsch/RavSchachter-Corona-56-January-31-2021.pdf Rav Schachter (Corona teshuva #56)]</ref>

===Bread===

#The meal should be a bread meal.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot 2:11:3</ref>

===Minyan===

#The minhag is to have a minyan for the seudah of a brit milah.<ref>Rama Y.D. 265:12, Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot 2:11:2</ref> If one didn't have a minyan the seudah is still valid.<ref>Otzar Habrit 3:17:4 p. 239 writes that even if there wasn’t a minyan present at the seudat brit milah the seuda is still a seuda and the minyan isn’t the halacha but a minhag. Bechorat Habrit 265:66 says ten is enough but it isn't critical. See also Maharam Shik YD 386.</ref>
#If one would otherwise learn Torah one does not need to [[Bitul Torah|mevatel Torah]] in order to go to a seuda of a Brit Milah unless there wouldn't be a [[minyan]] at the seuda.<ref>Lhorot Natan YD 15:65 and Yabia Omer YD 4:19. Yabia Omer cites Maharshag 2:125 who explains that it is more important to learn Torah than to go to a seudat mitzvah and he quotes that the Maharam Shik told him this as good advice. He qualifies it that if there's a chance that there wouldn't be a minyan without him it is better to go to the seuda than to learn. Yabia Omer asks why indeed should he mevatel Torah in order to make the minyan if that is a mitzvah that isn't critical to have a minyan for the seuda. He answers that since having a minyan is an enhancement of the mitzvah (Rama Y.D. 265:12) we would mevatel Torah to make sure that happens and it is considered as a mitzvah that couldn't be done without you (Moed Katan 9b and Meiri there). Dibrot Eliyahu 8:62 cites and agrees with Yabia Omer. Lhorot Natan YD 15:65 comes to the same conclusion on his own.</ref>
#A brit milah which falls out on Sukkot must have the seuda of a Brit Milah in the Sukkah. If the Sukkah isn't big enough for everyone to enter, they should have a minyan have the seuda in the Sukkah and not eat outside the Sukkah. If they can't even fit a minyan, some say that they can eat outside the Sukkah with a minyan and others argue that they should have a seuda with fewer people in the Sukkah even without a minyan rather than eat outside the Sukkah.<ref>Maharik 179 cited by Rama O.C. 640:6 holds that the seuda of brit milah needs to be in the sukkah. The Biur Halacha 640:6 s.v. vseudat explains that if the Sukkah isn't big enough for everyone they should just have a minyan eat the seuda. If they can't even fit that, he quotes the Magen Avraham 640:13 who says that they can eat the seuda outside the Sukkah, while the Gra holds that you should have a sueda without a minyan rather than eat outside the Sukkah. Biur Halacha seems to favor the Gra in citing the Pri Megadim and Bikurei Yaakov to support that contention. Aruch Hashulchan 640:15 is very lenient to have the seuda outside the Sukkah if they don't fit.</ref>

==A Delayed Milah==

#A delayed Milah may not take place on [[Shabbat]] or [[Yom Tov]].<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:4</ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, one may perform a delayed Brit Milah on Thursday or Friday even if it will cause a situation of Pikuach Nefesh, however, Sephardim hold that one should not perform a delayed Brit Milah on Thursday or Friday. <ref>*The Gemara [[Shabbat]] 19a quotes the Briatta which states that one may not board a boat in order to travel on [[Shabbat]] unless one got on before 3 days before [[Shabbat]] (whether or not this includes Wednesday, see Mishna Brurah 248:4).
*The Rif ([[Shabbat]] 7a-b) explains that the reason for this restriction is that if one boards a boat within 3 days of [[Shabbat]] it will negatively impact the passenger’s oneg [[Shabbat]] (enjoyment of [[Shabbat]]), however, if it’s started earlier the passengers will get used to it and be able to enjoy [[Shabbat]]. The Rosh ([[Shabbat]] 1:38) and Rambam ([[Shabbat]] 30:13) agree with this reason.
*However, the Baal HaMoer (on Rif) explains that the reason that one may not board a boat close to [[Shabbat]] is because it’s likely that there will be life threatening danger which will necessitate a violation of [[Shabbat]]. However, when it is begun earlier there’s no issue because the obligation to prepare not to violate [[Shabbat]] even for life threatening danger doesn’t begin (explained by Mishna Brurah 248:8).
*The Rashbatz 1:21 originates based on the Baal HaMoer’s concept that a convert shouldn’t schedule his Brit Milah on Thursday because it will lead to a violation of [[Shabbat]] (if he doesn’t recover fully) and the same would be true of a baby who had his Brit Milah delayed. This is codified by the Tur and S”A YD 268. [Interestingly, the Taz explains that even if there’s no concern of a violation of [[Shabbat]] there’s an issue of ruining oneg [[Shabbat]] and so it would be forbidden to do the delayed Brit Milah on Thursday or Friday.]
*However, the Shach YD 266:18 argues on the Rashbetz that the Baal HaMoer would permit just like it’s permitted to board a boat on Friday for the purpose of a mitzvah (S”A OC 248:1) and Brit Milah is a tremendous mitzvah. The Magen Avraham 331:9, Mishna Brurah 331:33, and Sh”t HaRanach 38 (quoted by Tzitz Eliezer 12:43) agree with the Shach.
*The Chida in Birkei Yosef 248 quotes several achronim who defended the Rashbetz by saying that it was only permitted to board a boat on Friday for a mitzvah if one stipulated with the group that they wouldn’t continue to travel on [[Shabbat]] (S”A 248:1) and since there’s no way to make such a stipulation regarding Milah it’s forbidden to do it within 3 days of [[Shabbat]] like the Baal HaMoer.
*Sh”t Yabia Omer YD 5:23, Menuchat Ahava (vol 1, 1:6), and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (comments to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:4) accept the Chida as halacha.
*However, the Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 12:43 rejects the Chida because he points out that the Tashbetz himself wasn’t sure whether to hold like Rebbe that one must stipulate or Rabben Shimon and one wouldn’t have to stipulate and only as a stringency did the Tashbetz hold like Rebbe. The Tzitz Eliezer concludes that it’s illogical that the Tashbetz would have postponed the Milah from Thursday just because of a stringency of holding like Rebbe. [See further in the Birkei Yosef who gives a second defense of the Rashbetz and Tzitz Eliezer who rejects it as well.]</ref>
#Everyone agrees that if a baby boy is born during the [[Bein HaShemashot]] (halachic twilight) on Wednesday can have the Brit Milah on Thursday next week. <ref>Menuchat Ahava (vol 1, 1:7) and Sh”t Yabia Omer YD 5:23(4) explain that since the Brit Milah’s original time was set for Thursday because of a doubt it’s not considered like it was delayed specifically for that time. </ref>

==Milah On Shabbat==

#Sephardim hold that when there is a milah on Shabbat they shouldn’t have one mohel do the milah and another do the priyah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 267:12.</ref> There is a dispute if it is true for Yom Tov as well.<ref>Otzer Brit v. 2 p. 379 writes Yam Shel Shlomo Yevamot 8:3 is machmir even on Yom Tov but we don't follow it (Petach Habayit). Or Yisrael p. 308 n. 42 writes it is asur even on yom tov. Yalkut Yosef Shabbat v. 4 p. 326 331:14 we hold that you shouldn't have two mohalim. It is clear from the footnote that it applies also to yom tov.</ref>
#A father can do a brit on Shabbat even if he could have someone else do it.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 338</ref>
#Regarding putting away the milah knife after the milah see [[General_laws_of_Muktzeh#Muktzeh_that.E2.80.99s_in_already_in_one.E2.80.99s_hands]].
#If the mohel knows that by doing the milah on Shabbat the relatives will come to violate Shabbat to get there or the like, many poskim hold that they should push it off to Sunday.<ref>Shevet Halevi 1:205:331, 4:135:1, Orot Hahalacha p. 1164. Minchat Yitzchak 3:35:3-6 also seems to agree with this as he writes that it is lifnei iver for the mohel to do the milah on Shabbat if he knows that the family will drive there on Shabbat. However, since the mohel knew that if he didn't do it, another non-religious mohel would it is only mesaya. With some other factors he's lenient because of that consideration.</ref> Others hold that they should nonetheless do the milah on Shabbat.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 6:3</ref>
#A mohel who is asked to do a milah on Shabbat and he is worried about going and seeing violations of Shabbat, he should nonetheless go and do the milah.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:156. He explains that seeing chilul Shabbat is certainly a negative thing, however, that consideration is not a reason to delay a milah.</ref>

==Procedure of Milah==

#There are two parts to every Milah, the milah and the priyah. Milah entails cutting the Orlah skin which covers the Atarah and priyah entails peeling back the thin membrane beneath that skin until the Atarah is uncovered.<ref>The Mishna (Shabbat 133a) outlines the 3 stages of milah including milah, priyah, and metsisah. For a discussion of metsisah see further. Rashi s.v. mohalin refers to cutting the orlah skin. Rambam (Milah 2:2) elaborates that the orlah skin is the skin that covers the Atarah. Rashi s.v. veporin writes that priyah is peeling back the membrane covering the tip of the gid. Rambam (Milah 2:2) elaborates the priyah is the membrane underneath the orlah skin. </ref>
#The last stage of milah is metsisah. There is a great controversy whether this is considered a ritual part of the milah procedure or simply a medical practice of the days of the gemara and wouldn't be necessary today.<ref>The Mishna (Shabbat 133a) writes that metsisah is the last stage of milah. The gemara (133b) comments that the reason that is practiced on Shabbat is because if it isn't done there is a critical danger to the baby's life. The Rambam (Milah 2:2) echoes this and says that metsisah is for medical reasons. The Tiferet Yisrael (Boaz Shabbat 19:1) writes that the entire purpose of metsisah is medical and if nowadays it causes a medical danger it doesn't need to be done. See also the Maharam Shik (OC 152) takes the position that there is no danger with metsisah. However, the [http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&pgnum=264 Mishkenot Yacov (YD 63)] writes that drawing blood (hatafat dam) is an integral part of the ritual milah. He proves this from the Zohar and Rashi (Shabbat 134a s.v. lekarchei).</ref> There is a further discussion if metsisah should be done with one's mouth or a utensil.<ref>Har Tzvi (YD 214) writes that since there are dangers with doing metsisah with one's mouth, one may do it with a utensil.</ref> Because of the danger involved, many poskim hold that one should not and may not do metsisah with one's mouth.<ref>Rav Hershel Schachter in a shiur on [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/798611/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Hilchos_Shabbos_3_-_Choleh_BeShabbos_&_Kiddush# yutorah.org ("Hilchos Shabbos 3" min 27-30)] said that there is a real danger to the life of the baby with doing metsisah with one's mouth and it is foolish to continue doing it today. A number of poskim are quoted in an article by David Shabtai and Raymond Sultan entitled Medical Risk Taking in Halacha in 'Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, 2006. See also the Binyan Tzion 23 who writes that a mohel who does metsisah must be certain that he is not infected with herpes and cause the baby to become infected. Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot v. 2 ch. 6 fnt. 1 writes that one may use metzitza bkli such as with a tube if there's a concern of danger, otherwise it is done with one's mouth as the Sdei Chemed (Kuntres Metzitza) writes.

*With respect to the general question of relying on doctors to ascertain that there's no danger see Rav Kook's teshuva about metzitza in Daat Kohen YD 140 who argues that we can never rely on doctors to make such a claim. Yabia Omer OC 7:53 likes this idea.</ref>
#It is permitted to wear gloves for brit milah.<ref>[https://www.torahmusings.com/2013/09/must-a-mohel-wear-gloves/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on torahmusings.com] citing Rav Schachter and Rav Zilberstein Pesachim 57</ref>
#It is the minhag for the mohel to dip his finger in the wine to feed it to the baby while the pasuk of "בדמייך חיי" is recited.<ref>Magen Avraham 269:1 records the minhag to give some of the wine to the baby at the brit milah. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:8:21) writes that the minhag is that the mohel dips his finger in the wine and gives a drop of the wine to the baby during the recitation of בדמייך חיי.</ref>

==Related Pages==

#[[Shalom Zachor]]
#[[Pidyon HaBen]]

==Links==

*[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/802797/rabbi-hershel-schachter/inyonei-milah/ Inyonei Milah] by Rabbi Hershel Schachter
*[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739319/rabbi-zvi-sobolofsky/hilchos-milah/ Hilchos Milah] by Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky

==Sources==
<references />
[[Category:Lifecycles]]

Chol HaMoed

2024-08-19T01:55:40Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

{{Good}}
[[Image:Nissan.png|thumb|right|Calendar from Kaluach of the month of Nissan with the first day of Chol HaMoed [[Pesach]] highlighted]]
Chol HaMoed refers to the intermediate days of the [[holidays]] of [[Sukkot]] and [[Pesach]]. In the diaspora, on [[Pesach]], Chol HaMoed spans from the third day of [[Pesach]] until and including the sixth day, and on [[Sukkot]] from the third day of [[Sukkot]] until [[Shemini Aseret]]. In [[Israel]], on [[Pesach]], Chol HaMoed starts on the second day of [[Pesach]] and lasts until and including the sixth day, and on [[Sukkot]], from the second day of [[Sukkot]] until [[Shemini Aseret]].
==Kavod and Oneg==

#Since Chol Hamoed is called a mikarei kodesh,<ref>Vayikra 23:4, Chagiga 18a, Mechilta (Parshat Bo 9), Rambam (Yom Tov 7:1). However, Tashbetz 2:206 writes that Chol Hamoed is not called mikraei kodesh and that's why he doesn't mention it in Yaaleh Veyavo. In fact, there is an old dispute between the rishonim whether a person should say mikraei kodesh in the Yaaleh Vyavo for Chol Hamoed. In Tashbetz 2:210 he writes that even though the gemara calls Chol Hamoed mikraei kodesh that is only a rabbinic level. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 490:3 writes that the Sephardic minhag is to say it, while Rama holds the minhag is not to say it. Nonetheless, Magen Avraham 490:2 (as explained by Pri Megadim) writes that even Ashkenazim say it in other places in davening.</ref> there’s an obligation to honor Chol Hamoed and treat it differently from how a person treats a weekday. This includes having special food, drinks, and clothing that are nicer than a person has during the week, but it is more lenient than Kavod of [[Yom Tov]].<ref>Sh”t Rabbi Akiva Eiger 1 (in the Hashmatot) and S”A HaRav 529:5 write that there’s no Kavod and Oneg on Chol HaMoed. On the other hand, Magen Avraham 530:1, Mishna Brurah 530:1, Sefer Chol HaMoed (pg 1; by Rabbi Dovid Zucker) write that there’s Kavod and Oneg on Chol HaMoed, however, Shaar Tzion 530:4 points out that it’s not as strict as Kavod of [[Yom Tov]]. Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 502) agrees. Mechilta (Parshat Bo 9) derives from a pasuk that there is an obligation to honor Chol Hamoed with food, drinks, and nice clothing. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8920&st=&pgnum=111 Tanya Rabati (siman 52)] writes that a person should eat and drink on Chol Hamoed like he does on Yom Tov. Shaar Hatziyun 530:4 concludes that the mechilta means that it is necessary to have food, drink, and clothing that is nicer than during the week but not necessarily like Yom Tov. </ref>
#As part of Kavod, one should wear clothing on chol hamoed that are a little nicer than his weekday clothing. Some have the minhag to wear [[Shabbat]] clothing on Chol HaMoed.<ref>Mishna Brurah 530:1, Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 502), and Aruch HaShulchan 530:4 write that there’s an obligation to wear clothing which is a little nicer than regular weekday clothing. Shaar Hatziyun 530:4 clarifies that it isn't necessary to wear Shabbat or Yom Tov clothing. It is sufficient to wear clothing that are a little nicer than during the week. [https://ph.yhb.org.il/12-10-03/ Peninei Halacha (Moadim 10:3)] agrees that chol hamoed clothing just need to be slightly nicer than weekday clothing. Nimukei Orach Chaim 530:3 and Chaye Adam 106:1 hold that one should wear [[Shabbat]] clothes, but one doesn’t need to wear [[Yom Tov]] clothing which are supposed to be a little better than [[Shabbat]] clothing. Mishna Brurah 530:1 writes that the Maharil's practice was to wear [[Shabbat]] clothes on Chol HaMoed. Beer Moshe 7:3:3 and Yalkut Yosef (Chol Hamoed p. 735) write that a worker who is allowed to work may put on work clothing in private when he needs to work and then change into nicer clothing afterwards. </ref>
#As part of Kavod, some have the practice to leave the table cloth on the table all of Chol HaMoed.<ref>Pri Megadim 639 (M”Z 639:1) and Aruch HaShulchan 530:4 </ref>
#As part of Kavod, one is not obligated to have a bread meal, however, it is preferable to do so.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 188:7 writes that since there’s no obligation to have a meal on Chol HaMoed, if one forgets [[Yaaleh VeYavo]] one doesn’t repeat Brikat HaMazon. Magen Avraham 530:1, Mishna Brurah 530:1, and Yalkut Yosef (Moedim pg 502) write that it’s preferable to have bread, since Kavod is with food and the most important food is bread. Regarding having nice meals on Chol HaMoed, see Rashi's comment to Avot 3:11.</ref>

==Simcha==

#There’s a requirement of Simcha on Chol Hamoed just like there is on [[Yom Tov]].<ref>Rambam Hilchot [[Yom Tov]] 6:17. This is codified as halacha by Shulchan Aruch HaRav 529:6-7 and Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 502). </ref>
#One should fulfill simcha of Chol HaMoed with what makes each person happy, men should drink wine, women should be given and wear new clothing, and children should get candies.<ref>*Regarding simcha of [[Yom Tov]], the Gemara Pesachim 109a says that since there's nowadays there's no [[Korbanot]] Shlamim, one fulfills simcha with wine. The Gemara continues that women fulfill their simcha with new clothes and children with toys and candies. This is codified as halacha by the Rambam ([[Yom Tov]] 6:17) and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 529:2. Rambam (Mitzvah 54) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 488) hold that Simcha is a Mitzvah Deoritta nowadays, however, Tosfot (Moed Katan 14b s.v. Aseh) holds that Simcha is only Derabbanan nowadays.
*According to the Magen Avraham 530:1, Nimukei Orach Chaim 530:2, Moadim UZmanim 1:29 there’s no obligation to have wine on Chol HaMoed (this may be based on [[Sukkah]] 47b). However, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (by Rabbi Dovid Zucker [[Siman 1]]) writes that from Rambam 6:17 it seems that all the days of the holiday are equal in fulfilling the mitzvah of Simcha. Similarly, Sh”t Rabbi Akiva Eiger 1 (in the Hashmatot), Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (Buir 1) in name of Rav Yacov Kamenetsky, Rav Moshe Feinstein and the Debersiner Rav hold that there’s a reason to have wine to fulfill simcha. Yalkut Yosef Moadim p. 502 agrees that men should have wine and meat each day. Rav Elyashiv in Kovetz Teshuvot 1:57 writes that one should drink wine every day of chol hamoed and Rav Chaim Kanievsky quoted this from the Chazon Ish as well.</ref>
#According to those who fulfill simcha on Chol HaMoed like simcha on [[Yom Tov]], men should fulfill simcha with wine and not grape juice.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (Buir 1:2) quotes Rabbi Moshe Feinstien and the Debersiner Rav who say that grape juice doesn’t fulfill the mitzvah of simcha. Nemukei Orach Chaim 529:2 writes that one should have a reviyat of wine, while Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 3; based on Sh”t Rosh 25:1) writes that a Meloh Lugmav is sufficient. </ref>
#Initially one should have two bread meals on each day of Chol Hamoed, once at night and once during the day but it isn't an absolute obligation.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Moadim p. 502</ref>
#It is forbidden to get married on Chol HaMoed because such an occasion would infringe on the mitzvah of simcha of the holiday.<ref>Moed Katan 8b, Shulchan Aruch 546:1</ref> However, it is permitted to get engaged, which isn't the same as halachic [[Kiddushin]], on Chol HaMoed.<ref>Taz 546:2, Chol HaMoed KeHilchato 1:32</ref>

==Special parts of Davening==
===Shemonah Esrei===

#On Chol HaMoed, one should insert [[Yaaleh VeYavo]] in [[Shmoneh Esrei]] during the Bracha of Avoda (Retzeh). If one forgot to say [[Yaaleh VeYavo]] and remembered before concluding [[Shmoneh Esrei]] (with Yeyihu LeRatzon), one should return to Retzeh and continue from there. However, if one only remembered after finishing [[Shmoneh Esrei]], one must repeat [[Shmoneh Esrei]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 124:10, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 19:11, [[Tefillah]] KeHilchato 23:106 </ref>

===Birkat HaMazon===

#On Chol HaMoed, one should insert [[Yaaleh VeYavo]] in the middle of the third Bracha of [[Birkat HaMazon]].<ref>S”A 188:4 and 5 </ref>
#If one forgot [[Yaaleh VeYavo]] and one realized:
##before saying Hashem’s name at the end of the third Bracha, one should return to [[Yaaleh VeYavo]] and then continue from there.<ref>Halachos of [[Brachos]] (pg 510) </ref>
##after saying Hashem’s name, but before saying [[Boneh]] Yerushalayim, one should immediately say למדני חוקיך which is the conclusion of a פסוק in Tehillim, and then return to Yaaleh Veyavo and continue from there.<ref>Halachos of [[Brachos]] (pg 510) </ref>
##after finishing the third Bracha before starting the fourth Bracha, one should insert a special Bracha ברוך אתה ה' אלקינו מלך העולם שנתן מועדים לעמו ישראל לששון ולשמחה את יום חג (פלוני) הזה <ref>Halachos of [[Brachos]] (pg 513) writes that the special Bracha to insert on Chol HaMoed is ברוך אתה ה' אלקינו מלך העולם שנתן מועדים לעמו ישראל לששון ולשמחה את יום חג. (פלוני) הזה. This is based on Mishna Brurah 188:27 who writes that the special Bracha of Chol HaMoed doesn’t have a conclusion like the Bracha of [[Rosh Chodesh]]. </ref>
##within the first six words of the fourth Bracha (ברוך אתה ה' אלקינו מלך העולם), one should continue with the special Bracha (שנתן...) mentioned in the last option.<ref>Halachos of [[Brachos]] (pg 515) </ref>
##after one said the seventh word in the fourth Bracha, one should continue and not repeat Birkat Hamazon.<ref>S”A 188:7 writes that one doesn’t need to repeat [[Birkat HaMazon]] if one forgot [[Yaaleh VeYavo]] on Chol HaMoed because there’s no obligation to have a bread meal on Chol HaMoed. </ref>

===Torah Reading===

#On [[Shabbat]] Chol HaMoed, both on [[Sukkot]] and [[Pesach]], the Torah reading is from Reah Atta, which on a regular week is Shelishi of Ki Tisa, until the end of Parshat Ki Tisa.<ref>Rav Huna in Gemara [[Megillah]] 31a says that on [[Shabbat]] Chol HaMoed we read the portion beginning with Reah Atta. Rashi explains that we read this portion because it includes the mitzvot of [[shabbat]], the regalim, and a reference to Chol HaMoed (derived by chazal in gemara Chagiga 18a).</ref>
#The Haftorah for [[Shabbat]] Chol HaMoed [[Sukkot]] is Bayom Bah Gog (beginning from Yechezkel 38:18) and the Haftorah for [[Shabbat]] Chol HaMoed [[Pesach]] is Atzamot Yeveshot (beginning from Yechezkel 37:4).<ref>Gemara [[Megillah]] 31a</ref>

==Forbidden work==

#There’s a dispute amongst the Rishonim as to whether the prohibition of work on Chol HaMoed is Biblical or Rabbinc.<ref>Tosfot (Chagiga 18a s.v. cholo, Moed Katan 19a s.v. rebbe), Rabbenu Tam (cited by Rosh), Rosh (Moed Katan 1:1), Rambam (Yom Tov 7:1), Mordechai (Moed Katan n. 835), Yereyim 304, Nemukei Yosef (Moed Katan 1a s.v. Gemara), and Tashbetz 2:210 hold that the entirety of work on Chol HaMoed is derabbanan. On the other hand, Rashi (m"k ktav yad 11b s.v. ela, 12a s.v. khilchot, 13a s.v. disura, Tosfot Rabbenu Peretz Pesachim 5a), Rashbam (Pesachim 118a s.v. kol), Tosfot (m"k 2a s.v. mashkin, 11b s.v. afilu), and Yereyim (Mitzvah no. 304) hold that melacha on Chol HaMoed is forbidden by the Torah. Several statements of Chazal indicate this position including Chagiga 18a and Moed Katan 11b. However, Tosfot answer that these Gemaras mean that there is an allusion in the pasuk to the prohibition. 
The Ramban (Moed Katan 2a s.v. od ani), Rashba (a"z cited by Maggid Mishna Yom Tov 7:1), and Ritva (m"k 2a) arbitrate between these two positions and consider melacha on Chol HaMoed from the Torah’s perspective to be dependent on whether the melacha is necessary for the holiday or there is a loss. If it is necessary for the holiday or there is a loss, then the melacha is permitted from the Torah and, if not, it is forbidden. The Bach 530:1 supports such an explanation based on the pesukim.

On Yom Tov, the Torah forbids “melechet avoda” (Vayikra 23:8) and Rashi explains this to mean that one is prohibited to perform even work that will cause one to experience a loss if not done today. The Torat Kohanim (Emor 12:5) states that the prohibition of “melechet avoda” does not apply to Chol HaMoed; therefore, concludes the Bach, it is biblically permitted to do a melacha for the need of the holiday. 
In a similar vein, Rav Sobolofsky (“[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/811776/Rabbi_Zvi_Sobolofsky/Issur_Melacha_On_Chol_Hamoed Issur Melacha on Chol HaMoed],” min 12-15) explained based on the Ritva (Moed Katan 13a s.v. elah) that the primary principle underlying the laws of Chol HaMoed is that one should enjoy the holiday. Thus, activities that further this purpose are permitted, while those which hinder this goal, especially ones that involve excessive effort, are forbidden. 
The Sefer HaChinuch (n. 323) explains that the determination of which melachot are biblically forbidden is left in the hands of the rabbis. He seems to understand this concept (לא מסרה הכתוב אלא לחכמים) differently than the Ramban. Ramban understood that the general principles that the rabbis stated such as צורך המועד and דבר האבד are considered principles from the Torah, however, the other details are only rabbinic. Sefer Hachinuch, on the other hand, understands that every detail that the rabbis dictated is also given the weight of a Torah prohibition. </ref> According to Sephardim, the halacha is that work on Chol HaMoed is a Rabbinic prohibition.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Yom Tov p. 168) and Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 504) writes that one may be lenient like Shulchan Aruch, and if there’s a safek one can be lenient as it’s only derabbanan. Chazon Ovadia quotes 16 rishonim who hold that it is derabbanan including: Rambam, Smag, Rash, Riva, Rabbenu Tam, Rosh, Yereyim, Hagahot Maimoniyot, Mordechai, Or Zaruah, Meiri, Talmid Ri Mparis, Tosfot Rid, Orchot Chaim, Kol Bo, and Rashbetz. </ref> Ashkenazic poskim are concerned for the opinion that work on Chol Hamoed is a Biblical prohibition.<ref>Magen Avraham 530:1 and Gra 530:3 understand that Rama 530:1 holds that melacha on Chol Hamoed is from the Torah. Mishna Brurah (Biur Halacha 530:1 s.v. umuter) writes that it is proper to be strict because most Rishonim hold it is from the Torah. Biur Halacha enumerates 7 rishonim who hold that it is from the Torah: Rif, Shiltot, Eshkol, Ritz Geyitz, Rashbam, Rashi, and Shibolei Haleket. </ref>
#According to those who hold that melacha on Chol Hamoed is only derabbanan, some poskim permit anything which is a psik reisha (action which will inevitably cause a melacha to occur).<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Yom Tov p. 171) explains that according to those who hold that melacha on Chol Hamoed is derabbanan, a pesik reisha is permitted based on Trumat Hadeshen 66.</ref> Others hold that a psik reisha is permitted on Chol Hamoed even according to the view that melacha is deoritta.<ref>Hilchot Chag Bchag (ch. 3 fnt. 30) proves from Moed Katan 10b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 537:8, and Mishna Brurah 538:32 that psik reisha is permitted on chol hamoed according to everyone. The reason is according to some rishonim melacha without a tircha is permitted, so too a psik reisha doesn't involve extra tircha. Alternatively, in a case where a person is doing a melacha for tzorech hamoed as well as a psik reisha for another melacha, the same tzorech hamoed that permitted a melacha can also permit the psik reisha.</ref>

=== Melacha without Tircha ===

# Some rishonim and a minority of poskim hold that melacha is forbidden on Chol Hamoed because it takes away from a person being able to enjoy the Moed. For that reason Chazal forbade melacha that involved tircha since that distracts a person from simcha on the Moed. However, if it is no tircha at all, the melacha is permitted.<ref>'''Yereyim''' 304 writes that because the Gemara Moed Katan 13a states that melacha on Chol Hamoed is only forbidden because of tircha, melacha that isn't tircha, such as loans or a little bit of work in one's house, is permitted. '''Shibolei Haleket''' (cited by Biur Halacha 545:5 s.v. vafilu) quotes some who say that it is permitted to write friendly letters on Chol Hamoed because it is a melacha that doesn't involve tircha and it is similar to taking a walk, which is permitted. '''Trumat Hadeshen''' 153 seems to imply this as well. '''Tosfot Rabbenu Peretz''' (Pesachim 5a) quoting Risva implies that melacha without tircha is permitted. '''Eshel Avraham''' 540:1 writes that he understood that melacha without tircha is permitted. His proof is that Tosfot (m"k 10b s.v. muliya) permits flattening a ground for an animal corral. He understands that there's no tircha and permitted even though there's no need. [It is possible to argue with these premises; see Rashi (ktav yad 10b s.v. uriya).] '''Aruch Hashulchan''' 545:12 in his second answer writes that it is permitted to write friendly letters on Chol Hamoed because doing so doesn't involve tircha.

* However, '''Radvaz''' 2:727 is lenient only if the melacha is a melacha sheino tzaricha lgufa and not a tircha. If the melacha is a melacha shetzaricha lgufa or a tircha it is forbidden. The concept that melacha on Chol Hamoed is only forbidden because of tircha as it distracts from simchat hamoed is found in Ritva (m"k 13a s.v. ela) and Ravyah (m"k 3:835).

* Hilchot Chag Bchag (Chol Hamoed 3:7) is lenient to allow melacha without tircha on Chol Hamoed. He quotes Rav Elyashiv as holding m'ikar hadin that it is permitted. He notes that the minhag is to be lenient regarding turning off and on lights, cutting toilet paper, and talking on the phone even without a tzorech hamoed, and according to him is permitted.

* Igrot Moshe OC 1:163 learns from Tosfot (Moed Katan 14a) that melacha without tircha is permitted. Tosfot writes that shaving on Chol Hamoed is forbidden because of tircha. Rav Moshe infers that if it would be a melacha without tircha it would be permitted. Rav Moshe doesn't conclude on this topic as he only discusses this point incidentally. </ref> However, the view of other Rishonim, and the consensus of the poskim, is that all melacha is forbidden, even if it does not involve tircha. Melacha without tircha is only permitted if there's a need for the holiday or another reason that permits melacha on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Shibolei Haleket (cited by Biur Halacha 545:5 s.v. vafilu) quotes Rav Avigdor Katz who does not allow writing friendly letters on Chol Hamoed unless there is a need for the moed or a concern for loss. He implies that melacha without tircha is forbidden. Also, Ritva (m"k 18a s.v. vigeret) implies this as well because he writes that it is only permitted to write a letter if there's a particular need for the moed. Mishna Brurah 545:30 codifies this approach. He definitely seems to disagree with Aruch Hashulchan 545:12's second answer. It is also implied from Pri Megadim (E"A 540:5) that melacha without tircha is forbidden. Beer Moshe 7:42:1 quotes a lot of sources on this topic and doesn't come to a clear conclusion. He seems to be strict as he quotes Aruch Hashulchan as lenient, but Pri Megadim and Mishna Brurah as strict. Betzel Hachachma 5:95:1 is also strict in general and only lenient for carrying. Shevet Halevi 6:68 is lenient for carrying but doesn't sound like he would permit in general. Moadim Uzmanim 4:298 is strict except for carrying and cooking, but in 7:154 he isn't sure. He suggests that perhaps any melacha that doesn't involve tircha is permitted but leaves it unresolved. Chazon Ovadia p. 204 quotes Aruch Hashulchan but notes that it is against the Ritva. He indicates that he is strict about this question. See Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata (66:55) who quotes Aruch Hashulchan and also quotes Mishna Brurah. His ruling on this matter isn't clear. </ref>
## Many poskim hold that it is permitted to carry on Chol Hamoed even if there's no need.<ref>Meiri (18b s.v. ein), Shevet Halevi 6:68, Moadim Uzmanim 4:298, 7:154, Betzel Hachachma 5:95:1 (see there for details), Chazon Ovadia (Yom Tov p. 171), Hilchot Chag Bchag 3:6</ref> However, some poskim are strict.<ref>Chazon Ish and Amudei Or cited by Moadim Uzmanim 4:154. Hilchot Chag Bchag 3:6 quotes that Chazon Ish in his sefer is lenient, but Orchot Rabbenu records his practice not to carry anything unnecessarily on Chol Hamoed.</ref>
## Some poskim permitted ripping toilet paper off the lines on Chol Hamoed even if he has pre-ripped toilet paper or tissues available.<ref>Beer Moshe 7:10:1, 7:42, Hilchot Chag Bchag 3:6</ref>
## Some poskim permit killing bugs on Chol Hamoed even if they're not bothering him.<ref>Radvaz 2:727</ref>
## It is permitted to wash oneself with soap, even bar soap, on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Yom Tov p. 193). See Moadim Uzmanim 4:298, 7:154 who suggests that only if it is necessary is it permitted.</ref>

===Tircha without Melacha===

#A strenuous activity (one that involves exertion) is forbidden even if it doesn’t involve any Melacha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 535:1 writes that one may not move homes on Chol HaMoed. Mishna Brurah 535:1 explains that it’s forbidden because of the tircha (exertion) involved. This is the explanation of Rashi (ktav yad 13a s.v. ein), Rabbenu Gershom, Ran, and one explanation of Ritva. Ritva has another explanation that it is because of uvda dchol. However, see Tosfot 12b who isn't sure if there is a prohibition of tircha without melacha in general. </ref>
#For example, it’s forbidden to move heavy furniture (unless there’s a need, see below).<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 7) brings this as an example of forbidden exertion on Chol HaMoed. </ref>
#It is permitted to wash dishes after eating, or dishes that he might use again on the moed.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shulchan Shlomo 530:2:2) permits washing dishes after eating. However, if a family is leaving the house on Chol Hamoed and going to be away for the second days, he isn't sure that it is permitted to clean the dishes, take out the garbage, and tidy up. </ref>
#It is permitted to take out the garbage, put the garbage bag in garbage cans, and move the can so that they can be picked up.<ref>Based on Pesachim 55b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 535:3 writes that it is forbidden to remove manure from the courtyard on chol hamoed; rather, he should just push it to the side. Seemingly, that would indicate that it is forbidden to take out the garbage on chol hamoed. However, Rav Elyashiv (Mevakshei Torah ch. 106 cited by Chazon Ovadia) ruled that it is permitted to take out the garbage since that isn't a simple act that doesn't involve tircha. Rav Ovadia (Chazon Ovadia p. 196) agrees. Garbage collectors are allowed to work on chol hamoed since that is considered tzarchei rabbim (Chazon Ovadia p. 196).</ref>

===Degradation of the Holiday===

#Certain activities must be limited to avoid degradation of the holiday. For this reason, even when commercial activity is permitted, it should be done in private.<ref>Beiur Halacha 539 s.v. Eino Mutar, quoted by Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 8) </ref>
#For example, it’s forbidden to paint one’s apartment on Chol HaMoed to improve its appearance.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 8) in name of Rav Moshe Feinstein. Or Letzion 3:24:6 writes that it is permitted to have a non-Jewish painter paint a yeshiva during Chol Hamoed if it isn't possible another time because it would interrupt the learning.</ref>

===Which Melachot are entirely permitted?===

#The forbidden melachot includes all 39 melachot and derabbanan’s of [[Shabbat]] and [[Yom Tov]] except for: [[carrying]], going beyond [[techum]] (2000 [[amot]]), [[muktzah]], [[VeDaber Dvar]] (preparing or talking about business issues), Havarah (lighting a fire), [[Tevilat Kelim]], and removing Trumah.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 8-9) writes that there’s four exceptions to the forbidden melachot of Chol HaMoed including: [[carrying]], [[techum]], [[muktzah]], and VeDaber Dvar. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 68:26 writes that besides these four there’s also no melacha of Havarah (lighting a fire), Gezerah about [[Tevilat Kelim]] and removing Trumah. Avnei Darech 4:55 proves from Bet Yosef 511 that it is permitted to be tovel kelim on chol moed and quotes the the Dvar Yehoshua YD 3:74 and Chol Hamoed Khilchato 7:37 who agreed.</ref>
#[[Shevitat Behemto]] (having one’s animal work or renting it out), and Mechamer (leading one’s animal) according to some apply on Chol HaMoed and some say that it doesn’t apply and there’s what to rely on to be lenient.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 530:5) writes that [[Shevitat Behemto]] and Mechamer don’t apply on Chol HaMoed. However, Beiur Halacha (536 s.v. UMutar Lirkov) writes that there’s a Safek Safeka to be lenient and one shouldn’t protest those who are lenient in this case. Chol HaMoed KeHilchato 2:14 writes that the only reason to be lenient is the Safek Safeka and those who hold melacha is Deoritta would hold it’s forbidden. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 68:26 writes that there’s room to be lenient unless the animal is doing a Deoritta prohibition. </ref>
#It’s permitted to go biking since that’s not considered a melacha.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 22) </ref>

===Is one forbidden to benefit from work that was illegally performed on Chol HaMoed?===

#If one did violate Chol HaMoed unintentionally, one may be lenient and benefit from the work that day. However, if one violated the Chol HaMoed intentionally, that individual shouldn’t benefit from it forever, and others may benefit from it after the holiday.<ref>S”A 318:1 rules that if one violates [[Shabbat]] unintentionally, the work is prohibited from benefit until after [[Shabbat]] and for intention violations, the work is prohibited for the perpetrator forever and everyone else is permitted after [[Shabbat]]. Magen Avraham 538:2 says that this same prohibitions would apply to someone who violates Chol HaMoed according to those that melacha on Chol HaMoed is s.v. HaMivashel who writes in name of the Gra and Chaye Adam that a Derabbanan Melacha is permitted on [[Shabbat]] itself.) Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 15) writes that for this safek one can be lenient based on the fact that the entire prohibition is a rabbinic penalty. However, writes the Hilchot Chol Moed, for an intentional violation, there’s more reason to be strict based on Mishna Brurah 538:16. </ref>

==The Principle Reasons to Permit Melacha==

#Melacha on Chol HaMoed is forbidden just like [[Yom Tov]], however, there are five major leniencies to permit Melacha on Chol HaMoed: 1) Tzorech HaMoed (work done for a holiday need), 2) Tzorech Ochel Nefesh (work to prepare food), 3) Tzarchi Rabim (work needed for communal purpose), 4) Dvar HaAved (work done to avoid a loss), 5) Poel Shein Lo Mah Yochal (work done by a laborer who doesn’t have food to eat).<ref>Tur 530 writes that all of the melachas of [[Shabbat]] and [[Yom Tov]] apply to Chol HaMoed with five reasons to permit Melacha. This is codified by Biur HaGra 530:1 and Mishna Brurah 530:1. </ref>

===Comparison of the Reasons for which Melacha is Permitted===
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! !!General Holiday Needs!!Making Food!!Communal Need!!Financial Loss!!A Very Poor Worker
|-
|Professional Labor||Forbidden<ref>Mishna Brurah 530:1, Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 11) </ref>||Permitted<ref>Ramban (Likutim on Chol Hamoed s.v. vchen machshirin), Ritva (Moed Katan 9b s.v. oseh isha), Meiri (19a k'shetitbonen), Shulchan Aruch O.C. 533:5, Mishna Brurah 530:1, Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 36) </ref>||Permitted (under certain conditions)<ref>Tosfot Harosh Moed Katan 4b quoting Raavad, Meiri (19a s.v. k'shetitbonen), Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 47).

Sheloshim Yom Kodem HaChag (vol. 1, p. 168) writes that one may only perform melacha via professional labor for a communal need, provided that all three of these conditions are met: 1) the melakha is l'tzorekh haguf (such as fixing public roads so people don't get hurt or eating/drinking), 2) the community needs it on the holiday itself, and not after the holiday, and 3) one can complete the melakha on the holiday. If one of these conditions is absent, only maaseh hedyot (unprofessional labor) is permitted to accomplish the task (ibid). </ref>||Permitted <ref>Tosfot (10a s.v. tofer), Mordechai (n. 844), Maharshach 1:113, Tiferet Yisrael (Kupat Rochlin 5:5), Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 51) </ref>||Permitted<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 540:2, 534:3</ref>
|-
|Excessive Exertion||Forbidden (see footnote for exceptions)<ref>Chol HaMoed K'Hilchato (perek bet seif 36 & footnotes). Aruch HaShulchan 540:4 forbids great exertion. Pri Megadim M”Z 540:3 permits even great exertion. (Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 66:38 adds that the pri megadim means that it’s permitted if it’s a maaseh hedyot or shinui.) See Nishmat Adam 110:1. Netivei Moed 7:2 says tzorech hamoed must be hedyot and one should still minimize the exertion. Sheloshim Yom Kodem HaChag (Chol HaMoed p. 163) writes based on Zichron Shlomo that exertion is prohibited whenever the tircha is great relative to the desired outcome. According to this approach, great exertion would be permitted for a great need, and small exertion would be permitted for a small need. But great exertion would not be permitted for a small need. However, Chol HaMoed KeHilchato (perek bet footnote 98) quotes this position of the Zichrom Shlomo and writes that the purpose of his distinction is only to explain contradictions in the poskim and cannot be used to establish new halachic principles. See Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 17). See also Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 17) </ref>||Permitted<ref>Ritva (Moed Katan 8b s.v. oseh isha), Meiri (19a s.v. k'shetitbonen), Biur Halacha (546:5 s.v. kol), Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 36) </ref>||Permitted<ref>Meiri (19a s.v. k'shetitbonen), Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 47) </ref>||Forbidden <ref>Moed Katan 2a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 537:2, Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 52) </ref>||-
|-
|Work Delayed for the Holiday<ref>Rashi 11a, 12b implies that the definition of someone who plans to do melacha on Chol Hamoed to avoid a loss only includes someone who had the ability to do it before the moed and intended to leave it for the moed. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 538:1 rules that if someone forgot to do the melacha before the moed or was lazy and thought there was time but he ended up without time, he isn't considered as though he planned it for the moed. Gra 538:1 writes that he's only considered as having planned it for the moed if he intentionally plans to do it on the moed. Chazon Ovadia p. 186 cites this from Meiri and Michtam as well. </ref>||Forbidden<ref>Meiri (19a s.v. k'shetitbonen), Aguda (Moed Katan 1:8), Pri Megadim (M"Z 533:1), [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8020&st=&pgnum=26 Shulchan Atzi Shitim 1:2], Mishna Brurah 541:4, Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 12) </ref>||Permitted<ref>Rosh, Mordechai, Meiri (19a s.v. k'shetitbonen), Shulchan Aruch O.C. 533:1, Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 36) </ref>||Permitted<ref>Meiri (19a s.v. k'shetitbonen), Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 47) </ref>||Forbidden <ref>Moed Katan 11a and 12b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 538:1, Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 61) </ref>||-
|-
|Paying for the Work||Forbidden<ref>Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 16) </ref>||Permitted but preferable to get a goy <ref>Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 36) </ref>||Permitted<ref>Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 47) </ref>||Permitted <ref>Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 51) </ref>||Permitted<ref>Shulchan Aruch 540:2</ref>
|-
|Working in Public||Professional - forbidden; Non-professional - permitted<ref>Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 23); Shulchan Aruch OC 533:5 writes clearly that melacha for a need of the holiday when done by a professional needs to be in private. Also, Shulchan Aruch OC 540 and 541 give examples of tzorech hamoed that's a melacha of a hedyot and never mention that it needs to be in private. However, Ramban (Chidushim Moed Katan s.v. ulinyan) writes that we don't find the concept of doing the melacha in private on chol hamoed except for a professional working the same way he works all year, but non-professional work for the need of the holiday may be done in public. </ref>||Forbidden for uman<ref>Moed Katan 13b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 533:7-8, Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 37). </ref>||Permitted<ref>Meiri (19a s.v. k'shetitbonen), Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 47) </ref>||Forbidden <ref>Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 52). However, Ramban (Piskei Chol Hamoed s.v. v'l'inyan) writes that working in private is only necessary if there's a concern for a loss, but if it is certain that there's going to be a loss it is permitted to work in public. Also, even if there's a concern for a loss if there's no way to do it in private, it may be done in public. </ref>||Forbidden<ref>Magen Avraham 534:7, Mishna Brurah 534:18. Mishna Brurah 542:7 is lenient for a worker who doesn't have any food to eat to do work in public if he can't do it in private.</ref>
|-
|Preparing for after the Holiday||Forbidden<ref>Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 18) </ref>||Forbidden<ref>Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 37) </ref>||Permitted<ref>Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 47) </ref>||-||-
|}

==Tzorech HaMoed==

#One may do unskilled work on Chol HaMoed for a holiday need. However, skilled work is forbidden even for a need of the holiday.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 540:1, Mishna Brurah 540:1, Biur HaGra 530:1 </ref>
#Tzorech HaMoed is only permitted if the work doesn't entail excessive tircha (exertion).<ref>Pri Megadim (E"A 540:5), Mishna Brurah 540:7, and Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 66:38 forbid tircha even though a melacha is a tzorech hamoed. Aruch HaShulchan 540:4 forbids great exertion (tircha gedola) for tzorech hamoed. Hilchot Chag Bchag (3:14, p. 75) quotes a dispute if tircha yetera is permitted for tzorech hamoed, but someone who is lenient has what to rely upon. Pri Megadim M”Z 540:3 permits even great exertion for tzorech hamoed. (Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 66:38 adds that the Pri Megadim means that it’s permitted if it’s a maaseh hedyot or shinui.) See Nishmat Adam 110:1. Netivei Moed 7:2 says tzorech hamoed must be hedyot and one should still minimize the exertion.

The Mishna (Moed Katan 13a) forbids moving homes on Chol Hamoed and Rashi, Rabbenu Gershom, and Ritva explain that this is forbidden because of tircha. Seemingly, this is forbidden even though it is a melacha for tzorech hamoed. However, Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 535:1 without mentioning tircha clearly write that moving homes is only forbidden if it is not a tzorech hamoed. Mishna Brurah 535:1 quotes Rashi who says that it is forbidden because of tircha. This implies that a tzorech hamoed is permitted even though it is a tircha (unlike Mishna Brurah 540:7).

The Gemara Moed Katan 5a clarifies that an individual may not dig a hole to hold drinking water even though he needs it, though he may fix an old hole that got clogged. Tosfot 2a s.v. vchotetin explains that unclogging a hole isn't tircha, but digging a new one is. Seemingly, this is a proof that tircha is forbidden for tzorech hamoed. However, this could be rejected by Ramban (Likkutim on Hilchot Chol Hamoed) who explains the case there was where the individual didn't really need the pit for drinking water. It was for drinking water but he could also get the water from a further pit and this was only for convenience.

Rivav (on Rif m"k 4b) explicitly permits tzorech hamoed even with tircha yeterta (excessive effort). He explains the gemara 5a is forbidden because that is maaseh uman. Ramban (Torat Haadam, Inyan Hakevura s.v. k'sh'iyanti) also seems to permit tzorech hamoed with tircha. However, Ritva (m"k 2a s.v. vha) implies that it is forbidden. Hilchot Chag Bchag 3:14 quotes Meiri (12a and 19a) and Ohel Moed 3:1 as lenient on this question but they seem only to be lenient about ochel nefesh.

Torat Avraham p. 71 discusses the opinion of Mishna Brurah (537:15, 540:2, 541:13) rejects the proofs that he holds it is forbidden. </ref>
#It’s permitted to do an action even if it will involve violating a melacha indirectly if there’s a holiday need. For example, it’s permitted to cut branches in order to make Sachach for the [[Sukkah]] as long as one makes sure to only cut from one side of the tree. Another example, it’s permitted to wash one’s hands over grass.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 18-9), Pitchei Teshuvot 530:1 </ref>

===What’s called a “holiday need”?===

#Anything where there’s a likely possibility that the work is needed is considered Tzorech HaMoed.<ref>Pri Megadim A”A (intro to 537) writes that even if there is only a doubt if there will be a Dvar Aved one may do work on Chol HaMoed. Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 17) writes that it is sufficient if there is a reasonable possibility of a Dvar Aved. However, the Mishna Brurah 537:1 writes that it must seem as being "close to" a Tzorech HaMoed. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 66:34 agrees. </ref>
#One may not delay doing a certain work from before Chol HaMoed and do it on Chol HaMoed.<ref>S”A 536:1 </ref>
#Fixing a broken object is called a holiday need if the object will be needed, however, if there’s a replacement that can be used instead or one could easily borrow a replacement, fixing the object isn’t a holiday need.<ref>Based on Bet Yosef 534 and Magen Avraham 544:1, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 12) writes that if one can borrow a replacement one must not fix the broken object. </ref>
#It’s permissible to vacuum or wash floors that are usually cleaned at least once<ref>Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo p. 19 is lenient if it is washed or vacuumed once a week to do so it on chol hamoed. However, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1485&pgnum=617 Teshurat Shay 2:174] is only lenient if it is cleaned more often than that. </ref> a week.<ref>Chazon Ovadia p. 194, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 66:47, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 19 and 34), Hilchot Chag Bchag p. 233. They quote this same idea from [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1485&pgnum=617 Teshurat Shay 2:174] is lenient to clean only if it is regularly cleaned more than once a week. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=210&pgnum=119 Kapei Aharon 41] explains those who are even stricter and don't wash at all. Minchat Yom Tov 104:2 quotes Rav Shlomo Hacohen as lenient in places where they generally wash the floors twice a week. However, Chazon Ovadia himself is lenient to wash the floors even if it isn't washed every week. The Debretziner (Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo teshuva 14) and Chazon Ovadia argue with the premise of the Teshurat Shay that washing the floor is included in the gezerah of laundering. However, Debretziner forbade vacuuming regularly because that involves tircha and uvda dchol. </ref> It is permitted to sweep on chol hamoed.<ref>It is permitted to flatten the floor of the house on chol hamoed (Moed Katan 10b, Rashi ktav yad s.v. adayta d'ara, Rabbenu Yerucham (4:5, cited by Bet Yosef 537:9), Shulchan Aruch O.C. 540:2, Magen Avraham 540:5). Rashi and Rabbenu Yerucham write that it is permitted to flatten the floors on Chol Hamoed so that a person doesn't trip. Magen Avraham 540:5 adds that it isn't a tircha. Pri Megadim E"A 540:5 writes that it isn't a tircha and also it is a tzorech hamoed. Mishna Brurah 540:7 agrees. However, Eshel Avraham Mbuchach 540:1 and Hilchot Chag Bchag 3:6 argue that it is permitted because it isn't tircha even though it isn't a tzorech hamoed. This is also how Atzi Shitim understood the Magen Avraham, though he disagreed with Magen Avraham (and held like Pri Megadim).</ref>
#Some say it’s forbidden to nail a picture to a wall for decorative purposes, while others permit since it involves no skilled work or exertion.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 19-20) </ref>
#It’s forbidden to garden, plant, dewed, or move grass on Chol HaMoed. Watering is only permitted if the plant is in danger of dying.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 537:1, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 21) </ref>
#It’s permitted to pick flowers in order to decorate for the holiday.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 21), Chol HaMoed KeHilchato (7:4 pg 234) </ref>

===Simchat Chag===

#An activity that brings one simcha is considered a holiday need as it’s a mitzvah to have simcha on the holiday. For example, going on a family trip is considered simchat hachag and so it’s permissible to wash one’s car windows or fill up the tank in order to drive to the park.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 22), Shulchan Aruch O.C. 536:1 </ref> When it is permitted to drive on chol hamoed, it is fine to drive oneself and it isn't necessary to get a taxi driven by a non-Jew.<ref>Beer Moshe 7:9</ref>
#For example, since playing music is considered a simchat hachag, it’s permitted to fix (in an unskilled fashion) an instrument in order to play music for the holiday.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 21) </ref>

===Preparing from Chol HaMoed to [[Yom Tov]]===

#It’s permitted to do work for a Tzorech HaMoed from one day of Chol HaMoed in preparation for the other days of Chol HaMoed or for days of [[Yom Tov]].<ref>Pri Megadim 533 M”Z is in doubt whether one may cook from one day of Chol HaMoed for another. However, Kaf HaChaim 533:6 and Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 18) rule that it is permissible. Additionally, Hagahot Rabbi Akiva Eiger 539:11, Eshel Avraham 330, and Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 18) write that it’s permissible to cook from Chol HaMoed to [[Yom Tov]] including [[Yom Tov]] Sheni of Galiyot. </ref>

===Melacha needed in preparation for a Tzorech HaMoed===

#Just as unskilled work is permitted for a Tzorech HaMoed, so too it is permitted to do necessary preparations for work that is done for a Tzorech HaMoed.<ref>Magen Avraham 545:25 and Mishna Brurah 545:48 say that preparatory work that’s necessary for a Tzorech HaMoed is permissible such as preparing a quill and ink to write things that are permitted to write on Chol HaMoed. </ref>
#For example, one may sharpen a pencil in order to writes a social letter for the Moed.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 17) </ref>

===Needs for others===

#Unskilled work is permitted even for the need of others as long as one isn’t being hired.<ref>S”A 542:1 </ref>
#One is allowed to hire a non-Jew to do work that’s permitted for a Jew to perform and it’s permitted to pay the non-Jew for the work.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 16) based on Beiur Halacha 541 s.v. Elah and 542 s.v. Afilu. </ref>

===Examples===

#For example, if a chair broke, it may be fixed in an unskilled manner is the chair is needed for the holiday, however, if another chair could be used or a chair could be borrowed one shouldn’t fix the chair. Additionally, if it takes carpentry skills to fix the chair or it was broken before the holiday and could have been fixed then, one may not fix the chair.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 12) based on the principles of Tzorech HaMoed. </ref>
#For example, it’s permissible to change a tire, jumpstart a car, or change it’s battery if the car will be used for festival purposes.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 15, 22) </ref> However, making other car repairs which require skilled work are forbidden to make (unless there’s a financial loss like having to leave your car on the road and having to return for it).<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 23), Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 66:59, for further analysis see R’ Nebenzahl’s Yerushalayim BeMoadeha pp. 279-282. Chazon Ovadia p. 175 cited by Tiferet 536:4 permits doing melacha to fix a car only if it is maaseh hedyot. This fits the regular rules of tzorech hamoed. [However, Vayan Avraham 17 and Or Letzion 3:24:5 permit fixing the horse for riding even with a maaseh uman. Accordingly, Or Letzion seems to permit maaseh uman to fix a car on chol hamoed. (This opinion is seemingly very hard to justify.)] </ref>
#Purely preparatory actions are allowed, provided that they are necessary. Thus, washing a car’s windows or getting gas are permitted. However, preparatory actions that are purposely delayed until Chol HaMoed may not be done on Chol HaMoed.<ref>S.A. 536:1. M.A. there quotes the Maharik that if this was done, the use of the item is forbidden. </ref>
#Washing or vacuuming the floor which is usually cleaned once or more times a week is permitted during Chol HaMoed.<ref>Minchat [[Yom Tov]] 104:2 writes that since it’s normal to wash the floor twice a week it’s permissible to wash the floors on Chol Hamoed even if it’s a excessive work, however, scrubbing the floor to remove dirt is forbidden as it involves a melacha and requires excessive effort. Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 19) extends this to floors that are cleaned once a week, and permits vacuuming as well. </ref>
#One may change the tire of a car if the car is needed for use during the holiday. One may also change the tire for a friend’s car if one isn’t being paid.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 15) rules like Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 1:166(3) even though he quotes the Debrinsiner Rav who says that it’s a maaseh uman and involves a tircha. </ref>
#Many forbid fishing for pleasure on Chol HaMoed, while some are lenient. If the fish will be eaten one may be lenient.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 38) writes in name of the Debreciner Rav that it’s forbidden to fish for pleasure and points out that Rav Moshe Feinstein permits. However many others side are strict including Sh”t Rivevot Efraim 1:356(2) and Chol HaMoed KeHilchato (7:24, p. 244) in the name of Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurerbach, Rav Wosner, and Rabbi Brandsdorfer. He explains that they hold that going on a trip for pleasure and enjoyment isn't a tzorech hamoed. Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 38) writes that (according to all) one can be lenient if the fish will be eaten. See Tosfot Beitzah 12a and Rama 518 who write that playing with a ball for pleasure is a small tzorech yom tov. </ref>
##Some hold that any activity that is done for pleasure on Chol Hamoed even if it involves melacha is permitted since that is simchat hachag.<ref>Rav Moshe (Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo teshuvot n. 13), Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 3:8:6, v. 3 p. 52). Rav Elyashiv wrote that a person should try to minimize the tircha (exertion) he is involved in. However, if the exertion is pleasurable, such as row boating, it is permitted. Halacha Sheleima (siman 23) is lenient and quotes Hitorerut Teshuva 48 as a proof to be lenient. Yalkut Yosef (Chol Hamoed p. 888) quotes that some poskim are lenient to go fishing for pleasure. In the footnote he cites the dispute between Rav Wosner and Rav Moshe. He doesn't clearly resolve the dispute.</ref> However, many authorities argue that it isn't considered simchat hachag.<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Chol Hamoed Khilchato 7:24), Rav Wosner (Mbet Levi Hilchot Chol Hamoed 5783 p. 16), Rabbi Brandsdorfer (Chol Hamoed Khilchato), Hilchot Chag Bchag (p. 183), Debretziner (Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo teshuvot n. 30), Rivevot Efraim 1:356(2)</ref> Some have a compromise view and permit activities that involve melacha with minimal exertion, but not something that involves exertion like fishing.<ref>Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo (Biurim 4)</ref>

===Driving===

# It is permitted to drive for any need of the moed.<ref>Based on Gemara 10a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 536:1 permits fixing a horse in order to ride for a tzorech hamoed. On this basis, Rav Moshe (Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo n. 6) and Beer Moshe 7:13 permit driving for any tzorech hamoed. Even though Shulchan Aruch writes that it is only permitted to do melacha in order to ride if he wouldn't usually walk instead of riding, Rav Moshe writes that this doesn't apply to driving for two reasons. One is that nowadays people enjoy driving as opposed to walking. Also, riding a horse is much more similar to walking in how much exertion is involved than driving is like walking. Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky (Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo p. 22) and Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata (ch. 66 fnt. 224) agree.</ref> However, it is forbidden to drive if there's no tzorech hamoed.<ref>Rav Moshe (Hilchot Chol Hamoed teshuva n. 6), Beer Moshe 7:13, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata (ch. 66 fnt. 224).</ref>
# For example, it is forbidden to take driving lessons on chol hamoed.<ref>Beer Moshe 7:13 writes that it is forbidden to take driving lessons on chol hamoed unless it is dvar haaved. The example he has for dvar haaved is someone who is working, needs to drive for work, cannot take off any day from work, and needs to learn how to drive on chol hamoed. In that case he permits taking driving lessons in a secluded place. Otherwise it is forbidden. Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo p. 22 agrees.</ref>
# Some poskim permit washing a car on chol hamoed if it doesn't involve a lot of tircha.<ref>Chazon Ovadia p. 175 cited by Tiferet 536:6 permits in accordance with Shulchan Aruch O.C. 536:2. Piskei Teshuvot 536 is strict based on some rishonim who understand that it is only permitted to comb a horse on chol hamoed because it is helpful for the health of the horse. But Chazon Ovadia is following the Meiri and Rambam who sound like it is permitted just to beauty the horse.</ref>

===Maaseh Uman===

#For a person who isn't a tailor and isn't adept at sewing, sewing is considered not a Maaseh Uman. However, the average women is proficient at sewing and so is considered an Uman.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 14) writes that nowadays most men aren’t adept at sewing. </ref>
#A skilled worker may sew with a Shinui, meaning, making long stitches and alternating between high and low stitches (forming a zig-zag).<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 14) </ref>
#When sewing on a button, many hold that it is a sufficient Shinui to sew it loosely and only use 2 out of 4 holes (such as two diagonal ones). However, some say that it is an insufficient Shinui unless one has no other clothes to wear.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 14) quotes Rav Yacov Kamenetsky and the Debrinsiner Rav who allow if the action is significantly changed such as it’s loose and one only sews it through 2 holes. Hilchot Chol HaMoed continues to quote Rav Moshe Feinstein who forbids unless there’s no other clothes to wear. </ref>
#According to some authorities, it’s never considered a Shinui if a skilled person sews with a sewing machine while others are lenient if one makes a Shinui.

==Preparation of Food==

#It’s permissible to do melachot in order to prepare food for the holiday (from one day of Chol HaMoed to another day of Chol HaMoed or from Chol HaMoed to [[Yom Tov]])<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 37) </ref> even if it involves a lot of effort.<ref>Ramban (Likkutim on Chol Hamoed), Meiri (m"k 19a s.v. k'sh'titbonen), Ohel Moed (m"k 3:1)</ref>
#It’s permissible even if the melacha was deliberately pushed off to doing it on Chol HaMoed.<ref>S”A 533:1 </ref>
#If one has adequate supply of the specific food one shouldn’t cook that food on Chol HaMoed unless the fresher food will be tastier.<ref>S”A 533:1 writes that if one already has flour one should not ground new flour; however, even if one has bread one may cook new bread since hot bread is tastier. Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 37) agrees.</ref>
#It’s permissible to take wages for [[cooking]] on Chol HaMoed food that’s needed for the holiday, however, it’s preferable to have a non-Jewish cook do it.<ref>Beiur Halacha 542, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 36) </ref>
#It’s permissible to fish on Chol HaMoed or to pick fruit on Chol Hamoed with intent to eat the fish or fruit. It’s permissible to fish or pick fruit abundantly so that one will be able to choose the choicest among them to eat.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 38). S”A 537:15 regarding fruits, Mishna Brurah 533:14, 18 regarding fish. </ref>

===Cooking Extra===

#One may not cook on Chol HaMoed in order to have food after the holiday, however it’s permissible to cook generously without calculating precisely and if there’s leftovers, it’s permissible to have them after the holiday.<ref>S”A 533:1 </ref>
#If one transgressed and did cook for after the holiday it’s still permissible to eat it.<ref>S”A 527:23 rules this regarding [[Yom Tov]] and Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 38) writes that this is true regarding Chol HaMoed as well. </ref>

===For whom?===

#It’s permissible to cook for fellow Jews, but one may not do extra work in [[cooking]] for a non-Jew. If one is just adding more ingredients to the pot (not considered extra work for the non-Jew) it’s permissible.<ref>Chayey Adam 106:11, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 36), Shemirat Hamoed Kehilchato (siman 5). Shemirat Hamoed Kehilchato writes that if a Jew has a particular need why he needs to give the non-Jew food for his own benefits then it is permitted to cook for him, however, if he's doing it for the non-Jew, such as if he's inviting him over, it is forbidden. </ref>
#It’s permissible to prepare food for guests even though it’s uncertain that they will come (as long as there’s a reasonable possibility).<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 37) </ref>

==Preliminary Preparations for Food==

#Preliminary preparations such as sharpening a knife or repairing a stove in order to make food for [[Yom Tov]] is permissible if one wasn’t able to fix in before [[Yom Tov]].<ref>S”A 540:7-8, Mishna Brurah 540:27 </ref>
#It’s permissible to do preparations even in a skilled fashion and even if it involves excessive effort.<ref>Ramban (Likkutim on Chol Hamoed s.v. vchen bmachshirin), Mishna Brurah 540:18 and 537:15, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 39). Ramban holds that machshirei ochel nefesh are permitted just like ochel nefesh, even with professional work. However, Raavad (cited by Tosfot Harosh 10a) and Ritva (Moed Katan 10a s.v. darash and 11a s.v. oharei) argue that professional work, such as fixing a mill, is forbidden for machshirei ochel nefesh. Ramban permits that example even though it is professional work. </ref>
#However it’s forbidden to intentionally postpone preliminary preparations from before the holiday until Chol HaMoed and if one did so, one may not work on it on Chol HaMoed.<ref>Mishna Brurah 540:27, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 40) </ref>
#One may only do work that would cause an improvement to the food itself which is true of a knife or stove, however, one may not fix a can-opener or a table as these do not enhance the food but rather these can only be fixed with unskilled work.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 40) </ref>

==Physical Needs==

#It’s permissible to do work for the physical needs of a person (Tzarchei HaGuf) on Chol HaMoed even if it involves skilled work or excessive effort.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 41). What’s the basis for this leniency? Ritva (Moed Katan 9a s.v. oseh, 14a s.v. veshaar) explains that attending to one’s physical needs is considered Ochel Nefesh. See also Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam (Beitzah 2:4). </ref>
#Therefore, one may shower with hot water and soap, brush one’s teeth on Chol HaMoed. Similarly, a woman may apply [[cosmetics]] or tweeze eyebrow or body hair.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 41) </ref>
#If one’s only pair of glasses break one may fix it or have a professional optician fix it.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 42), Chazon Ovadia p. 195. Igrot Moshe 3:78 writes that it is permitted to fix one’s glasses on Chol HaMoed. He adds that one could fix sunglasses if one needs them to see outdoors. Shevet HaLevi 4:214 adds that one could even have a professional fix one’s regular glasses if one needs them to see. See Bear Moshe 7:7. </ref>
#It’s permissible to have a heater fixed if it’s very cold and an air conditioner fixed if it’s very hot on Chol HaMoed.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 43) </ref>
#A person who is already sick can go to the doctor for treatment because a treating the sickness is a physical need.<ref>S”A 532:2 writes that it is permitted to treat a sick patient on Chol HaMoed. Mishna Brurah 532:5 adds that even melachot can be performed in order to heal a person on Chol HaMoed. </ref>
#It’s permissible to treat a person’s health from illness or preventing a decline in health. However, many forbid doing work for a small ache or pain.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 45) </ref>
#It’s permissible to take [[medications]] on Chol haMoed.<ref>Rif (Moed Katan 4a), Rambam (Hilchot Yom Tov 8:15), Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 45) </ref>
#Some permit a regular medical checkup, whereas others advise avoiding it on Chol HaMoed.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/733780/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Hilchos_Chol_Hamoed Rav Hershel Schachter min 29-30] holds that it’s permissible to schedule a doctor’s appointment even lechatchila and even if you planned to go on Chol HaMoed. Similarly, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 46) quotes Rav Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg and Rav Elyashiv concur and explain that just like it is permitted to do Ochel Nefesh on Chol HaMoed even if it is planned for then, it is similarly permitted to go for a checkup even if it is scheduled for Chol HaMoed. He assumes that a checkup is considered in the category of medical attention.
Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 46) quotes Rav Moshe Feinstein saying that one should not have a routine checkup if it does not involve a Melacha such as drawing blood. Igrot Moshe 3:78 writes that the leniency of doing melacha for physical need on Chol HaMoed only applies if a person is in pain or is afraid that not going to the doctor will make the condition worse. However, a healthy person shouldn’t make a dentist appointment on Chol HaMoed since it involves melachot and can be done afterwards. Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 62) follows the opinion of Rav Moshe and extends it to any routine medical checkup. Furthermore, Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg. 46) quotes Rav Moshe as saying that in order not to degrade the sanctity of the holiday one shouldn’t go for a checkup even if no melacha is involved. </ref>
See [[Healthcare on Chol Hamoed]].

==Communal Needs==
# It is permitted to do communal needs on Chol Hamoed even if there were planned for Chol Hamoed and even if they involve are professional labor or excessive effort. The work is permitted even in public.<Ref>Moed Katan 2a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 544:1-2, Mishna Brurah 544:1. The reason that it is permitted even if it is planned for chol hamoed is because otherwise the communal need will not be taken care of as everyone can push it off.</ref>
# Professional labor is only permitted for communal needs under two conditions: 1) the community will benefit from it on Chol Hamoed itself,<ref>Mishna Brurah 544:1</ref> and 2) the community will benefit directly from the labor in a physical way, such as fixing the roads or water sources and not building a shul.<ref>Rashba 4:326, Rama 544:1</ref>
# Non-professional labor for communal needs is permitted even if the community will only benefit after the holiday<ref>Shulcan Aruch 544:2, Mishna Brurah 544:1</ref> and even if the benefit isn't a physical benefit, such as construction for a shul.<ref>Mishna Brurah 544:1, Rama 544:1</ref>
# Examples of communal needs include: fixing the streets, water aqueducts, marking graves, and fixing a mikveh.<ref>Moed Katan 2a, Shulchan Aruch 544:2. Mishna Brurah 544:4 clarifies that you can fix a mikveh only if it'll be completed on chol hamoed and be needed on the holiday otherwise it is forbidden since it involves professional labor.</ref>

==Avoiding a Loss==
See [[Dvar Ha'aved on Chol Hamoed]] for details on this topic.
# Saving time isn’t considered dvar haaved.<ref>Chol Hamoed Kehilchato p. 286, Chazon Ovadia p. 196</ref>
# Doing a melacha on chol hamoed to save time for after the moed that he can use for learning and not doing the melacha will cause him bitul torah is not dvar haaved.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo teshuva 19), Chol Hamoed Kehilchato p. 286, Chazon Ovadia p. 196</ref>

==Hiring Workers==
#It is prohibited to hire workers to do melacha on Chol HaMoed. This prohibition applies even if the action one is hiring another to do would be permitted if one was doing this activity for oneself or for another free of charge.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 542:1. Mishna Brurah 542:2 explains that the prohibition is uvda dichol. The Mishna Brurah notes that some poskim permit one to pay a worker to do work if 1) the person cannot perform the work himself, 2) the workers will not do the work unless they are paid, and 3) it is litzorech hamoed. The same idea is found in Ritva 12a s,v. hay. Shulchan Aruch is based on Moed Katan 12a according to Rabbenu Gershom and Rashi. However, Ran (Chiddushim m"k 12a s.v. rav) quotes two opinions about this question. One opinion permits paying a worker for work that is permitted as a tzorech hamoed. </ref> However, if one does not give the worker a set salary and pays him with food that he eats with the owner, then paying a worker on Chol HaMoed would be allowed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 542:1 </ref>
#If the work is a pressing need to the point that it would cause a substantial loss if not performed (davar ha’aveid), then it would be permitted to hire a worker to perform the work, even if the work is not necessary for the holiday (litzorech hamoed) and involves skilled labor (maaseh uman). In such a case one may even pay the worker.<ref>Rama 542:1 and Mishna Brurah 542:5. The Biur Halacha explains that is preferable for one to hire a non-Jew in this situation. Mishna Brurah 540:2 states that if it would only be a minor loss, one may only do non-skilled labor (maaseh hedyot) to prevent the loss.</ref>
#One may hire a worker who has nothing to eat in order that he will be able to sustain himself.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 542:2. The Mishna Brurah there cites the Magen Avraham as saying that if the poor person has bread and water, then it is prohibited to employ him. Magen Avraham 534:7 writes that ideally one should only employ such a person in a private setting because other people may not know that this poor person has a special exemption to do melacha on Chol HaMoed.</ref>
#Someone who has no food at all, or one who has food but does not have his needs for the holiday (tzorchei hamoed), is considered someone who has no food and is allowed to work on Chol HaMoed.<ref>Mishna Brurah 542:7. See the Magen Avraham cited by the Mishna Brurah who holds more stringently and says that if one has bread and water, one may not work on Chol HaMoed. </ref>
#If one stipulates with a non-Jew that the non-Jew should do work for him after Chol HaMoed, but the non-Jew starts the work immediately during Chol HaMoed, one need not stop the non-Jew because he instructed the non-Jew that he should perform the work after the moed.<ref>Rama 543:3 as explained by M.B 543:11</ref>

==Taking a Haircut==

#It’s a mitzvah to take a haircut on Erev [[Yom Tov]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 531:1 </ref> Some say that it is acceptable to take a haircut within 30 days of the holiday and that's considered sufficiently close to the holiday to indicate that he cut his hair in honor of the holiday.<ref>Pri Megadim M"Z 531:1, Shaar Hatziyun 531:1</ref>
#It’s forbidden to take a haircut on Chol HaMoed. The rabbis prohibited this so that people would prepare properly before the holiday.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 531:2. 
The Mishna in Moed Katan 13b lists the people who are permitted to shave on Chol HaMoed. The list includes those who were unable to do so before Yom Tov such as someone who just arrived from his travels abroad. The Gemara on 14a explains that the reason that the Rabbis forbade shaving on Chol HaMoed is to encourage people to shave in honor of Yom Tov before Yom Tov. If one were allowed to shave on Chol HaMoed, we are concerned that he would not shave on Erev Yom Tov and he would enter Yom Tov unkempt. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 531:1 writes that it is a mitzvah to shave before Yom Tov and in 531:2 records the prohibition to shave on Chol HaMoed. </ref> It’s forbidden to take a haircut even if one took one before the holiday.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 531:2. 
Rabbenu Tam (cited in Tur 531) held that since that is the reason for the rabbinic enactment, if one shaved before Yom Tov, he can shave on Chol HaMoed and the enactment would not apply. The Tur himself rejects this logic for two reasons: 1. If someone who shaved before Yom Tov could shave on Chol HaMoed, why is he not listed in the Mishna among the people who can shave on Chol HaMoed? 2. It should be forbidden because nobody can tell that he shaved before Yom Tov. This second reason is based on a question raised in the Gemara there about someone who was too busy to shave on Erev Yom Tov because he was looking for something that he lost. Though the Gemara leaves this question unresolved, the Tur here rules strictly, saying that since nobody can tell why he did not shave before Yom Tov, it is forbidden to do so. Thus he applies the same logic to one who already shaved before Yom Tov and forbids him from shaving on Chol HaMoed itself.
S”A 531:2 rules explicitly against Rabbenu Tam and says that even one who shaved before Yom Tov cannot shave on Chol HaMoed. Though most rishonim and acharonim rejected the idea of the Rabbenu Tam, the Noda Biyehuda Mahadura Kamma 13 writes that one may rely on Rabbenu Tam on condition that the one cutting his hair is a poor person who does not have what to eat. When asked why he printed such a novel idea, in Nodah Biyehuda Mahadura Tinyana 99-101 he explains that if he didn’t print it, people would go to non-Jewish barbers who use razors and he had another secret reason. The Chatam Sofer 154 writes that the Nodah Biyehuda’s hidden reason was that there were some who shaved daily with a razor and by allowing them to shave on Chol HaMoed he would save them from a biblical prohibition of shaving with a razor as long as their hair stayed below some minimal level. In conclusion, the Chatam Sofer disagrees with the Nodah Biyehuda’s leniency as did most other acharonim (see Chida in Yosef Ometz Siman 7) </ref>
#Chazal did not make an exception for someone who was sick and was unable to cut one’s hair before the holiday and forbid him as well.<ref>S”A 531:3 </ref>
#Chazal made a few exceptions and permitted certain people to cut hair on Chol HaMoed including: a person who was released from prison on the holiday or late on Erev [[Yom Tov]], one who arrives from over seas on Chol Hamoed or late on Erev Yom Tov and was unable to cut one’s hair of Erev [[Yom Tov]], and one who was a mourner for a relative other than a parent, whose seventh day of [[mourning]] occurred on Erev [[Yom Tov]] which was [[Shabbat]] (and so he was unable to shave before the holiday).<ref>S”A 531:4, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 27) </ref> Those who Chazal permitted to permitted to cut one’s hair should do so in private.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 531:5 quoting Ramban and Mordechai </ref>
##Nowadays there is no leniency to permit haircutting for someone who came back from a trip overseas before Yom Tov or on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (cited by Dirshu 531:7) and Ish Matzliach (cited by Tiferet 531:15) conclude that there is no leniency of someone who comes from overseas before Yom Tov or on Chol Hamoed. The reason is that it is possible to cut one's hair in the country where a person was travelling. Also, travel doesn't take so long. This is evident in Mishna Brurah 531:12 who writes that it is only a leniency for someone who came from a very far trip and it is known to everyone that he couldn't cut his hair before Yom Tov. That doesn't really exist today. Also, Mishna Brurah 531:13 writes that if a person came in from overseas and was in another city before he came home before Yom Tov it is forbidden to for him to shave on Chol Hamoed. The reason is that he could have shaved in that other town. This is the basis for Rav Elyashiv's ruling.</ref>
#Cutting one’s hair for medical reason is permissible.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 29) quoting Mishna Brurah 531:21 </ref>
#It is permissible to comb or wash one’s hair even though hairs will be pulled out.<ref>Mordechai (Moed Katan 839), Rama O.C. 531:8, Aruch Hashulchan 531:8, Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg. 517), Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchita (vol 2. 66:32) </ref>

===Women and Children===

#This prohibition applies both to men and women,<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 26), Mishna Brurah 546:16 based on Pri Megadim 546:9 and Gra 546:5, Kaf Hachaim 546:28, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchita vol. 2 66:23. </ref> but not to children below the age of Bar or Bat Mitzvah if it causes them discomfort.<ref>In Moed Katan 14a, Shmuel permitted a parent to cut the hair of his child on Chol Hamoed. There are two versions whether this applies only to a baby born on Chol Hamoed or any child. Rosh (m"k 3:2) and Rambam (Hilchot Yom Tov 7:19) rule like the lenient version of Shmuel. Therefore, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 531:6 permits haircutting for a child.

Nemukei Yosef (Moed Katan 7a s.v. katan) writes that it is only permitted to cut a child's hair if it is causing them discomfort. Magen Avraham 531:8, Mishna Brurah 531:15, Aruch Hashulchan 531:6, and Kaf Hachaim 531:26 codify the Nemukei Yosef. Shulchan Gavoha (cited by Or Letzion 3:24:1) disagrees and holds that it is permitted even if the child is not in discomfort.

Magen Avraham 531:9 writes that if the child looks like he is older than bar/bat mitzvah one should not give him a haircut publicly. </ref>
#It is permitted to perform an upsherin on Chol Hamoed even if it is delayed.<ref>Shaare Teshuva 531:2 quotes the Gan Hamelech who allows an Upshirin on Chol Hamoed for a baby whose third birthday falls out on Chol Hamoed Sukkot or Pesach. He even quotes poskim who allow delaying it until Chol HaMoed if the birthday falls out earlier. Kaf Hachaim 531:30 and Piskei Teshuvot 531:3 agree. Or Letzion (3:24 fnt. 1) notes that it is questionable why it is permitted to have an upshiring according to Nemukei Yosef who doesn't allow cutting a child's hair unless he's in discomfort. Divrei Yatziv (Likutim 93) writes that since an upsherin is a minhag it is the equivalent of a child who is discomfort and it is permitted to cut his hair. </ref>
#Some poskim are strict to forbid fixing a wig on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (quoted in Dirshu M”B 531:note 4) is strict regarding fixing a wig on Chol HaMoed, while Beer Moshe 7:5 is lenient. </ref>
#A woman may remove other hair on her body besides for on her head.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 546:5, Aruch Hashulchan 531:8 </ref>

===Shaving on Chol HaMoed===
See the full article about [[Shaving on Chol Hamoed]].
#In general, it is forbidden to shave on Chol HaMoed unless it jeopardizes his job.<ref>Moed Katan 13b, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 531:1, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 26) </ref>
#Many Ashkenazic authorities permit [[shaving]] on Chol HaMoed for someone who shaves regularly, at least once every three days, on condition that (1) he shaved on Erev Yom Tov and (2) there's a great need or is pained by not [[shaving]]. Also, one who relies on this only to look presentable should not be protested.<ref>*Nodeh BeYehuda 1:13 writes that one may rely on the opinion of Rabbenu Tam who holds that one who shaved on Erev Chag may shave during Chol HaMoed on condition that the one cutting the hair is a poor person who doesn’t have what to eat. When asked why he printed such a novel idea, in Nodeh BeYehuda 2:99-101 he explains that if he didn’t print it, people would go to non-Jewish barbers who use razors and he had another secret reason. The Chatom Sofer 154 writes that the Nodeh BeYehuda’s hidden reason was that there were some who shaved daily with a razor and by allowing them to shave on Chol HaMoed he would save them from a biblical prohibition of [[shaving]] with a razor as long as their hair stayed below some minimal level. In conclusion, the Chatom Sofer disagreed with the Nodeh BeYehuda’s leniency.
*Based on the opinion of Rabbenu Tam, Sh”t Igrot Moshe OC 1:163 rules leniently for someone who shaved on Erev [[Yom Tov]] and regularly shaves at least once in every 3 days, and he’s pained by not [[shaving]] or has a great need to shave. His logic is that even the Tur who disagreed with the Rabbenu Tam would agree nowadays, since many people shave regularly and it is well known that one who shaved on Erev [[Yom Tov]] will still have to shave on Chol HaMoed. This addresses the Tur's first question on Rabbenu Tam, however, with regards to his second claim, Rav Moshe offers several potential answers. [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/764803/Rabbi_Shmuel_Marcus/Shaving_on_Chol_Hamoed Rabbi Shmuel Marcus] explains this [[teshuva]] of Rav Moshe.</ref> Some authorities are even more lenient and say that if one shaves daily and shaved on Erev [[Yom Tov]] one should shave on Chol HaMoed.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/733780/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Hilchos_Chol_Hamoed Rav Schachter] (min 50-53) quotes Rav Soloveitchik who said that anyone who had permit to shave should shave in order to look presentable for the holiday. This is also recorded in Nefesh HaRav (p. 189) and "Halakhic Positions of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik" pg. 25. Rav Aharon Lichtenstein (cited in Techumin 2:133 note 37) agrees with this ruling of Rav Soloveitchik.</ref> However, many poskim rejected this leniency<ref>Rav Chaim David Halevi (Aseh Lecha Rav 1:39) notes that most contemporary poskim reject Rav Moshe’s leniency. Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchita (Vol. 2 66:23) is also strict. Rav Avigdor Neventzal (Yerushalayim Bimoadeha Chol HaMoed pg. 237) is strict even for a date or a business meeting. </ref> including most sephardic poskim.<ref>Chazon Ovadyah ([[Yom Tov]] pg 190), Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 516) and Rabbi Shalom Mesas (Tevuot Shemesh OC 55-56), [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?PageIndex=&ClipID=2478 Rabbi Eli Mansour] on dailyhalacha.com</ref>
#A man may trim his mustache even if it does not interfere with his eating.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 531:8, Mishna Brurah 531:21, Kaf Hachaim 531:39 </ref>

==Nail Cutting==

#Ashkenazim hold that it’s forbidden to cut one’s nails normally on Chol HaMoed, while Sephardim hold that it is permissible.<ref>S”A 532:1 holds it’s permissible, while the Rama 532:1 writes that the Ashkenazic minhag is to refrain from [[cutting one's nails]] on Chol HaMoed. Yalkut Yosef 531:10 writes that Sephardim follow S”A. Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 29) writes that the Ashkenazic minhag is like the Rama. See, however, the Aruch HaShulchan 532:2 and Magen Avraham 532:1 who write that in extenuating circumstances, a person who didn't get to cut his nails before Chol HaMoed because he was very busy, may cut his nails on Chol HaMoed. [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?PageIndex=&ClipID=2478 Rabbi Eli Mansour on dailyhalacha.com] also writes that the Sephardic minhag is to permit cutting nails on Chol HaMoed, whereas Ashkenazim refrain.</ref>
#If one cut one's nails on Erev [[Yom Tov]] one may cut them on Chol HaMoed.<ref>Magen Avraham 532:1, Mishna Brurah 532:2 </ref>
#It’s permissible to cut one’s nails with one’s hands or teeth.<ref>Mishna Brurah 532:3 </ref>
#If one usually cuts one’s nails on Erev [[Shabbat]], it’s permissible to cut them on Chol HaMoed Erev [[Shabbat]].<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1812&pgnum=64 Nachalat Shiva 57], Ba'er Hetiev 532:1, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 30), Kaf Hachaim 532:5, Chazon Ovadia (p. 194). However, Shaarei Teshuva 468:1 quotes Shvut Yaakov 1:17 who disagrees and forbids this. </ref>
#It’s permissible for a woman to cut her nails before going to the mikveh.<ref>Rama 532:1 </ref> If a man has the custom to go to the mikveh before every Shabbos, some poskim permit cutting nails.<ref>Shu”t Nachalat Shivah (Chelek 1, Siman 57). Shevut Yaakov disagrees (Chelek 1, siman 17 cited by Shaarei Teshuva siman 468:1).</ref>
#Whenever it is permissible to cut one’s hair on Chol Hamoed, it is also permissible to cut one’s nails.<ref>Magen Avraham 532:1, Mishna Brurah 532:2, Aruch HaShulchan 532:2 </ref>
#It is permissible to cut one’s nails for medical reasons.<ref>S”A 532:2 </ref>
#It is permissible to cut one’s nails if they are making it difficult to put on shoes.<ref>Rav Nissim Karelitz - Chut Hashani Chol HaMoed pg.227. Because he writes that the gezeira against cutting nails was so that one does not plan to cut them after the holiday starts and enter the holiday looking disgusting/unkempt. But in this case the cutting is in order to fix the nails, and one can therefore rely on the opinions that allow cutting nails on Chol HaMoed.</ref>

==Laundry==
===Washing Machines===
# The poskim hold that the prohibition against doing laundry on chol hamoed applies today even though it is easy to do laundry in a washing machine. The reason is that the prohibition wasn't because of working on chol hamoed. It was enacted in order to ensure that a person prepares for the holiday properly and has clean clothing and doesn't save the laundry for chol hamoed.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo teshuva 9), Yabia Omer 7:48, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 66:65, Or Letzion 3:24:2, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1081&pgnum=277 Rivevot Efraim 1:354:1], [https://ph.yhb.org.il/plus/12-11-11/ Peninei Halacha (Moadim 11:11:4)], Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo p. 30, Shemirat Hamoed Kehilchato p. 358. </ref>
# If someone did all of their laundry before the holiday and now they don't have clean clothing a minority opinion in the poskim allows doing laundry in a washing machine, while most forbid it.<ref>[https://ph.yhb.org.il/plus/12-11-11/ Peninei Halacha (Moadim 11:11:4)] quotes several who hold that if one cleaned all of one's clothing before chol hamoed and now they're dirty to be able to launder them on chol hamoed. These poskim include [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21155&st=&pgnum=209 Chemda Genuza of R' Shalosh 2:55], Migdal Sofim 3:30, and Chevel Nachalato 11:19. He also quotes Rav Liyor in Dvar Chevron OC 545 who held this approach but is hesistant to rule like that without the approval of the gedolei hador. Peninei Halacha concludes that majority of the poskim do not allow it. Shemirat Hamoed Kehilchato p. 358 is stringent.</ref>
===Adding to the Load===
# If someone is running a load of permitted clothing such as children clothing one may not add to the load more clothing that otherwise would be forbidden to clean.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 32) citing Rav Moshe Feinstein, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 66 fnt. 254, Yabia Omer 7:48, [https://ph.yhb.org.il/plus/12-11-11/ Peninei Halacha (Moadim 11:11:5)], [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1101852 Rav Mordechai Willig (Chol Hamoed Shiur 20 min 61)]. Peninei Halacha cites this from Rav Elyashiv in Mivakshei Torah p. 471, Or Letzion 3:24:2, Chazon Ovadia p. 199, Tefilla Lmoshe 2:24, Chut Shani p. 237, Piskei Teshuvot 534:32, and Chol Hamoed Khilchato 5:18. The only lenient opinion he quotes is Shevivei Esh Moadim v. 2 p. 294.</ref>

===Clothing, Towels, Tableclothes===
#It’s forbidden to launder clothing, towels, linens, or tablecloths on Chol HaMoed as the rabbis prohibited this so that people would prepare properly before the holiday.<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 14a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 534:1, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 34). The Mishna (13b) states that it is forbidden to launder clothing on Chol HaMoed. Even though it should have been considered a need of the holiday and permitted, Chazal (Gemara Moed Katan 14a) made a specific gezerah not to do laundry on Chol HaMoed lest one neglect to prepare properly for the holiday and not launder his clothing until the holiday comes. Shulchan Aruch 534:1 codifies this as halacha. </ref> It’s also forbidden to launder clothing in a washing machine.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 30). Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer 7:48:1) writes that it is forbidden to do laundry with a laundry machine on Chol HaMoed since the reason of Chazal, to prevent a person from being unprepared for the holiday, still applies whether or not it takes a lot of effort. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 66:63 agrees. </ref>

===Undergarments and Socks===

#It is permitted to launder socks and stockings on chol hamoed if they got dirty. It is better to buy new ones and wash the dirty ones. It is better to wash them by adding them to a load with children clothing rather than wash them by themselves.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchato 66:66, Hilchot Chag Bchag p. 225, Shraga Hameir 7:43. This also seems to be the view of Chazon Ovadia p. 198. However, Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo p. 32 quotes the Debretziner who was strict not to launder even socks and underwear. He writes that usually the only recourse for someone whose clothing got dirty is to buy new ones. In a case where a person doesn't have enough he should ask a competent posek. </ref>
#Some poskim allow cleaning an adult's undergarments if they were all cleaned before the holiday and then because they frequently get sweaty or dirty need to be laundered and there aren't any other available, can be washed in the washing machine on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 534:8 based on Magen Avraham 534:2 and Shraga Hameir 7:43:3. Chazon Ovadia p. 198 permits laundering undershirts if a person changes them daily if he doesn't have clean ones. Shevet Halevi 8:124:2 writes that he would only permit laundering undershirts on chol hamoed if a person is really bothered by not having the undershirt laundered, such as by having worn it for a few days without laundering it. [https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%91%D7%9C_%D7%A0%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%AA%D7%95_%D7%99%D7%90_%D7%99%D7%98 Chevel Nachalato 11:19:2] argues that today many people are bothered to wear an undershirt that they already wore once. </ref> However, some poskim are strict and forbid laundering undershirts.<ref>Hilchot Chag Bchag p. 226 quotes that Rav Elyashiv forbade laundering undershirts which get dirty every day and he should just buy new ones.</ref>
#Similarly, a niddah who needs to change her white underwear for [[Shiva Nekiyim]] and doesn't have enough can launder it on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 534:6 based on Meiri Moed Katan 14a</ref>

===Sheets and Towels===

#One may launder guests' sheets and towels on Chol HaMoed if he had guests the first days and he needs them clean for more guests for chol hamoed or the second days.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=890&st=&pgnum=13 Beer Moshe 7:8] permits cleaning guests' sheets if they are necessary for more guests on the second days. He adds that it is proper to buy new sheets for the guests for the second days rather than do laundry on the sheets from the first days. Similarly, [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/ostroff/archives/shabbos6_21.htm Weekly Hilchos Shabbos Shemini] based on Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (66 note 263). Mishna Brurah 534:6 explains that it is permitted to launder clothing that get dirty all the time since it is evident that even if one were to clean in advance of the holiday, they would need to be cleaned again on the holiday. Similarly, Chaye Adam adds that it is permitted to clean a handkerchief that gets dirty frequently. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (66 no. 263) writes that as an application of this Mishna Brurah one is permitted to launder towels and guest sheets on the holiday since those are frequently cleaned on a regular basis. Interestingly, Shevet HaLevi 8:124 is hesitant to permit laundering undergarments which become dirty frequently on Chol HaMoed if one can wear them again without great discomfort. </ref>
#It is permitted to clean sheets in a hospital and hotels on chol hamoed.<ref>Chazon Ovadia p. 198</ref>
#It is permitted to clean towels in a mikveh on chol hamoed.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 66:67</ref>

===Sick===

#Chazal did not make an exception for someone who was sick and was unable to do laundry before the holiday and forbid him as well.<ref>Mishna Brurah 534:2, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 30) </ref>

===Extenuating Circumstance===

#Chazal made a few exceptions and permitted certain people to do laundry on Chol HaMoed including a person who was released from prison on the holiday or late on Erev [[Yom Tov]], one who arrives from over seas on Erev [[Yom Tov]] and was unable to do laundry all of Erev [[Yom Tov]], and someone who was a mourner for a relative other than a parent, whose seventh day of [[mourning]] occurred on Erev [[Yom Tov]] which was [[Shabbat]] (and so he was unable to do laundry before the holiday).<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 534:1, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 30) </ref> Those who Chazal permitted to cut one’s hair should do so in private.<ref>Rama 534:1 </ref>
#If someone has only one suit and it got dirty on the first days of yom tov he can clean it for Shabbat or the second days of Yom Tov.<ref>Or Letzion 3:24:3, Hilchot Chag Bchag (p 222 5:19 fnt. 27). The logic is that wearing weekday clothing on Shabbat and Yom Tov is not considered an alternative. Therefore, it is considered as though he only has one clothing, in which case chazal permitted him to launder his clothing (Moed Katan 18a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 534:1). Although some rishonim forbade this nowadays since it isn't clear that he only has one clothing, some are lenient (see Mishna Brurah 534:9).</ref>

===Women===

#It’s permissible for a women to launder her support hose, nursing bras, and white underwear if she becomes Niddah on Chol HaMoed if she has insufficient to last for the whole holiday.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 32-3) </ref>

===Dry Cleaning===

#Dry cleaning is also forbidden like [[laundering]]. If one’s only suit became so soiled that it’s impossible to worn, some permit it to be dry cleaned, and one should consult a competent rabbinic authority.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 33) citing Shemirat Shabbat Khilchata 66:72</ref>

===Removing a Stain===

#Many poskim permit cleaning a stain in clothing that one needs to wear on the moed.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 33). Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe 5:36:1) writes that cleaning a stain is considered a simple task (melechet hedyot) and does not constitute actual laundry which Chazal forbade. However, giving clothing to a laundromat is forbidden even if it is a simple task. Chazon Ovadia (Yom Tov p. 200) agrees. Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 66:72 and Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg. 33) also allow one to clean a stain if one does not have other suitable clean clothing. Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut HaShani (Chol HaMoed p. 238) however, does not allow one to wash out a stain unless one is wearing the clothes and one does not have other clothes to wear. Hilchot Chag Bchag p. 214 quotes Rav Elyashiv as lenient. Chol Hamoed Khilchato (ch. 5 fnt. 86) quotes Rav Wosner as strict. </ref>
#If a garment has a tough stain that won’t be removed if one waits until after the holiday, cleaning is permissible.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 33), Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 66:72 </ref>

===Ironing, Making Pleats, and Polishing===

#Ironing is permissible but pressing by a professional is forbidden.<ref>Or Letzion 3:24:4, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 33-4) </ref>
#Making pleats in a skirt or pants is forbidden.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 33) </ref>
#Many poskim permit polishing one's shoes on Chol HaMoed, though some forbid it. Everyone permits brush them off.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo teshuva 4), Yabia Omer 1:32, and Or Letzion 3:24:4 permit polishing shoes on Chol Hamoed. Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 34) quotes that most poskim permitted polishing shoes. </ref>

===Children's Clothing===
#If children’s clothing got dirty, it is permissible to launder the clothing that is necessary for the moed.<ref>Mishna Brurah 534:11 and Aruch HaShulchan 534:8. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Shulchan Shlomo 534:3 says that this age is until at most 6 or 7 years old. Tiferet 534:7 quotes Rav Sheinberg (Avnei Yishpeh 1:104) who said that there's no specific age and it depends on the child. </ref>
#It is permitted to clean the children's clothing that are necessary for the rest of the moed all together in one load, rather than one clean the ones that are necessary right then.<ref>Minchat Yitzchak 8:50:2, Yabia Omer 7:48, Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo p. 32, Hilchot Chag Bchag p. 229-230. He explains that it is minimizing the tircha and melacha by doing it together and that's better than only doing what is immediately necessary. Even though Rama 534:6 writes that a person should only clean the children's clothing one at a time as necessary, here it is permitted since doing it one at a time will be more tircha and melacha. Rav Ovadia permits doing all the clothing in one load because it minimizes tircha and melacha and also the children's clothing get dirty quickly.</ref>
#If someone is going with their children to their parents or another place some poskim hold that one should bring as many of the children's clothing as they own in order that they won't have to launder them on chol hamoed,<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=890&pgnum=14 Beer Moshe 7:9], Rav Nissim Karelitz (cited by Tiferet 534:9)</ref> while others are lenient if it is a difficulty.<ref>Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo quoting Rav Moshe Feinstein (teshuva 7-8), Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata ch. 66 fnt. 255, Rav Meir Mazuz (cited by Tiferet 534:9)</ref>
#It isn't necessary to buy extra clothing before the moed to avoid having to launder children's clothing on chol hamoed.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo teshuva 7), [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=890&pgnum=14 Beer Moshe 7:9]</ref>

==Moving Houses==

#It is forbidden to move homes on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Based on Moed Katan 13a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 535:1 writes that one may not move homes on Chol HaMoed. Mishna Brurah 535:1 explains that it’s forbidden because of the tircha (exertion) involved. S”A writes that it’s only forbidden to move from one courtyard to another, however within the same courtyard it’s permitted. Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 7) writes in name of the Drinsiner Rav that since nowadays people have many possessions and moving always involved exertion it’s forbidden in any manner. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 68:24 (footnote 86) seemingly disagrees with this and yet leaves the leniency of moving within the chetzer out of the halachas probably because nowadays we don’t have groups of houses in small courtyards.</ref>
#Nonetheless, if it’s intolerable to live under present conditions, there’s a loss of money one may certainly move homes. However, if one is moving from a rented house to one that one owns, or from a home which one splits with others to live in one’s own home there’s room to be lenient and preferably one should ask a rabbinic authority.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 535:1 writes that one may not move homes from one courtyard to another, however, in 535:2 he permits if one is moving from someone else’s home to one’s own home. Mishna Brurah 535:7 explains that moving to one’s own home is permitted because it’s a Simcha for him, yet, it’s not permitted if one is just moving from a ugly or small house to a nicer or bigger one. Shaar Tzion 535:5 writes that the same leniency would be true if one is moving from a joint home to one’s own home. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 68:24 quotes this as halacha. However, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 7) writes that one shouldn’t move unless there’s more serious needs such as if the living conditions are intolerable or there’s a loss of money. Mishna Brurah 535:7, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 7), and Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 68:24 write that each case should be judged by a rabbinic authority. </ref>
#One may not set aside time to move around and organize inventory for business on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Shevet Halevi 6:67 writes that moving around and organizing business inventory is a tircha and forbidden just like it is forbidden to turn over one's fruit unless they're going to rot. Another proof is that it is forbidden to bring utensils back from a worker on Chol Hamoed. Also, it is forbidden to move one's residence from place to place because of tircha.</ref>
#It is forbidden to contract a house to be built on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 543:2 writes that one can't contract a house to be built by a non-Jew on Chol Hamoed. Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 100) writes that if the custom is that everyone contracts their house to be built with a contract (kablanut) and not by individual day workers (sachir) it is a discussion if it can be built on Chol Hamoed and a person must ask a posek if they can rely on that leniency.</ref>
#It is permitted to pack and take home suitcases and bags that he took with him for the first days when he is traveling to another place or home on chol hamoed.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=890&pgnum=64 Beer Moshe 7:85] explains that this isn’t considered like moving residences.</ref>

==Buying and Selling==

#One is not permitted to purchase or sell an item that will not be needed for the festival.<ref>M.B 539:1 writes that buying and selling is forbidden on Chol HaMoed because it is burdensome. The Levush 539:1 writes that if a sale or purchase comes his way that will provide him great gains he can undergo the transaction in private, as long as he ensures to spend more than he would have otherwise from the funds he receives from the transaction to add to the joy of the holiday. The Aruch Hashulchan 539:3 explains that it is because the atmosphere of the day is supposed to be one of joy and involved with Torah and one may get caught up in doing business and shopping that it will become like a normal day.
S.A 539:12 forbids transactions not needed for the moed; however, the Rama writes that one may purchase items which are not needed for the Yom Tov in private. M.B 539:43 limits this leniency to items one will not be able to acquire at a discounted price after the festival because, as explained by M.B 539:18, this is similar to dvar heaved.</ref>
#One is permitted to buy or sell if by not undergoing the transaction he would experience a loss.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 539:1. An example would be if a lock broke you would be able to replace it so that the items inside will not be stolen. A dvar heaved is something that is already considered yours and there is a fear that you will lose it if you do not act.</ref> Accordingly, if there is an opportunity such as a sale that is passing and the sale will not happen again, one may purchase the object at the discounted price.<ref>Chol HaMoed by Rabbi Dovid Zucker/ Rabbi Moshe Francis pg 101. However it is better for one to wait, if the sale will happen again.</ref>
#One may purchase or sell something that is generally bought or sold for the festival even in public.<ref>S.A 539:10. Chol HaMoed By Rabbi Dovid Zucker/ Rabbi Moshe Francis p105 quotes a machloket regarding whether one is allowed to buy more than is necessary for the festival. </ref>
#One may not return an item unless one would not be able to return the item after the festival.<ref>Chol HaMoed p. 108 cites Rav Moshe Feinstein who says that one may not return for a refund. However, if by waiting one will no longer be able to return the object this is considered a dvar heaved and may be returned. </ref>
#One should not shop online during Chol HaMoed unless no money is being paid.<ref>Chol HaMoed p. 108 </ref>
#If one traveled during the moed and found a unique object that he will not be able to find when he returns from his trip, he may purchase such an item.<ref>Chol Hameod p 106-107 Rav Moshe Feinstein says that this is considered a dvar heaved because it will save him the trip in the future. However, Rav Moshe says that it is better for one to extend his trip until after the Chag. This leniency only applies if he will not be returning to this city after the festival. Similarly, if a child is visiting a parent during Chol HaMoed and the parent will buy the item for the child, whereas if the parent does not purchase the item, the child will have to buy it himself this is considered a dvar heaved and one may allow his parents to buy it for him on Chol HaMoed.</ref>
#One is permitted to make a sale if he is poor and the sale will provide him with more money that he can spend for the moed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 539:4. Here the S.A is discussing someone who does not have enough money to spend for Yom Tov, not merely someone who has stingy, but would spend more if he had more money. </ref>

=== Bringing Items to and back from a Professional ===
#One should not pick up an item from a store even if one ordered it before the holiday and even if the store is a non-Jewish store.<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 13b, Shulchan Aruch 534:3, Mishna Brurah 534:16 explains that some say it is because of tircha (unnecessary effort) to pick up something at the store and some say it is because it is going to look like it was commissioned to be done on chol hamoed. According to the last reason it is forbidden even if it is at a non-Jewish store. Chol HaMoed p. 107 agrees.</ref> If the item is necessary for the holiday it can be picked up on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 13b, Shulchan Aruch 534:3</ref> If it is necessary for a mitzvah item even if it isn't a tzorech hamoed it can be picked up on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Mishna Brurah 534:15 citing the Pri Megadim</ref>
#It is forbidden to bring an item to a professional on chol hamoed even if it is something that is necessary for the moed.<ref>Bach 534 is strict to forbid bringing a kli to a professional on chol hamoed even if it is necessary for the moed. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=38213&st=&pgnum=130 Shita Talmid L'Ri Mparis 13b] and Meiri 13b agree. Mishna Brurah 534:15 quotes this from Bach and Eliya Rabba 534:6. Hilchot Chag Bchag p. 345 agrees. Therefore, Hilchot Chag Bchag and Tiferet 534:14 quoting Chiko Mamtakim write that it is forbidden to bring a car to a mechanic on chol hamoed. However, Maamar Mordechai 534:4 argues that it is permitted since it is a tzorech hamoed. Kaf Hachaim 534:21 quotes Maamar Mordechai.

Why is there a prohibition to bring kelim to a bet hauman on the moed for a tzorech hamoed? Hilchot Chag Bchag explains that it is a concern that people will think that you asked the uman to do melacha for after the moed. Hilchot Chol Hamoed Khilchato (ch. 8 fnt. 61) writes that there's a concern that people will think you asked the uman to do melacha in a prohibited fashion, such as maaseh uman for tzorech hamoed. The practical difference between these approaches is that Hilchot Chol Hamoed Kehilchato would permit bringing to an uman kelim for ochel nefesh since there maaseh uman is permitted.

See Hilchot Chol Hamoed Zichron Shlomo p. 102 who permits bringing clothing to a dry cleaner on chol hamoed to do for after the moed. However, seemingly this is in contradiction to Mishna Brurah 534:15. </ref>

==Traveling==

#Taking a trip for pleasure is considered a legitimate festival need and thus may be done on Chol HaMoed <ref>S.A. 536:1. It is problematic, however, to engage constantly in pleasure trips without enjoying the Moed through festive meals and Torah; see Kol Bo and M.B. 530:2.</ref>
#Modes of transportation that are forbidden on a Torah level on Yom Tov (e.g. a car) may not be used on Chol HaMoed without need, <ref>As a basic extension of the laws of the Chol HaMoed. However, R’ Moshe Feinstein (Piskei Halachos 6) permits the use of a car even for walkable distances.</ref> while other modes of transportation (e.g. a bicycle) may even be used without need.<ref>Mo’adei Hashem 34. See Rama 536:1 for the parallel case of riding an animal. </ref>

==Writing==

#Writing in a non-professional manner such as regular handwriting is permissible for a need of the holiday, public need, a loss of money, or a passing mitzvah.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 73-7). 
The Mishna (Moed Katan 18b) establishes that in general one may not write on Chol HaMoed. Rambam (Chol HaMoed 7:13) and S”A 545:1 codify this. Just like other melachos on Chol HaMoed, there are two categories of writing. The Rama 545:1 quotes two opinions about whether ordinary writing is considered professional and says that the minhag is to be lenient. Based on this and other reasons, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (p. 87) writes that ordinary writing is maaseh hedyot. S”A 540:1 and Mishna Brurah 540:1 clarify that maaseh hedyot is muter for a tzorech hamoed. Mishna Brurah 545:4 writes that writing of a sofer is considered professional and would not be permitted even for a holiday need. </ref> It is customary when writing for a need of the holiday or a public need that isn't for the holiday to alter the way in which one writes.<ref>Rama 545:1 and 545:5, Magen Avraham 545:21, Mishna Brurah 545:5 and 34. Mishna Brurah explains that it means that they wrote everything on a slant.</ref>
#Writing in a professional manner/calligraphy is only permissible if there’s a public need, a loss of money, or a passing mitzvah.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 72-73). Background: The Mishna in Moed Katan 18b states that one may not write a loan unless the lender doesn’t trust the borrower and could potentially lose his capital. The Rambam (Chol HaMoed 7:13) and S”A 545:1 generalize this by stating that one may not write on Chol HaMoed if there’s no potential loss of money. </ref>
#Because of ‘need of the holiday’, it’s permissible to write a shopping list or a social letter. Additionally a child may draw. Some say that one should write on a slant so as to function as a Shinui (change from the norm).<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 75-6) </ref>
#It is permissible to take notes in a vocational course, write homework for school, or to write a bank deposit because of a concern of a loss.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 76-77) </ref>
#Some permit using a copy machine (since it’s not similar to writing) for a ‘need of the holiday’, while some only permit in order to prevent a loss.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 79) quotes Rav Moshe as permitting and Rav Yacov Kamenetsky as forbidding. </ref>
#It’s permissible to use a tape recorder on Chol HaMoed.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 79) </ref>
#If a person has a nuance in Torah he is permitted to write it down so that he doesn't forget it.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 545:9, Mishna Brurah 545:47. Taz 545:13 writes that his father-in-law wrote the Bach on chol hamoed. Radvaz 1:357 permits a rabbi to write a teshuva on chol hamoed because of tzarchei rabbim and dvar ha'aved. </ref>
#If a sefer torah is invalid and the congregation needs it for ''[[Kriyat HaTorah|kriyat hatorah]]'' it may be fixed on chol hamoed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 545:2. From the Bet Yosef it appears that the leniency is based on the fact that it is included in tzarchei rabbim, communal needs. This is also the view of Magen Avraham 545:4. Gra 544:1 asks that Rashba (cited by Rama 544:1) holds that communal needs are only permitted if it is a physical need and not a spiritual one. Chayey Adam 111:1 (and Nishmat Adam 106:2) answers that the reason it is permitted to fix a sefer torah that is necessary is because of dvar ha'aved, a concern for loss. The loss of the mitzvah of kriyat hatorah is sufficient to permitted professional work necessary to fix the torah. </ref>

===Typing===

#Some consider typing on a computer like non-professional writing and so it’s permissible if there’s a ‘need of the holiday’. However, some consider typing like professional writing which is only permissible is there’s a public need, a loss of money, or a passing mitzvah.<ref>The Mishna (Moed Katan 18b) establishes that in general one may not write on Chol HaMoed. Rambam (Chol HaMoed 7:13) and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 545:1 codify this. Just like other melachos on Chol HaMoed, there are two categories of writing. The Rama 545:1 quotes two opinions about whether ordinary writing is considered professional and says that the minhag is to be lenient. Based on this and other reasons, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (p. 87) writes that ordinary writing is maaseh hedyot. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 540:1 and Mishna Brurah 540:1 clarify that maaseh hedyot is muter for a tzorech hamoed. Mishna Brurah 545:4 writes that writing of a sofer is considered professional and would not be permitted even for a holiday need. A very practical question to ask is how this halacha translates to typing on a computer. Is that considered like regular writing or professional writing?

*Rav Ovadia Yosef (Sh”t Yabia Omer 8:48:5) writes that typing on a computer is considered non-professional writing and would permit typing up divrei torah one might forget or sending greetings for a holiday need. Rav Elyashiv (cited by Hilchot Chag Bchag p. 288) agrees that it is permitted for any holiday need. Similarly, Igrot Moshe EH 4:73:4 implies that typing on a computer isn’t considered a melacha. Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (ch. 66 n. 211) adds that typing is permitted because it isn’t permanent. He permits even if it isn't a need for the holiday. However, saving the information to the hard-drive is problematic because of boneh as the disk is improved when information is saved. That is only permitted for a holiday need or dvar aved. [[Shevet Halevi]] (6:37 s.v. VeAf) discusses whether typing is considered like writing for the purpose of Chol HaMoed because it is easy, but doesn't come to a conclusion.
*Shemirat Hamoed Kehilchato (ch. 3 fnt. 49) is lenient and quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as also holding that printing is maaseh hedyot. Some of his proofs that maaseh hedyot and uman depends on how it is done and not the result is from Mishna Brurah 540:8 and Eshel Avraham 545.</ref>
#There is a dispute whether printing from a computer is considered like professional or ordinary writing. Most poskim are lenient. Therefore, they permit printing even for just a tzorech hamoed. The stringent poskim would only allow printing for a dvar haaved.<ref>Regarding printing, Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 78) records a dispute between Rav Moshe Feinstein who considers printing to be non-professional writing and Rav Yacov Kamentsky who argues that printing is considered professional writing. Yabia Omer 8:48:3 holds that printing is considered maaseh hedyot. He quotes there Rav Elyashiv as also holding this way. However, Beer Moshe 7:41 and Kinyan Torah Bhalacha 2:97 are stringent and hold it is a maaseh uman since the result is professional looking print. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1099687/Hilchos-Chol-Hamoed-Shiur-12:-Dvar-Haaved-and-Maaseh-Uman Rabbi Willig (Chol Hamoed shiur 12 min 46-49)] seems to be lenient as he commented about polaroid that it isn't maaseh uman. </ref>

===Taking Pictures===

#Some permit using a camera (since it’s not similar to writing) for a ‘need of the holiday’, while some only permit if there’s a loss (such as if one will miss a rare opportunity to take such a picture).<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 78) quotes Rav Moshe Feinstein (see Piskei Halachos 30,31) as permitting this because it is a maaseh hedyot, an action that does not require expertise. He also quotes Rav Yacov Kamenetsky as forbidding, arguing that it is a maaseh uman, and thus it is not allowed except in a case of monetary loss. R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchesa 66 note 209) agrees with the lenient opinion. </ref>
#Many permit taking pictures with digital cameras or camcorders. The files from cameras or camcorders may be transferred to a computer.<ref>This follows from the idea that “writing” on an electronic screen is not considered writing at a Torah level and there is no effort involved. See the responsa of R’ Moshe Stern (siman 56), which discusses a using calculator. See Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchesa 66:55, which permits such activities because the writing is not at all permanent. R’ Yosef Shalom Elyashiv is also quoted (Mevakshei Torah p. 473 note 85) as permitting writing on a computer screen, if necessary for the Moed, because it is not considered writing. </ref>
#Burning pictures onto a disk is permitted by many authorities. Others say it is only allowed in cases of necessity for the Moed or monetary loss.<ref>While R’ Moshe Feinstein allows this (Piskei Halachos 32), R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchesa 66 note 211) contends that it is problematic because of the melacha of boneh, building. There is some contention, however, whether this would still be the case for a memory storage device that already has data on it, or can be rewritten; see Shulchan Shlomo Hilchos Yom Tov veChol HaMoed 545:5 in the margins, and also Nishmas Avraham O”CH 340. </ref>
#Many permit the use of a film camera unconditionally;<ref>R’ Moshe Feinstein (Piskei Halachos 31,32) allows using a film camera, since the “writing” which occurs before the film is developed is not considered substantive. However, R’ Chaim Kanievsky writes in the name of the Chazon Ish that it is forbidden. See Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchesa 67:19 and note 105 in the name of R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach. </ref> others permit only for a rare photo opportunity.<ref>See the responsa of R’ Moshe Stern 55.</ref>
#One should not have pictures developed on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 11:53 writes originally he thought that a professional picture is a maaseh uman based on the discussions of printing presses. However, he concluded that it wasn’t maaseh uman but still it was forbidden to let the pictures be developed on chol hamoed.</ref>

==Going to Work on Chol HaMoed==

#If one may lose one’s job or if one can’t explain it to one’s employer and one will lose a promotion then it’s permissible to go to work. Additionally, it’s permissible to work for needs of the public community such as a work for the Shul.<ref>Rav Schachter on [http://www.ou.org/torah/article/oukosher_pre-pesach_webcast_5771 OU Pre-Pesach Webcast 5771] between minutes 62 and 64:15 </ref>
#If one will lose one’s usual customers if one doesn’t open one’s store on Chol HaMoed and not just a loss of income then it’s permissible to open one’s store on Chol HaMoed but still one should minimize one’s hours.<ref>Rav Schachter on [http://www.ou.org/torah/article/oukosher_pre-pesach_webcast_5771 OU Pre-Pesach Webcast 5771] between minutes 62 and 64:15 </ref>

==Having Simchas==

#It’s forbidden to have a wedding on Chol haMoed because of Ein Maarivin Simcha BeSimcha (one may not mix different Simcha’s).<ref>S”A 546:1 </ref>
#It’s permissible to have a [[Brit Milah]], [[Pidyon HaBen]], or Siyum.<ref>Hilchot Chol HaMoed Zichron Shlomo (pg 106-7) </ref>

==Tefillin==

{{Tefillin on Chol HaMoed}}

==Work Through a Non-Jew==

#It is forbidden to instruct a non-Jew to do any activity that’s forbidden for a Jew to do on Chol HaMoed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 543:1 </ref>
#It is forbidden to have a non-Jew build one's house on Chol Hamoed. This is forbidden even if it is contracted and isn't fired per hour or day. It is forbidden even if it is outside of the town.<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 12a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 543:2</ref>
#For a mitzvah it is permitted to ask a non-Jew to do construction on Chol Hamoed.<ref>Mishna Brurah 543:1, Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata end of ch. 68</ref>
#If hiring a worker on chol hamoed is cheaper than hiring him afterwards nonetheless it is forbidden to hire the worker on chol hamoed, even if he's non-Jewish.<ref>Chayey Adam 106:12, Mishna Brurah 643:2. However, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=118&pgnum=239 Chelek Levi 183] disagrees. Chol Hamoed Kehilchato quotes this dispute and adds that Sh"t Maamar Mordechai and Rav Meir Mazuz dispute this Chayey Adam. Chayey Adam explains that it isn't considered a dvar aved to have to spend more for a service that was necessary and would cost more after the moed. It is only considered a loss to permit buying and selling but not to permit melacha. Chelek Levi argues that it is a dvar aved even with respect to melacha and certainly for a non-Jewish worker. Ramban (Piskei Chol Hamoed) seems to be a proof for Chelek Halevi. Gra on 539:9 quotes this Ramban who doesn't distinguish between buying and writing, which is a melacha.</ref>

==Links==

*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/834054/Rabbi_Elchanan_Adler/Contemporary_Applications_of_Hilchos_Chol_HaMoed Contemporary Applications of Hilchos Chol HaMoed] by Rabbi Elchanan Adler
*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/733780/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Hilchos_Chol_Hamoed Hilchos Chol Hamoed] by Rabbi Hershel Schachter

==Related Pages==

*[http://www.halachipedia.com/documents/5775/Chol_HaMoed_Packet.pdf Chol Hamoed Packet]

==Sources==
{{Reflist|2}}
<references />
{{Holidays}}
[[Category:Holidays]]
[[Category:Pesach]]
[[Category:Sukkot]]

Kriyat HaTorah

2024-08-19T01:18:59Z

Bchernigoff: grammar

Kriyat Hatorah (heb. קריאת התורה; trans. reading the Torah) refers to the mitzvah of reading the Torah publicly on Mondays, Thursdays, Shabbat and holidays.
[[Image:Kriyat_hatorah.png|200px|right]]
==Taking out the Sefer Torah==
===Peticha (Opening the Ark)===

#The honor of opening the Aron (Ark) and passing the Sefer Torah to the Shaliach Tzibur or the one who is going to carry it is a great honor and not automatically granted to the Shaliach Tzibbur.<ref>Rama 147:2 citing the Mordechai. Mishna Brurah 147:15 comments that when someone performs Peticha, he passes the Sefer Torah to the Shaliach Tzibbur, who then carries it to the Bimah.</ref>
#When opening the parochet (curtain) of the Aron, it's acceptable to move the curtain either from left to right or from right to left. Some say that it's best to open the parochet from left to right.<ref>Perisha 128:23 writes that the concept of always moving from left to right (reference Zevachim 62b) only applies to when you have to turn, but not if you're simply moving in a straight line. According to this logic, one can open the curtain of the Aron in either direction. Bear Moshe 5:38:1 agrees with the Perisha. However, he recommends that if a new shul opens that they should institute the practice to open the parochet from left to right in order to satisfy the view that you need to turn to the right even when things are in a straight line. (The concept of lighting Chanuka candles doesn't seem to fit this model). </ref>
#There is a minhag to give Peticha to someone who's wife is in her ninth month of pregnancy.<ref>Kaf Hachaim cited by Dirshu 147</ref>
#There is a minhag to give Peticha to a man who is getting married that upcoming week or recently got married.<ref>Dirshu 147</ref>

===Hotza'ah (Removing the Sefer Torah)===
# The minhag is to recite Barich Shemey while removing the Sefer Torah from the Aron.<Ref>Mishna Brurah 134:13</ref> Some say it before the Torah is taken out,<ref>[https://halachablog.com/2016/11/10/the-prayer-of-brich-shmei-%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9A-%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%94/ Halachablog] quoting the minhag of Sephardim and the Munkatcher Rebbe</ref> while others say it only after the Torah is taken out.<ref>[https://halachablog.com/2016/11/10/the-prayer-of-brich-shmei-%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9A-%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%94/ Halachablog] quoting Igrot Moshe 4:70 and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/726345/rabbi-hershel-schachter/lesser-known-laws-of-torah-reading/ Rav Hershel Schachter]</ref> Sephardim recite barich shemey when the sefer Torah is still in the Aron and the Torah is opened.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Maamar Mordechai 2:13)</ref>
#The minhag is to kiss the Sefer Torah when it is carried out of the Aron but one shouldn't touch the Siddur to the Sefer Torah and kiss that since it is appears as though you're using the Siddur as an extension of your hand in a disrespectful way.<ref>Rav Chaim Kanievsky (quoted by Ohel Yakov Kavod Ukedushat Sefarim p. 1)</ref>
#If the Sefer Torah taken out of the Aron is not in the right place, it should be rolled to the right place. One should not return it to the Aron and take out the Torah which is rolled to the right place.<ref>Igrot Moshe OC 2:37 writes that if they took out the wrong Sefer Torah, there is a dispute between earlier poskim whether or not it's considered disrespectful to return it back to the Aron, as people may think that it's invalid. The Gemara (Yoma 70a) says that it's forbidden to use two Sifrei Torah for one aliyah since people will think that the first one is invalid. However, this concern doesn't exist when switching Sifrei Torah between aliyot. Based on this, one can argue that if they haven't yet started reading the Torah, that's the equivalent of being between aliyot, and there's no concern of appearing invalid if they switch it for the other Sefer Torah. On the other hand, since they didn't read from this Sefer Torah at all, it might give off the impression that it's invalid. Rav Moshe concludes that one who follows either opinion has what to rely upon. However, if the congregation doesn't mind, then they should roll it as opposed to returning it. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer OC 8:15:4 and Halacha Brurah 144:5 agree.</ref> Some poskim hold that it's better to return the Sefer Torah to the Aron and take out the one which is already rolled to the right spot.<ref>Mayim Chayim Mashash 2:19 notes that although this issue is a debate amongst the poskim, it's nonetheless better to return the Sefer Torah, since rolling it in public isn't respectful to the congregation's time (tircha d'tzibura), and beyond this, people will engage in idle and frivolous chatter while waiting. </ref>
# Some observe a very old minhag not to take out a Sefer Torah twice in one shul for two different minyanim.<ref>Mishpatei Shmuel 3 writes that once the shul already davened and read from the Torah, another minyan of people shouldn't daven in the same shul with the same Torah, because it might look like they're invalidating the Torah and the first reading didn't count. Alternatively, it isn't respectful to have a second minyan in one shul when they should have joined with the first one. Knesset Hagedola (Hagahot Hatur 144:3) cites this.</ref>

==Hagbah (Raising the Torah)==
===When to Do Hagbah===
#There is a mitzvah when taking out a Sefer Torah for kriyat hatorah to open it up and show it to the whole congregation.<ref>Masechet Sofrim 14:14</ref> Ashkenazim do this after kriyat hatorah and Sephardim do it beforehand.<ref>Shulchan Aruch and Rama O.C. 134:2</ref>
#In some Sephardic communities, they carry the Sefer Torah from the Aron to the Bimah while it is open so that everyone can see it better. Other Sephardic communities have the minhag of having it closed while it's taken out.<ref>Vayisbor Yosef 5:9 cites the Halachot Ketanot 2:255 and Rav Shmuel Meyuchas (Tefillah 12:5) as saying that minhag Yerushalayim was to carry the Sefer Torah to the Bimah with it open so that more people could see it. Vayisbor Yosef quotes many sources regarding this minhag and establishes that this was the minhag in Israel and Syria but not in Egypt. Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Toldot no. 16) writes that the minhag Baghdad was to carry it open and then do another hagbah when the Sefer Torah got to the Bimah. Yabia Omer OC 7:16 writes that this was the minhag of Yerushalayim.</ref>
#There is no hagbah on the Sefer Haftarah (the scroll used for the Haftarah) and it shouldn't be open when brought to the bimah.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 7:16 explains that the reason we perform Hagbah is so that everyone can see the letters in the Sefer Torah. There is no need for this by the Haftarah, so we don't carry the Sefer Haftarah while it's open. Rav Ovadia concludes that if there is a community with a minhag to carry out the Sefer Haftarah while it's open, if they won't listen to stop their minhag, then they can continue to follow their practice. </ref>
#Some Sephardim have the minhag to carry the Sefer Torah back to the aron closed<ref>Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Toldot no. 16)</ref> and some have the minhag to carry it back open.<ref>Yaskil Avdi 8:24:5:3, Yabia Omer 7 OC 16</ref>
===How to Do Hagbah===
#During Hagbah, the Sefer Torah should be opened so that three columns are seen. However, it depends on the strength of the one doing Hagbah (Magbiyah); if he's stronger then he can open it more than three columns, and if he's weaker then he can open less than three columns.<ref>The Mishna Brurah 134:8 quotes the Magen Avraham who says that the sefer torah should be opened so that 3 columns can be seen. The Magen Avraham suggests that 3 is specific. Mishna Brurah concludes that it all depends on the strength of the Magbiyah. If he's strong he can do more than 3 columns and if he's weaker less than 3. Bikarei Shemo 14:14 p. 241 suggests that the reason 3 columns should be open is because doing so is an expression of kavod hatorah to see it wide open.</ref> Sephardim only open the Sefer Torah as much as it opens, which is generally around one column, and that fulfills the obligation.<ref>Halacha Brurah end of 134:19 writes that Sephardim open the Sefer Torah only so much as the case can open. It isn't a concern that it isn't opened to 3 columns and it is similar to the Mishna Brurah 134:8 who says a weak person doesn't need to open the sefer to 3 columns.</ref>
#While performing Hagbah, it is permitted to touch the Atzei Chayim (wooden poles) of the Sefer Torah. Some are strict not to, and if one is stringent in this matter to hold the atzei chayim with a tallit or cloth, he should do so in a inconspicuous manner so others don't notice.<ref>The Bach 147:1 writes that it's forbidden to directly hold the atzei chayim of the Sefer Torah. Rather, one should hold them using a cloth or a tallit. The Mishna Brurah 147:2 writes that the halacha is that it's permitted to touch the atzei chayim. He adds that someone who is stringent should only do so in an inconspicuous fashion, as others might perceive his stringency as him being pretentious (mechzi k'yehura). Chazon Ish (cited by Dirshu 147:4) holds that it is permitted to hold the atzei chayim and that one doesn't need to be strict. </ref>
#During Hagbah, some people turn to the right and then to the left so that everyone can see the letters of the Sefer Torah,<ref>Masechet Sofrim 14:14 rights that one should show the open Sefer Torah to the right and to the left. Shulchan Aruch 134:2 codifies this. Mishna Halachot 11:103 writes that the minhag is just to turn to the right and to the left, and there is no need to turn completely around.</ref> while others turn to the right in a full circle.<ref>Beer Sheva (Shevuot 15b s.v. umzeh) explains that the Hagbah should be done performed while turning around coutnerclockwise.

Shevet Halevi 9:26 writes that it is best to turn all the way around with the Sefer Torah and cites the Mishna Brurah as a support. Orchot Rabbenu (v. 3 p. 216) writes that the Chazon Ish would turn around completely, first turning to the right and going counterclockwise. For example, if the shul is towards the east he faces the east, south, west, north, and east again. Then he would turn to the right again. See Mishna Brurah 134:9.</ref>
#Ashkenazim have the Magbiyah (the person doing Hagbah) raise the Sefer Torah so that the words are facing towards him, and he raises it high so that it is seen above his head behind him.<ref>Rama 147:4, Mishna Brurah 147:16</ref> Sephardim do it such that the words are facing the people looking at the Sefer Torah.<ref>Bach 134 writes that the Maharam held that Hagbah should be with the Sefer Torah facing the people. Maamar Mordechai 134:1 disagrees. Halacha Brurah 134:20 writes that the Sephardic minhag is to turn the words of the Sefer Torah to the congregation. Baruch Hashem siman 20 agrees because he proves from Eruvin 97b that the greatest way to honor a Sefer is to have it open for the public to read and turning it to the Magbiyah is less respectful. A similar idea is found in Minchat Yechiel 2:85 who writes that it is always an honor to the Torah to have it facing the people. That is the way it is placed in the Aron, the way it should be carried to the Bimah, and the way it sits on the Bimah. That's symbolized with the concept of "Yaar Hashem Panav Eylecha," that Hashem's countenance should face you. </ref>

===Who Should Do Hagbah===
#The honor of Hagbah is very great and the reward for it is tantamount to the reward for all of those who got aliyot combined. Therefore, the honor should be given to the greatest Talmid Chacham present.<ref>Gemara Megillah 32a, Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1. Even though the Shulchan Aruch writes that the honor should be given to the greatest of those who got an aliyah today, the Mishna Brurah 147:6 writes that the minhag today is to give the Hagbah to the greatest in the shul.</ref> If someone buys the honor he has first rights.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1, Mishna Brurah 147:8</ref>
#Someone weak or has shaky hands shouldn't do Hagbah. He should turn down the honor. Also, the gabbay shouldn't give Hagbah to such a person.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:7</ref>
===What to Do during Hagbah===
#During Hagbah the congregation looks at the writing of the Sefer Torah<ref>Mishna Brurah 134:12 clarifies that וזאת התורה is only recited for seeing the writing in the sefer torah.</ref> and says "וזאת התורה אשר שם משה לפני בני ישראל".<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 134:2</ref> This applies to men as well as women in shul at the time of hagbah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Lisha Ulbat 9:38)</ref>
#During psukei dzimra, birchot kriyat shema, or shema a person should not interrupt for hagbah. Rather he should look at the torah and think about the pasuk of וזאת התורה.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 134:8</ref> If he's in between psukei dzimra and brachot kriyat shema he can recite the pasuk for hagbah as usual.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 51:14</ref>
#If someone is in the middle of putting on tefillin of rabbenu tam when they do hagbah they should stop to answer וזאת התורה.<Ref>Vayivarech Dovid (Tefillin p. 45) writes that a person should interrupt putting on tefillin of rabbenu tam to recite the pasuk of וזאת התורה during hagbah.</ref>

==Gelilah==
===Who Should do Gelilah===
#Even though in theory it is possible for the same person to do both Hagbah and Gelilah as was the custom in the days of the Gemara,<ref>Rashi Megillah 32a</ref> today the minhag is to have one person do Hagbah, and someone else do Gelilah.<ref>Bet Yosef 147:4 citing the Maharik, Mishna Brurah 147:17</ref>
#The honor of Gelilah is very great, but is nevertheless generally given to children to get them to practice mitzvot.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:7</ref>
#The honor of passing the ''gartel'' (belt around the Sefer Torah) and ''mantel'' (cloth on the Sefer Torah) to the person who does Gelilah, is a separate honor from the actual performance of Gelilah. If someone were to buy Gelilah, they don't automatically acquire the honor of passing the ''gartel'' and ''mantel''.<ref>Mordechai end of Megillah cited by Bet Yosef 147:2, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:2</ref>
===How to Do Gelilah===
#During Gelilah, the words of the Sefer Torah should face the Magbiyah, not the one doing Gelilah.<ref>Mahari Ibn Chaviv in Bet Yosef 147:4, Rama 147:4, Mishna Brurah 18. Mahari Ibn Chaviv explains that once the Magbiyah didn't it the Sefer Torah shouldn't be turned around for the benefit of the golel since it isn't respectful to have the Sefer Torah turned for the convenience of a person.</ref>
#The ''gartel'' is wrapped around the Sefer Torah so that the knot, buckle, or velcro latch that opens and closes is attached in front of the words of the Sefer Torah. This way the next time the Sefer Torah is opened it can opened up with the words facing upward and the latch unfastened without having to flip over the Sefer Torah onto its back disrespectfully.<ref>Tosfot Megillah 32a citing Rabbenu Chananel, Rosh cited by Bet Yosef 147:4, Tur, and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:4, Mishna Brurah 147:18</ref>

==Touching the Klaf of a Sefer Torah==
#It is forbidden to touch the klaf (parchment) of a Sefer Torah barehanded. Even merely touching it briefly is forbidden.<ref>Gemara Megillah 32a, Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 23:4, Mishna Brurah 147:1</ref> A sofer who needs to touch the klaf in order to fix it may do so.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:1</ref> However, some say that one only needs to be careful not to touch the parchment of a Sefer Torah while it's being read or between Aliyot.<ref>Ben Ish Chai S"S Toledot 18 </ref>
#It is forbidden to touch the klaf even after washing one's hands.<ref>The Mordechai, cited by Bet Yosef 147:1, permits touching a Sefer Torah after having washed one's hands. The Rama 147:1 rules that it is forbidden to touch a sefer torah even after washing one's hands. Mishna Brurah 147:4 agrees with Rama.</ref>
#According to many Rishonim, it is forbidden to touch the klaf of a book of Navi or Ketuvim that was written with ink on a klaf.<ref>Bet Yosef 147:1 citing the Agudah, Rama 147:1 is strict. However, Birkei Yosef 147:1 citing Shev Yakov 11 is lenient.</ref> However, the minhag is that one may touch the klaf he has washed his hands. For example, for Megillat Esther, the minhag is to touch the klaf after having washed one's hands.<ref>Rama 147:1 and Mishna Brurah 147:3</ref>
#A person should be very careful while doing Gelilah not to touch the klaf directly. If the klaf needs to be straightened, then one should do so while holding the klaf with a tallit or cloth.<ref>Gemara Megillah 32a states that someone who touches the klaf of a Sefer Torah with their bare hands will be buried bare. The Gemara is troubled by this and instead concludes that he will be buried without the mitzvah that he was involved with at that time. Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1 codify this halacha. Mishna Brurah 147:2 gives as an example that if the klaf isn't straight and needs to be fixed it can be done with the use of a tallit or cloth.</ref>
#It is permitted to touch other Seforim that aren't written on a Klaf with one's bare hands. However, if one's hands are dirty, then he shouldn't touch the Sefer until he cleans his hands.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:3</ref>

==Reading the Torah (Getting an Aliyah)==
===Who Can get an Aliya===
====Women====
#Women may not receive aliyot.<ref>Gemara Megillah 23a. The Gemara explains that the issue with women receiving Aliyot is "kavod ha'tzibbur", the dignity of the congregation. Bet Yosef 53 writes that a congregation can be mochel on their kavod with respect to having a child be shaliach tzibur. Bach argues. [https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?v=77736 Rav Yitzchak Yosef (Motzei Shabbat Ki Tisa 5779 min 21)] explained that even though according to the precise halakha women can receive aliyot, practically speaking they cannot because of the fifth volume of Shulchan Aruch.</ref>

====Child====

#Some poskim permit giving an aliya to a child who is old enough to understand who he is blessing. The child may even count among the seven.<ref>Yechave Daat 4:23</ref> Other poskim write that a child may only receive Maftir.<ref>Mishna Brura 282:12, Mikor Chaim 3: pg. 110, [http://tvunah.org/%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%AA-%D7%A7%D7%98%D7%9F-%D7%9C%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94/ Rav Osher Weiss]</ref>

====Blind====
#There is much discussion about a blind person receiving an aliya.<ref>see [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/853127/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/ten-minute-halacha-may-a-blind-person-get-an-aliya-/ May a Blind Person Get an Aliya] by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz</ref> The minhag in most Sephardic communities is to allow it.<ref>See Tzitz Eliezer 11:10</ref>
====Non-observant====
# One should not give an aliyah to someone who publicly violates Shabbat.<ref>Igrot Moshe 4:91:8</ref>

===Order of Priority in Giving Out Aliyot===

#There's is a mitzvah to give the Cohen the first Aliyah and the honor of doing [[Zimmun]].<ref>Gittin 59b and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 144:8</ref> Similarly, it is forbidden to use a Cohen for a personal task. However, if the Cohen foregoes his honor, it is permitted.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 144:9</ref>
#If there's no Levi and there is a Kohen in Shul, the Kohen who received the first Aliyah should also receive the second Aliyah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 135:8</ref>
#The following is the order of those who should receive an Aliyah:
##A groom on the day of his wedding,
##a groom on the [[Shabbat]] before his wedding, provided that this is his first marriage
##a bar mitzvah boy on the [[Shabbat]] after his bar mitzvah
##a sandak who holds the baby for the Milah
##a sandak who carries baby in for the Milah
##the husband of a woman who gave birth to a girl if the mother comes to shul
##the husband of a woman who gave birth to a boy if the mother comes to shul
##a groom on the [[Shabbat]] after his wedding if the wedding was on Wednesday or later in the week, provided that this is the first marriage of either the groom or the bride
##a person with [[Yahrzeit]] for a parent on that day
##the father of a boy who is going to have a Milah that day
##a person with a [[Yahrzeit]] in the coming week
##a mohel who performed a Milah that day
##a sandak on the [[Shabbat]] before the Milah
##the father of the boy on the [[Shabbat]] before the Milah
##the mohel of the baby on the [[Shabbat]] before the Milah<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 78:11. For more detailed lists see Magen Avraham 282:18 and Biur Halacha 136 s.v. Beshabbat. </ref>
#If there is a double parsha, the gabbai should ensure that the parshiyot are connected with the fourth Aliyah.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 78:3</ref>
#If a Yisrael takes the first aliyah when a Cohen is in the shul, some poskim hold that it doesn't count towards the count of Aliyot needed, while others hold it does count.<ref>Pri Chadash 135:6 holds that the aliyah of a yisrael in place of a Cohen doesn't count for an aliyah based on Gittin 59b. However, the Nodeh BeYehuda OC 2:14 argues that it counts and the gemara only meant that it is a common misconception. Mishna Brurah 135:20 and Halacha Brurah 135 accept the Nodeh Beyehuda.</ref>

===Father and Son Receiving Consecutive Aliyot===
# A father and son, as well as two brothers, should not receive an aliyah one after another because of Ayin Hara.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 141:6 based on Kolbo</ref>
# Some say that the same is true of a grandfather and grandson. However, in a case of need, it is permitted.<ref>Mishna Brurah 141:19</ref>
# It is permitted for a father and son to receive two consecutive aliyot in two Sifrei Torah, such as Chatan Torah and Chatan Bereshit.<ref>Mishna Brurah 141:20 writes that it is permitted to give a father and son two aliyot back to back in two sifrei torah, such as when Maftir is from a second Sefer Torah. Dirshu on Mishna Brurah 141:19 cites numerous poskim who are lenient in the case of Chatan Torah and Chatan Bereshit. </ref>
# If the congregation's minhag is that the person who receives the aliyah is not called up by name, then a father and son, or two brothers, can be called up for consecutive aliyot, as there is no ayin hara.<ref>Rama 141:6, Mishna Brurah 141:21</ref>
#Ideally, a father and son as well as two brothers shouldn't receive hagbah and gelilah together. However, if they were already called up, then it is permitted. If the congregation's minhag is that those who perform hagbah and gelilah are not called up by name, nor is a mi shaberech recited using their names, then it is permitted for a father and son, and two brothers, to do hagbah and gelilah.<ref>https://www.yeshiva.org.il/ask/113897</ref>

==Hosafot (Additional Aliyot)==
#The custom among Sefaradim is to add many aliyot on Shabbat and Holidays. However, Ashkenazim only add aliyot on [[Simchat Torah]].<ref> Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 282:1,2</ref>
#Some have the minhag not to add any aliyot when there’s a double parsha.<ref>Nefesh Harav p. 139 cites Rav Moshe Solovietchik that one shouldn't add any hosafot when there's a double parsha to avoid the dispute of how they should be added.</ref>
#On Mondays and Thursdays there are no additional aliyot.<ref> Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 135:1. Taz 135:1 cites the Gemara which explains that since people need to get to work, it's inappropriate to add aliyot and delay them. </ref> However if there are two grooms or two fathers who will be performing a [[brit milah]], the custom among Ashkenazim is to add a fourth aliya.<ref> Rama Orach Chayim 135:1</ref>

===Repeating Aliyot===

#One shouldn't repeat pesukim one just read for one aliyah for another aliyah, rather one should read new pesukim or add on new pesukim.<ref>Rama 282:2, Mishna Brurah 282:10 and Aruch HaShulchan 282:8. Although Shulchan Aruch 282:2 permits this, the Kaf HaChaim 282:19 writes that one shouldn't do so, though a community which has such a practice has what to rely upon. See Shu"t Heichal Yitzchak (Orach Chaim Siman 6),
Yabia Omer (vol. 6 Orach Chaim Siman 26:4, vol. 9 Orach Chaim Siman 27), and Chazon Ovadia (Shabbat vol. 2 page 222). See Nehar Mitzrayim (Orach Chaim Hilchot Tefilah) for a humorous anecdote about how the Egyptian community used to go overboard with extra aliyot when there was a Simcha, and then make the Chazzan recite Mussaf beKol Ram (and omit the silent Shemoneh Esrai) because of the lateness of the hour. The first time Chacham Refael Aharon ben Shimon experienced this as Rav of a Kehillah, he went over to the Baal Simcha who was attempting to persuade the Shaliach Tzibbur to do Mussaf beKol Ram and told him that "You gave everyone else an Aliyah. Now Hashem wants one, too." After that,
there was no more Mussaf beKol Ram in his shul.</ref>
#Even those who are lenient to allow repeating pesukim for an aliyah don't consider it to be one of the seven aliyot of Shabbat.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 137:6, Mishna Brurah 282:9, Aruch HaShulchan 282:8</ref>

==Procedure When Going up to the Torah==
===Brachot===

#Before receiving an aliya, a person should recite the bracha of אשר בחר בנו מכל העמים ונתן לנו את תורתו ברוך אתה ה' נותן התורה.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 139:8</ref>
#After receiving an aliya, a person should recite the bracha אשר נתן לנו תורת אמת וחיי העולם נטע בתוכינו ברוך אתה ה' נותן התורה.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 139:10. Ramban Niddah 51b s.v. ha explains that even though generally there's no bracha for completing a mitzvah which you have a mitzvah to continue since there's no bracha for a sin but for completing kriyat hatorah which is a takana of the rabbis there is a bracha after completing the mitzvah.</ref>
#A person should make sure to recite the brachot aloud so that at least ten people can hear them and answer amen.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 139:6 writes that the brachot need to recited be aloud, and if they aren't then some say that they need to be repeated. Biur Halacha s.v. vehabrachot concludes that although it is reasonable that they need to be heard by ten people so that it is considered a bracha in a congregation, after the fact, even if ten people didn't hear the bracha, they don't need to be repeated.</ref>
#If a person made a mistake and said the bracha of Asher Natan Lanu before the Aliyah, then he can correct it by saying the bracha of Asher Bachar Banu after the Aliyah.<ref>Mishna Brurah 139:15 citing the Magen Avraham</ref>

===Pointing to the Place===
# If the baal koreh started in the wrong place and they need to roll the sefer torah, Ashkenazim hold that a new bracha is necessary before starting the aliyah, since the oleh didn't have in mind the reading in the other place. If the wrong place was within what they were going to read today, but it was just beyond where they were supposed to start, some poskim hold that one doesn't have to recite a new bracha. Therefore, one who doesn't recite a bracha in that case has what to rely on.<ref>Mishna Brurah 140:9. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 140:3 quotes two opinions about whether a new bracha is necessary when the oleh intended that the aliyah would begin in one place and it came out that it was a mistake and the sefer needs to be rolled. </ref> Sephardim hold that in all cases one doesn't make a new bracha.<ref>Kaf HaChayim on Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 140:15 writes that we apply the principle of safek brachot lhakel even though it is unlike the standard ruling of following the second opinion in Shulchan Aruch.</ref>
# If the baal koreh started in the wrong place but it was just in another spot in the same column or an adjacent column that was revealed when the sefer was opened before the bracha, a new bracha is not necessary. If the other spot was earlier than the necessary spot, it is preferable to start from where the oleh thought the aliyah should have started and continue until the point where the aliyah actually needs to begin, and then read a few more pesukim from there.<ref>Mishna Brurah 140:9</ref>
# For example if the baal koreh started with נשא את ראש בני קהת instead of נשא את ראש בני גרשון, and they needed to roll the sefer torah to get to the right place, Ashkenazim hold that the oleh needs to make a new bracha, while Sephardim hold that one should not recite a new bracha.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21647&st=&pgnum=153 Tikkun Yisachar] writes that it once happened in his shul that the baal koreh started at the last aliya of bamidbar instead of the beginning of parshat naso. He required the oleh to recite a new bracha. He adds that Rav Yosef Karo was in attendance and he didn't protest. Yikra Dtzibura p. 194 cites that Chida (Ldovid Emet 6:62) and Rav Ovadia Yosef in his comments on Mikrei Kodesh Hilchot Kriyat Hatorah hold in this case that we would not require a new bracha.</ref>

===Reading Along with the Baal Koreh===
#Someone who receives an aliyah should read along with the baal koreh quietly.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 141:2, Yechave Daat 4:11 based on Rosh Megilla 3:1 and 10</ref>
# It is permitted for the one receiving the aliyah to be the baal koreh himself, and you don't have to worry that someone will feel embarrassed that he doesn't know how to lein and he needs the baal koreh, since at some points even those who know how to lein will ask the baal koreh to read.<ref>Igrot Moshe OC 4:91:7</ref>

===The Proper Way to Hold the Sefer Torah===

#When one is called to the Torah for an Aliya, he should hold onto the Sefer Torah while reciting the Beracha. See note for proper procedure.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 139:11. Rabbi Yosef Chaim (Ben Ish Chai Parashat Toledot Halacha 18) elaborates on the details of how precisely one should hold the Torah. He writes that when one is called to the Torah, he should first look at the text and see the first verse that will be read. He should then cover the writing with a cloth, and the text should remain covered until after the Beracha. While reciting the Beracha, one should hold onto the Torah scroll, his right hand should hold onto the right scroll, and his left hand should hold the left scroll. One should hold the Torah itself, and not the casing. As it is improper to directly touch the parchment, one should hold the Torah with a cloth, such as his Tallit. After completing the Beracha, one should remove his left hand from the Torah but continue holding the Torah with his right hand. He should continue holding onto the Torah with his right hand throughout the reading of the Torah. The Ben Ish Hai notes that this procedure is based upon the teachings of the Arizal, as written in Sha’ar Ha’kavanot. </ref>
#It is forbidden to hold onto to the parchment of the sefer torah without an intervening cloth, whether one is involved with rolling the sefer torah during kriyat hatorah or any other time.<ref>[[Megillah]] 32a says that a person who holds the parchment of a sefer torah without a covering of his hands he doesn't receive reward for the mitzvah he did while holding onto the sefer torah. Chazon Ovadyah ([[Shabbat]] vol 2, p. 266) writes that its forbidden to hold onto the parchment during kriyat hatorah or at any other time.</ref>

==Behavior During the Torah Reading==
===Listening to the Kriyat HaTorah===

#Even if the baal koreh pronounces the words in another dialect than one usually uses, such as an Ashekanzi listening to a Sephardi baal koreh, one fulfills one's obligation. The only times for which one should be strict to hear the Kriyat Hatorah from someone who uses the same pronunciation as oneself is Parshat Zachor and Parshat Parah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 282:15</ref>

===Standing for Kriyat HaTorah===

#It’s permissible to sit during Kriyat HaTorah<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 146:4 </ref> and that is the minhag. Some are strict to stand during Kriyat HaTorah, so as to hear it as if one is receiving it from Har Sinai when Bnei Yisrael were standing.<ref>Rama 146:4 cites that this was the practice of the Maharam m'Rutenberg. Mishna Brurah 176:19 quotes the Bach who explains that even the Maharam agrees that standing is not strictly speaking a requirement.</ref> Nonetheless, one who has difficulty standing and cannot focus on the leining should sit.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:19</ref>
#During [[Barchu]] and Baruch HaMiverech LeOlam VeEd one should stand.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:18 writes that everybody agrees that one must stand at this point because it's a davar she’bekedusha.</ref> However, many don’t stand, and this practice has what to rely on.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:18-20, Piskei Teshuvot 146:6. See Ba'er Heitiv 146:5 who quotes Magen Avraham that one should stand for brachot hatorah and the Shaar HaTziyun 146:20 who disagrees. One would have thought it would be required to stand for the entire Torah reading just as we stand for any davar sh’be’kedusha (i.e. Kaddish, Barechu, and other parts of the service that require a minyan). However, Beit Hillel explain that since the Torah says regarding Kriat Shema “uvi’lechtecha va’derech” (Devarim 6:7), one may recite the Shema in any position (in Berachot 10a). By extension, Rav Soloveitchik thought that the same could be applied to any recital of psukim from the Torah and even during the berachot before the kriat ha’torah that one may listen in any position ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/802935/rabbi-hershel-schachter/inyonei-krias-hatorah/ Rav Schachter on yutorah.org “Inyonei Krias Hatorah” min. 56]). This is recorded in Nefesh Harav p. 124. However, see Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:141 who quotes the Brikser Rav who comes to an opposite conclusion that one must stand. Piskei Tshuvot 146:6 quotes from Rav Chayim Vital who testifies about the Arizal that he would always sit during the leining and the Barechu preceding the leining.</ref>
#One may not stand in a shul where the local rabbi sits because it appears presumptuous (Mechzi [[Yuhara]]).<ref>Rabbi Hershel Schachter in a [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/802935/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Inyonei_Krias_Hatorah# shiur on yutorah.org "Inyonei Krias HaTorah"] (min 55) based on Baba Kama 86b where it says that any talmid who observes a midat chasidut which his rebbi doesn’t observe in the presence of his rebbi deserves to be excommunicated. See also Yalkut Yosef 145:12</ref>
#One should face the Sefer Torah during kriyat hatorah and not have one's back to the Torah.<ref>Rambam (Talmud Torah 10:10), Shulchan Aruch YD 282:1. [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/726345/rabbi-hershel-schachter/lesser-known-laws-of-torah-reading/ Rav Schachter (Hilchot Kriyat HaTorah II:10)] writes that some hold that if one doesn't face the kriyat hatorah one doesn't fulfill one's obligation.</ref>

====Standing for Aseret Hadibrot====
#Some have the custom to stand for the Aseret Hadibrot.<ref>The [[Rambam]] (Sh"t Harambam Siman 46) writes that we should prevent others from following the custom to stand, because there is a concern that allowing people to stand will lead to a lack of Emunah. There is a concern that people might come to believe that the Aseret Hadibrot are more significant than the other psukim in the Torah, and this is why we stand for them. (This is similar to why Chazal abolished the recitation of the Aseret Hadibrot on a daily basis, as recorded on Berachot 12a. Rashi s.v. mipnei explains that people were led to believe that only this section of the Torah was given by Hashem, and thus Chazal did away with saying it every day). The [[Chida]] writes that since we read the Torah every Shabbat, we demonstrate that the entire Torah is true and we need not fear that people might think that the Aseret Dibrot are more significant than other pesukim in the Torah. Additionally, Rav Hershel Schachter ([http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2010/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html The Aseres Hadibros]) writes that the fact that we read the pesukim differently (i.e. by stopping after each dibur as if there is a sof passuk) is an indication that we are attempting to reenact Ma'amad Har Sinai, and not grant the Aseret Hadibrot more significance. </ref> This is the prevalent Ashkenazic custom.<ref>Sh"t Igrot Moshe OC 4:22. Siddur Beit Yaakov, Shaarei Ephraiim, and the Chida (all quoted in Dirshu 494:3) had this custom. This custom is based on the idea that we strive to remember and even emulate the manner in which the Aseret Hadibrot were given at Har Sinai. Just as at Har Sinai the entire Jewish nation stood in awe and even trembled, so too, when we read the Aseret Hadibrot in shul, many stand in an effort to re-reexperience Matan Torah. See, however, R’ Elyashiv (in his shiurim on Berachot 12a), who writes that the Rambam is truly correct that one should not stand. 
See [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/741705/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/ten-minute-halacha-standing-for-the-reading-of-aseres-hadibros/ Ten Minute Halacha: Standing for the reading of aseres hadibros] by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz for more background</ref> However, the Sephardic Minhag is not to stand for Aseret HaDibdrot,<ref>Yalkut Yosef 145-6:12 and 14, Shu"t Yechave Daat 1:29, Rav Chaim David Halevi in Shu"t Aseh Lecha Rav 6:21, [https://jewishlink.news/features/18941-standing-for-the-aseret-hadibrot-not-at-a-sephardic-kehilla Rabbi Chaim Jachter ]. Chacham Ovadia Yosef (Yechave Daat 1:29 and Yalkut Yosef 145:12 writes that one should stop others from standing specifically for the Aseret Hadibrot. All the more so, if someone decides to stand in a place where there are many Talmidei Chachamim who know the halacha and sit, one should stop him, as the person standing will otherwise be perceived as haughty. Chacham Ovadia concludes that many poskim who permit standing simply lost the teshuva of the [[Rambam]].</ref> except among Moroccans, who do stand.<ref>Rabbi Shalom Messas (Shemesh U'magen [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21372&st=&pgnum=151 1:57], [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21291&pgnum=114 3:55:3]) defends the practice to stand even for Sephardim. [http://www.moroccanhalacha.com/standing-for-the-ten-commandments/ Rabbi Mordechai Lebhar ]writes that this is the prevalent custom for Moroccans. (Magen Avot, Orach Chaim 1:5)</ref> Others recommend giving the aliya to the rabbi so that everyone will stand anyway.<ref>Ish Matzliach 5: page 200 </ref>
# If one typically stands for the reading of the Torah throughout the rest of the year, there is certainly no issue with standing during the reading of the aseret hadibrot.<ref>The issue that the Rambam raised is simply not relevant if one stands during the leining all year, as no one will come to think that certain psukim are more important than others. Also, see Rav Hershel Schachter ([http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2010/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html The Aseres Hadibros]) </ref>
# Some hold that in a shul where many people stand for the Aseret Hadibrot, one should nonetheless remain seated so as to teach others the proper practice.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (in his shiurim on Berachot 12a) writes the Rambam is truly correct that one should not stand, and, therefore, even if everyone is standing, one should remain sitting because everyone else is acting incorrectly.</ref> Nonetheless, others argue that one should join the practice of others around him and stand even if it is typically his custom to sit.<ref>Chacham Ovadia Yosef (Chazon Ovadia Yom Tov pg. 314). Dirshu Mishna Brura 494:3 quotes Sh"t Dvar Shmuel and Avuhav 276 that in a place where everyone stands you should not stop this practice, because the intent is clear that people are trying to beautify their mitzvah performance as if they are going to greet the Shechina. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach writes that since everyone knows that we are standing as a zecher le’ma'amad har sinai we should not stop people who stand. Since we also stand for other portions of the Torah such as Shirat Ha’yam we therefore need not be concerned. 
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein writes (O.C 4:22) that although logically it would seem to make sense to forbid people to stand, since on a practical level it has never happened that heretics have convinced Jews who are not knowledgeable that some pesukim in the Torah are more important than others, we are therefore permitted to stand. Thus, if you are coming from a place where they never stood and you arrive at a place where everyone is standing you should join them.</ref> Some suggest that, in this scenario, he should stand from the beginning of the parsha or at least from the beginning of the aliya so as not to give off the impression that the psukim of the Aseret Hadibrot are more important than the rest of the Torah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (145:14) writes that an individual who is in a shul in which they stand and he does not have the ability to change the practice of the shul should ensure to stand from the beginning of the Torah reading or at the very least from the moment the person called up for the aliya of the Aseret Hadibrot lest he end up sitting amongst everyone else who is standing which will be perceived as a disgrace to the Kedusha of the Aseret Hadibrot.</ref>

===Talking During Kriyat HaTorah===

#From the time the Sefer Torah is opened to make the [[Brachot HaTorah]], it is forbidden to speak at all even words of Torah. Giving a halachic ruling is forbidden unless it’s in order to prevent someone from doing a prohibition and it’s impossible to signal to him.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 146:2, Mishna Brurah 146:4-5 </ref>
#Someone who speaks during Kriyat HaTorah is culpable of serious transgressions including disgracing Torah by ignoring the Torah, making a Chilul Hashem, potentially [[Lashon Hara]], Rechilut or other forbidden speech, speaking mundane words in a shul, and the punishments include having one’s [[Tefillah]] discarded and a trangession that’s too great to bear.<ref>Beiur Halacha 146 s.v. VeHaNachon </ref>
#Even between Aliya’s it’s forbidden to talk but it’s permissible to learn [[Shenayim Mikra VeEchad Targum]] and some permit learn other things, yet others emphasize not to learn with someone else between Aliya’s because it may continue into Kriyat HaTorah.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:6, 15 </ref>
#It is forbidden to talk during the haftara as well.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:4 </ref>

===Learning Torah During Kriyat HaTorah===

#It is forbidden to learn Torah during kriyat hatorah. The only permissible way to learn is if: (a) one already heard Kriyat HaTorah (or one will hear another [[minyan]]), (b) there are ten others who are listening to Kriyat HaTorah, (c) one is sitting on the side and facing away from the congregation, indicating that he already heard Kriyat HaTorah, (d) one already was learning before the Sefer Torah was open, and (e) one is learning quietly.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 146:2, Aruch Hashulchan 146:5, Piskei Teshuvot 146:4.
*The Gemara Sotah 39a establishes that it is forbidden to learn in the middle of kriyat hatorah, however, the rishonim try to explain how why Rav Sheshet was allowed to turn his face away and learn during kriyat hatorah as recorded in Brachot 8a. Tosfot (Brachot 8a s.v. Rav Sheshet) says that he learned quietly. The Rif (Megillah 14b) answers that he learned all the time and as such he was exempt from certain mitzvot (torato umanuto). The Rosh Brachot 1:7 cites both opinions. Rabbenu Yonah (Brachot 4a s.v. Rav Sheshet) writes that if he turns away his face before they start kriyat hatorah then he can learn since he is indicating that he isn't involved with kriyat hatorah now (and he going to fulfill that obligation another time). The Bahag (cited by Rif Megillah 14b) holds that in all cases it is only permitted to learn if there are already ten people listening to the kriyat hatorah. The Shulchan Aruch 146:2 cites all four of the above opinions. Mishna Brurah 146:9 cites the Eliya Rabba that today we don't have someone who learns all the time (torato umanuto). The Aruch Hashulchan 146:5 writes that it is only permitted to learn if one already started before they start kriyat hatorah, one turned away one's face, there are ten others who are listening to the kriyat hatorah, and one is learning quietly.</ref>
#Some say it is proper for everyone in the congregation to read along with the Baal Koreh word by word in order to listen better and have intent, while most poskim hold that it everyone should be quiet and listen intently.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:15 quoting Magen Avraham says to read along with Baal Koreh, while Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 24:3 and Piskei Teshuvot 146:5 say that it’s better to listen quietly. </ref>

==Laws for the Baal Koreh (the Reader)==
===Amen===

#Although usually one may not respond [[Amen]] louder than the blessing to which one is responding, the person reading the Torah may say [[Amen]] in a loud voice. This is acceptable because we want to alert the congregation that the reading is beginning.<ref>Sh"t Rivivot Ephraim 1:106 </ref>

===Accidentally Skipped a Word or Pasuk===

#On [[Shabbat]], if the one who read the Torah missed a word or [[Pasuk]], one needs to repeat that [[Pasuk]]. Even if the Sefer Torah was already returned to the aron, one should take out the Torah and read from the beginning of that [[Pasuk]] and two other [[Pesukim]] as well.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 137:3, Mishna Brurah 137:8. Nishmat Adam 31:1 writes that one does not need to read the pesukim in order, and if one is repeating for a missed pasuk, one doesn't need to continue to read everything afterwards in order.</ref>

===Correcting Mistakes===

#According to Sephardim, if the Baal Koreh makes a mistake, even if it doesn't change the meaning, the congregation should correct him and he should fix it. After the fact, if they already finished the aliyah, they shouldn't go back to the mistaken pasuk.<ref>The Rambam Tefillah 12:6 writes that the Baal Koreh should be corrected even for a small nuance. The Shulchan Aruch 142:1 adopts the opinion of the Rambam. Although the Mishna Brurah 142:1 implies that the Shulchan Aruch agrees with the Rama, the Kaf Hachaim 142:1 clarifies that this isn't the case. Kaf Hachaim indeed proves from the Zohar and other kabbalistic sources that every single punctuation and musical note (trup) is vital to the kriyat hatorah. (See also Mishna Brurah 143:21 that the Rama often argues with the Shulchan Aruch even without writing Yesh Omrim.) </ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, if the Baal Koreh makes a mistake, they should only correct him if it changes the meaning of the word.<ref>The Rambam Tefillah 12:6 implies that the Baal Koreh should be corrected even if he makes a mistake on one nuance in the pasuk. However, the Tur 142:1 cites the Manhig who sounds like you don't have to correct the Baal Koreh at all. The Mahari Ibn Chaviv (cited by Bet Yosef 142:1) proposes a compromise based on the Rosh. The Baal Koreh only needs to be corrected if the mistake changes the meaning of the word. The Rama 142:1 rules like the Mahari Ibn Chaviv.</ref>
#Just as the Baal Koreh has to be careful not to make mistakes, the one who receives the Aliyah needs to be vigilant as well.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 142:1</ref>

==When is Kriyat Hatorah Over?==
# When is there is an obligation to do Kriyat Hatorah? On Mondays, Thursdays, and Shabbat afternoons there is an obligation to do Kriyat Hatorah with 3 aliyot, on Rosh Chodesh and Chol Hamoed 4 aliyot, on Yom Tov 5 aliyot, on Yom Kippur 6 aliyot, and on Shabbat 7 aliyot.<ref>Mishna Megillah 21a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 135:1, O.C. 423:1, O.C. 663:1, O.C. 488:3, O.C. 494:1, O.C. 621:1, and O.C. 282:1.</ref>
# If a congregation missed doing Kriyat Hatorah during Shacharit of Monday they can do it in the afternoon at [[Mincha]] or afterwards,<ref>Mishna Brurah 135:1, Piskei Teshuvot 135:3. Mishna Brurah explains that essentially the mitzvah of Kriyat Hatorah applies all day. Piskei Teshuvot further supports this from the Goren Dovid OC 5, Mahari Asad 51, Teshuva Mahava 29, Maharshag 2:92, Bet Shaarim OC 50, Pri Hasadeh 3:1, Bet Yisrael 20, Shevet Halevi 4:15, 5:16, Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:145, and Tzitz Eliezer 13:27. He cites that once the Chatom Sofer was traveling and missed Kriyat Hatorah Shacharit of Monday and made it up at mincha. He summarizes that the poskim notes that it is only permitted after the fact that it wasn't possible for an extenuating circumstance they couldn't do it in the morning.</ref> however, they can not make it up on Tuesday.<ref>Ateret Zekenim 135:1 writes that it is possible to make up Kriyat Hatorah on Tuesday if the congregation missed it on Monday. However, the Eliyah Rabba 135:2 disagrees since we only make up Kriyat Hatorah of Shabbat since we miss an entire parsha and not Monday and Thursday which we complete on Shabbat either way. Biur Halacha 135:2 s.v. Shabbat and Yalkut Yosef 135:3 concur with the Eliyah Rabba. Halacha Brurah 135:6 agrees that it is impossible to make up Kriyat Hatorah of Monday on Tuesday. He quotes many that hold this way as well including Pri Megadim E"A 135:4, Machasit Hashekel 135:4, Birkei Yosef 135:2, Ldovid Emet 9:1, Emet Lyakov (Taut Kriyat Hatorah 1), Magen Giborim E"H 135:4, Maharil Diskin (Kuntres Acharon 5:8), Kaf Hachaim 135:8, Yabia Omer OC 4:17:7, and Aruch Hashulchan 135:7.</ref>
# If the congregation missed Kriyat Hatorah on Shabbat morning, most poskim hold that they can make it up Shabbat afternoon with 7 aliyot before mincha, while others hold that it can't be made up.<reF>Dagul Mirvava 135:2 holds that one can make up the Kriyat Hatorah of the morning on Shabbat in the afternoon. Shaar Hatziyun 135:3 extrapolates from there to making up on a Monday and Thursday afternoon. However, Chida in Chaim Shaal 2:16 disagrees and thinks that one may not make up a Kriyat Hatorah in the afternoon at all since it wasn't an establishment of chazal to read a whole parsha in the afternoon. Yabia Omer 4:17:5 and Halacha Brurah 135:5 accept the Chida and apply it to Monday and Thursday as well. The language of Yabia Omer's conclusion is that it is better not to do the Kriyat Hatorah and be passive, however, someone who does has what to rely upon.</ref>

==Mi Sheberach==

#When reciting the name of the person in a Mi sheberach, the minhag is to recite the person's name and his mother's name (ploni ben plonit).<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 368), Yabia Omer OC 2:11. He cites several reasons for this minhag. 1) The identification of the mother is usually more certain than the father (Zohar Lech Lecha p. 84a, Kaf Hachaim 284:37, Maharshal in Chachmat Shlomo Shabbat 66b). Also, so as not to embarrass a child of a Jewish mother and a non-Jewish father, we always mention the mother's name (Yafeh Lelev 3:605). 2) It is hinted to in the pasuk of "והושיעה לבן אמתך" (Tehillim 86:16) and "ואני עבדך בן אמתך" (Tehillim 116:16) (Zohar ibid., Melamed Lhoil OC 1:23). 3) Chazal said that symbolically the flesh comes from a person's mother, and one's bones from one's father. Therefore, while a person is alive the Mi sheberach is made using the mother's name and after he's dead we use the father's name (Rashi Kiddushin 30b, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pagefeed/hebrewbooks_org_41862_170.pdf Mekor Chesed 242:1]). 4) It is more effective to pray for mercy using the mother's name since she isn't accountable for bitul torah (Ben Yehoyada Brachot 55b). </ref> If the mother's name isn't known, you can use the father's name for a Mi sheberach.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 2:11:5</ref>
#In a hashkava (Sephardic prayer for a deceased person, similar to Kel Maleh for Ashkenazim), Ashkenazim mention the name of a person's father and the Sephardic custom is to mention the mother's name.<ref>Melamed Lhoil 1:23, Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 368) based on Shabbat 66b, Kaf Hachaim 284:37, Yabia Omer 2:11.</ref>

==Haftarah (Haftorah)==
===Brachot on the Haftarah===
#One does not answer [[amen]] after the words Neemarim BeEmet but only after VeTzedek.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:3</ref>
#At the end of the closing brachot of the Haftarah, according to Sephardim, the maftir should answer Amen to his own bracha.<ref>Yerushalmi Brachot Perek 7, quoted by Rif Brachot 33b and Rosh 7:11. Ritva Hilchot Brachot 6:5, Pekudat HaLeviim (Ra’ah) Brachot 45b, Birkeh Yosef OC 215:1, Yosef Ometz 68, Ben Ish Hai vol. 1 Masei Seif 14, Kaf HaChaim OC 215:1, Yechave Daat 2:23, Yabia Omer vol. 8 OC 25:10 and vol 9 OC 108:102, Ohr LeTzion vol. 2 page 134, Halichot Olam vol. 2 page 130, Birkat Hashem vol. 1 6:18. See [[Answering_Amen_to_Your_Own_Bracha]]</ref>

===The Type of Book to Read the Haftarah From===
#The best thing to use for Haftorah is a handwritten complete sefer of Navi.<ref>Gemara Gittin 60b, Magen Avraham 284:1. See however, Yachava Daat 5:26 who questions whether it is really better since once it was permitted once in history because it was impossible otherwise perhaps that halachic leniency is canonized. In fact, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1725&st=&pgnum=207 Chikrei Lev 1:57] holds that once it was permitted to write an incomplete sefer the leniency continues and that's why the minhag is not to use a complete sefer. </ref>
#Some poskim hold that it is better to use a handwritten Haftorah sefer instead of a printed complete Tanach.<ref>Rav Ovadia in Yachava Daat 5:26 holds that it is better to use a handwritten haftorah sefer instead of a printed Tanach since it has more kedusha as many poskim hold printing a sefer isn't considered ketiva. Chazon Ish 60:11 (cited by Dirshu) held that there's no preference for a printed tanach than an incomplete sefer since a printed tanach is made of separate pages and is considered a sefer that chazal wouldn't warrant to write. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shulchan Shlomo 284:1, cited by Dirshu) holds that it is better to use a sefer haftorah than a printed Chumash. See Rav Poalim 4:33 who writes that a sefer haftorot is an invalid sefer and once it is invalid it doesn't matter if it is invalid in one way or multiple ways. See also [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1725&st=&pgnum=208 Chikrei Lev 1:57]. </ref> Some hold it is better to use a printed Tanach rather than a handwritten Haftorah sefer.<ref>Magen Avraham 284:1 writes that it is better to use a printed Tanach or complete sefer of Navi rather than a chumash with printed haftorah. He explains that it is better since a printed sefer is considered a properly written sefer and therefore if it is complete it is warranted by chazal. Taz 284:2 also agrees that printing is like ketiva.</ref>
===The Text to Read for the Haftarah===
#If it is a double parsha, the Haftorah comes from the second parsha.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:6</ref>
===Proper Conduct During the Haftarah Reading===
#One may not speak when the maftir is reading the Haftorah.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:4</ref>
#If the haftorah is being read from a complete handwritten sefer only the maftir should read it and everyone should listen. However, if they are using a printed sefer or a handwritten incomplete sefer such as a Haftorah sefer, the maftir should read the Haftorah aloud and the rest of the congregation should read along quietly. If one is still in the middle of the Haftorah and the Maftir finished the Haftorah, one should pause and listen to the [[Brachot]].<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:5.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Rabba and Rav Yosef in Gemara Gittin 60a state that one can't read from a Sefer Haftorot since it isn't supposed to be written since it isn't a complete Sefer of Tanach. However, the Gemara concludes that it is permitted since it is otherwise impossible for every congregation to have a complete set of Navi klafim handwritten. Why shouldn't you read it if it isn't shouldn't be written? The Meiri seems that once the rabbis said it was forbidden to write they also didn't want people to read from it once it was written. However, the Ritva Gittin 60a explains that since the incomplete sefer shouldn't be written reading from it is like reading pesukim by heart, which is forbidden. Similarly, the Chatom Sofer O.C. 1:68 explains that reading from an incomplete sefer is forbidden just like reading by heart since both of them are forms of transmitting Torah that could lead to mistakes. According to that approach, assuming like Tosfot Temurah 14b s.v. devarim it is forbidden to read from an incomplete sefer for others. Tosfot Temurah holds that one could read pesukim by heart for oneself but not to exempt others. Gra 49:2 holds that opinion is correct. Magen Avraham 49:1 is concerned for that opinion. Accordingly, Chatom Sofer concludes that if they are reading the haftorah from an incomplete sefer the congregation should read to themselves. Gra in Maaseh Rav n. 136 and Mishna Brurah 284:11 agree with that logic.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Ritva and Meiri write that the halacha is that it is permitted to write an incomplete sefer because of Et Laasot LaHashem. Kol Bo siman 20 quotes the Rashba who writes that one can read the haftorah from an incomplete sefer. Bet Yosef 284:1 quotes this.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Magen Avraham 284:5 quotes the Arizal who said that a person should read the haftorah to oneself and listen to the brachot. Pri Megadim E"A 284:5 points out that everyone should read along quietly and listen to the congregational reading otherwise if no one listens to the congregational reading and just reads silently it isn't a reading of a tzibur. Maaseh Rav n. 136 also makes it clear that one should read word by word with the Shaliach Tzibur. </ref> Some say that the minhag is that everyone just listens quietly irrelevant of what it is being read from.<ref>Chatom Sofer O.C. 1:68 agrees with the approach of the Arizal and Gra to read along quietly but adds that the minhag is that everyone listens without reading along.</ref>

==Links==

*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/802935/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Inyonei_Krias_Hatorah# Inyonei Krias Hatorah] by Rav Herschel Schachter

==Sources==
<references />

{{Prayers}}
[[Category:Shabbat]]
[[Category:Prayer]]

Kriyat HaTorah

2024-08-18T23:26:08Z

Bchernigoff: /* Touching the Klaf of a Sefer Torah */

Kriyat Hatorah (heb. קריאת התורה; trans. reading the Torah) refers to the mitzvah of reading the Torah publicly on Mondays, Thursdays, Shabbat and holidays.
[[Image:Kriyat_hatorah.png|200px|right]]
==Taking out the Sefer Torah==
===Peticha (Opening the Ark)===

#The honor of opening the Aron (Ark) and passing the Sefer Torah to the Shaliach Tzibur or the one who is going to carry it is a great honor and not automatically granted to the Shaliach Tzibbur.<ref>Rama 147:2 citing the Mordechai. Mishna Brurah 147:15 comments that when someone performs Peticha, he passes the Sefer Torah to the Shaliach Tzibbur, who then carries it to the Bimah.</ref>
#When opening the parochet (curtain) of the Aron, it's acceptable to move the curtain either from left to right or from right to left. Some say that it's best to open the parochet from left to right.<ref>Perisha 128:23 writes that the concept of always moving from left to right (reference Zevachim 62b) only applies to when you have to turn, but not if you're simply moving in a straight line. According to this logic, one can open the curtain of the Aron in either direction. Bear Moshe 5:38:1 agrees with the Perisha. However, he recommends that if a new shul opens that they should institute the practice to open the parochet from left to right in order to satisfy the view that you need to turn to the right even when things are in a straight line. (The concept of lighting Chanuka candles doesn't seem to fit this model). </ref>
#There is a minhag to give Peticha to someone who's wife is in her ninth month of pregnancy.<ref>Kaf Hachaim cited by Dirshu 147</ref>
#There is a minhag to give Peticha to a man who is getting married that upcoming week or recently got married.<ref>Dirshu 147</ref>

===Hotza'ah (Removing the Sefer Torah)===
# The minhag is to recite Barich Shemey while removing the Sefer Torah from the Aron.<Ref>Mishna Brurah 134:13</ref> Some say it before the Torah is taken out,<ref>[https://halachablog.com/2016/11/10/the-prayer-of-brich-shmei-%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9A-%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%94/ Halachablog] quoting the minhag of Sephardim and the Munkatcher Rebbe</ref> while others say it only after the Torah is taken out.<ref>[https://halachablog.com/2016/11/10/the-prayer-of-brich-shmei-%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9A-%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%94/ Halachablog] quoting Igrot Moshe 4:70 and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/726345/rabbi-hershel-schachter/lesser-known-laws-of-torah-reading/ Rav Hershel Schachter]</ref> Sephardim recite barich shemey when the sefer Torah is still in the Aron and the Torah is opened.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Maamar Mordechai 2:13)</ref>
#The minhag is to kiss the Sefer Torah when it is carried out of the Aron but one shouldn't touch the Siddur to the Sefer Torah and kiss that since it is appears as though you're using the Siddur as an extension of your hand in a disrespectful way.<ref>Rav Chaim Kanievsky (quoted by Ohel Yakov Kavod Ukedushat Sefarim p. 1)</ref>
#If the Sefer Torah taken out of the Aron is not in the right place, it should be rolled to the right place. One should not return it to the Aron and take out the Torah which is rolled to the right place.<ref>Igrot Moshe OC 2:37 writes that if they took out the wrong Sefer Torah, there is a dispute between earlier poskim whether or not it's considered disrespectful to return it back to the Aron, as people may think that it's invalid. The Gemara (Yoma 70a) says that it's forbidden to use two Sifrei Torah for one aliyah since people will think that the first one is invalid. However, this concern doesn't exist when switching Sifrei Torah between aliyot. Based on this, one can argue that if they haven't yet started reading the Torah, that's the equivalent of being between aliyot, and there's no concern of appearing invalid if they switch it for the other Sefer Torah. On the other hand, since they didn't read from this Sefer Torah at all, it might give off the impression that it's invalid. Rav Moshe concludes that one who follows either opinion has what to rely upon. However, if the congregation doesn't mind, then they should roll it as opposed to returning it. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer OC 8:15:4 and Halacha Brurah 144:5 agree.</ref> Some poskim hold that it's better to return the Sefer Torah to the Aron and take out the one which is already rolled to the right spot.<ref>Mayim Chayim Mashash 2:19 notes that although this issue is a debate amongst the poskim, it's nonetheless better to return the Sefer Torah, since rolling it in public isn't respectful to the congregation's time (tircha d'tzibura), and beyond this, people will engage in idle and frivolous chatter while waiting. </ref>
# Some observe a very old minhag not to take out a Sefer Torah twice in one shul for two different minyanim.<ref>Mishpatei Shmuel 3 writes that once the shul already davened and read from the Torah, another minyan of people shouldn't daven in the same shul with the same Torah, because it might look like they're invalidating the Torah and the first reading didn't count. Alternatively, it isn't respectful to have a second minyan in one shul when they should have joined with the first one. Knesset Hagedola (Hagahot Hatur 144:3) cites this.</ref>

==Hagbah (Raising the Torah)==
===When to Do Hagbah===
#There is a mitzvah when taking out a Sefer Torah for kriyat hatorah to open it up and show it to the whole congregation.<ref>Masechet Sofrim 14:14</ref> Ashkenazim do this after kriyat hatorah and Sephardim do it beforehand.<ref>Shulchan Aruch and Rama O.C. 134:2</ref>
#In some Sephardic communities, they carry the Sefer Torah from the Aron to the Bimah while it is open so that everyone can see it better. Other Sephardic communities have the minhag of having it closed while it's taken out.<ref>Vayisbor Yosef 5:9 cites the Halachot Ketanot 2:255 and Rav Shmuel Meyuchas (Tefillah 12:5) as saying that minhag Yerushalayim was to carry the Sefer Torah to the Bimah with it open so that more people could see it. Vayisbor Yosef quotes many sources regarding this minhag and establishes that this was the minhag in Israel and Syria but not in Egypt. Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Toldot no. 16) writes that the minhag Baghdad was to carry it open and then do another hagbah when the Sefer Torah got to the Bimah. Yabia Omer OC 7:16 writes that this was the minhag of Yerushalayim.</ref>
#There is no hagbah on the Sefer Haftarah (the scroll used for the Haftarah) and it shouldn't be open when brought to the bimah.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 7:16 explains that the reason we perform Hagbah is so that everyone can see the letters in the Sefer Torah. There is no need for this by the Haftarah, so we don't carry the Sefer Haftarah while it's open. Rav Ovadia concludes that if there is a community with a minhag to carry out the Sefer Haftarah while it's open, if they won't listen to stop their minhag, then they can continue to follow their practice. </ref>
#Some Sephardim have the minhag to carry the Sefer Torah back to the aron closed<ref>Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Toldot no. 16)</ref> and some have the minhag to carry it back open.<ref>Yaskil Avdi 8:24:5:3, Yabia Omer 7 OC 16</ref>
===How to Do Hagbah===
#During Hagbah, the Sefer Torah should be opened so that three columns are seen. However, it depends on the strength of the one doing Hagbah (Magbiyah); if he's stronger then he can open it more than three columns, and if he's weaker then he can open less than three columns.<ref>The Mishna Brurah 134:8 quotes the Magen Avraham who says that the sefer torah should be opened so that 3 columns can be seen. The Magen Avraham suggests that 3 is specific. Mishna Brurah concludes that it all depends on the strength of the Magbiyah. If he's strong he can do more than 3 columns and if he's weaker less than 3. Bikarei Shemo 14:14 p. 241 suggests that the reason 3 columns should be open is because doing so is an expression of kavod hatorah to see it wide open.</ref> Sephardim only open the Sefer Torah as much as it opens, which is generally around one column, and that fulfills the obligation.<ref>Halacha Brurah end of 134:19 writes that Sephardim open the Sefer Torah only so much as the case can open. It isn't a concern that it isn't opened to 3 columns and it is similar to the Mishna Brurah 134:8 who says a weak person doesn't need to open the sefer to 3 columns.</ref>
#While performing Hagbah, it is permitted to touch the Atzei Chayim (wooden poles) of the Sefer Torah. Some are strict not to, and if one is stringent in this matter to hold the atzei chayim with a tallit or cloth, he should do so in a inconspicuous manner so others don't notice.<ref>The Bach 147:1 writes that it's forbidden to directly hold the atzei chayim of the Sefer Torah. Rather, one should hold them using a cloth or a tallit. The Mishna Brurah 147:2 writes that the halacha is that it's permitted to touch the atzei chayim. He adds that someone who is stringent should only do so in an inconspicuous fashion, as others might perceive his stringency as him being pretentious (mechzi k'yehura). Chazon Ish (cited by Dirshu 147:4) holds that it is permitted to hold the atzei chayim and that one doesn't need to be strict. </ref>
#During Hagbah, some people turn to the right and then to the left so that everyone can see the letters of the Sefer Torah,<ref>Masechet Sofrim 14:14 rights that one should show the open Sefer Torah to the right and to the left. Shulchan Aruch 134:2 codifies this. Mishna Halachot 11:103 writes that the minhag is just to turn to the right and to the left, and there is no need to turn completely around.</ref> while others turn to the right in a full circle.<ref>Beer Sheva (Shevuot 15b s.v. umzeh) explains that the Hagbah should be done performed while turning around coutnerclockwise.

Shevet Halevi 9:26 writes that it is best to turn all the way around with the Sefer Torah and cites the Mishna Brurah as a support. Orchot Rabbenu (v. 3 p. 216) writes that the Chazon Ish would turn around completely, first turning to the right and going counterclockwise. For example, if the shul is towards the east he faces the east, south, west, north, and east again. Then he would turn to the right again. See Mishna Brurah 134:9.</ref>
#Ashkenazim have the Magbiyah (the person doing Hagbah) raise the Sefer Torah so that the words are facing towards him, and he raises it high so that it is seen above his head behind him.<ref>Rama 147:4, Mishna Brurah 147:16</ref> Sephardim do it such that the words are facing the people looking at the Sefer Torah.<ref>Bach 134 writes that the Maharam held that Hagbah should be with the Sefer Torah facing the people. Maamar Mordechai 134:1 disagrees. Halacha Brurah 134:20 writes that the Sephardic minhag is to turn the words of the Sefer Torah to the congregation. Baruch Hashem siman 20 agrees because he proves from Eruvin 97b that the greatest way to honor a Sefer is to have it open for the public to read and turning it to the Magbiyah is less respectful. A similar idea is found in Minchat Yechiel 2:85 who writes that it is always an honor to the Torah to have it facing the people. That is the way it is placed in the Aron, the way it should be carried to the Bimah, and the way it sits on the Bimah. That's symbolized with the concept of "Yaar Hashem Panav Eylecha," that Hashem's countenance should face you. </ref>

===Who Should Do Hagbah===
#The honor of Hagbah is very great and the reward for it is tantamount to the reward for all of those who got aliyot combined. Therefore, the honor should be given to the greatest Talmid Chacham present.<ref>Gemara Megillah 32a, Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1. Even though the Shulchan Aruch writes that the honor should be given to the greatest of those who got an aliyah today, the Mishna Brurah 147:6 writes that the minhag today is to give the Hagbah to the greatest in the shul.</ref> If someone buys the honor he has first rights.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1, Mishna Brurah 147:8</ref>
#Someone weak or has shaky hands shouldn't do Hagbah. He should turn down the honor. Also, the gabbay shouldn't give Hagbah to such a person.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:7</ref>
===What to Do during Hagbah===
#During Hagbah the congregation looks at the writing of the Sefer Torah<ref>Mishna Brurah 134:12 clarifies that וזאת התורה is only recited for seeing the writing in the sefer torah.</ref> and says "וזאת התורה אשר שם משה לפני בני ישראל".<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 134:2</ref> This applies to men as well as women in shul at the time of hagbah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Lisha Ulbat 9:38)</ref>
#During psukei dzimra, birchot kriyat shema, or shema a person should not interrupt for hagbah. Rather he should look at the torah and think about the pasuk of וזאת התורה.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 134:8</ref> If he's in between psukei dzimra and brachot kriyat shema he can recite the pasuk for hagbah as usual.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 51:14</ref>
#If someone is in the middle of putting on tefillin of rabbenu tam when they do hagbah they should stop to answer וזאת התורה.<Ref>Vayivarech Dovid (Tefillin p. 45) writes that a person should interrupt putting on tefillin of rabbenu tam to recite the pasuk of וזאת התורה during hagbah.</ref>

==Gelilah==
===Who Should do Gelilah===
#Even though in theory it is possible for the same person to do both Hagbah and Gelilah as was the custom in the days of the Gemara,<ref>Rashi Megillah 32a</ref> today the minhag is to have one person do Hagbah, and someone else do Gelilah.<ref>Bet Yosef 147:4 citing the Maharik, Mishna Brurah 147:17</ref>
#The honor of Gelilah is very great, but is nevertheless generally given to children to get them to practice mitzvot.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:7</ref>
#The honor of passing the ''gartel'' (belt around the Sefer Torah) and ''mantel'' (cloth on the Sefer Torah) to the person who does Gelilah, is a separate honor from the actual performance of Gelilah. If someone were to buy Gelilah, they don't automatically acquire the honor of passing the ''gartel'' and ''mantel''.<ref>Mordechai end of Megillah cited by Bet Yosef 147:2, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:2</ref>
===How to Do Gelilah===
#During Gelilah, the words of the Sefer Torah should face the Magbiyah, not the one doing Gelilah.<ref>Mahari Ibn Chaviv in Bet Yosef 147:4, Rama 147:4, Mishna Brurah 18. Mahari Ibn Chaviv explains that once the Magbiyah didn't it the Sefer Torah shouldn't be turned around for the benefit of the golel since it isn't respectful to have the Sefer Torah turned for the convenience of a person.</ref>
#The ''gartel'' is wrapped around the Sefer Torah so that the knot, buckle, or velcro latch that opens and closes is attached in front of the words of the Sefer Torah. This way the next time the Sefer Torah is opened it can opened up with the words facing upward and the latch unfastened without having to flip over the Sefer Torah onto its back disrespectfully.<ref>Tosfot Megillah 32a citing Rabbenu Chananel, Rosh cited by Bet Yosef 147:4, Tur, and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:4, Mishna Brurah 147:18</ref>

==Touching the Klaf of a Sefer Torah==
#It is forbidden to touch the klaf (parchment) of a Sefer Torah barehanded. Even merely touching it briefly is forbidden.<ref>Gemara Megillah 32a, Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 23:4, Mishna Brurah 147:1</ref> A sofer who needs to touch the klaf in order to fix it may do so.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:1</ref> However, some say that one only needs to be careful not to touch the parchment of a Sefer Torah while it's being read or between Aliyot.<ref>Ben Ish Chai S"S Toledot 18 </ref>
#It is forbidden to touch the klaf even after washing one's hands.<ref>The Mordechai, cited by Bet Yosef 147:1, permits touching a Sefer Torah after having washed one's hands. The Rama 147:1 rules that it is forbidden to touch a sefer torah even after washing one's hands. Mishna Brurah 147:4 agrees with Rama.</ref>
#According to many Rishonim, it is forbidden to touch the klaf of a book of Navi or Ketuvim that was written with ink on a klaf.<ref>Bet Yosef 147:1 citing the Agudah, Rama 147:1 is strict. However, Birkei Yosef 147:1 citing Shev Yakov 11 is lenient.</ref> However, the minhag is that one may touch the klaf he has washed his hands. For example, for Megillat Esther, the minhag is to touch the klaf after having washed one's hands.<ref>Rama 147:1 and Mishna Brurah 147:3</ref>
#A person should be very careful while doing Gelilah not to touch the klaf directly. If the klaf needs to be straightened, then one should do so while holding the klaf with a tallit or cloth.<ref>Gemara Megillah 32a states that someone who touches the klaf of a Sefer Torah with their bare hands will be buried bare. The Gemara is troubled by this and instead concludes that he will be buried without the mitzvah that he was involved with at that time. Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1 codify this halacha. Mishna Brurah 147:2 gives as an example that if the klaf isn't straight and needs to be fixed it can be done with the use of a tallit or cloth.</ref>
#It is permitted to touch other Seforim that aren't written on a Klaf with one's bare hands. However, if one's hands are dirty, then he shouldn't touch the Sefer until he cleans his hands.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:3</ref>

==Reading the Torah (Getting an Aliyah)==
===Who Can get an Aliya===
====Women====
#Women may not receive aliyot.<ref>Gemara Megillah 23a. The Gemara explains that the issue with women receiving Aliyot is "kavod ha'tzibbur", the dignity of the congregation. Bet Yosef 53 writes that a congregation can be mochel on their kavod with respect to having a child be shaliach tzibur. Bach argues. [https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?v=77736 Rav Yitzchak Yosef (Motzei Shabbat Ki Tisa 5779 min 21)] explained that even though according to the precise halakha women can receive aliyot, practically speaking they cannot because of the fifth volume of Shulchan Aruch.</ref>

====Child====

#Some poskim permit giving an aliya to a child who is old enough to understand who he is blessing. The child may even count among the seven.<ref>Yechave Daat 4:23</ref> Other poskim write that a child may only receive Maftir.<ref>Mishna Brura 282:12, Mikor Chaim 3: pg. 110, [http://tvunah.org/%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%AA-%D7%A7%D7%98%D7%9F-%D7%9C%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94/ Rav Osher Weiss]</ref>

====Blind====
#There is much discussion about a blind person receiving an aliya.<ref>see [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/853127/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/ten-minute-halacha-may-a-blind-person-get-an-aliya-/ May a Blind Person Get an Aliya] by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz</ref> The minhag in most Sephardic communities is to allow it.<ref>See Tzitz Eliezer 11:10</ref>
====Non-observant====
# One should not give an aliyah to someone who publicly violates Shabbat.<ref>Igrot Moshe 4:91:8</ref>

===Order of Priority in Giving Out Aliyot===

#There's is a mitzvah to give the Cohen the first Aliyah and the honor of doing [[Zimmun]].<ref>Gittin 59b and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 144:8</ref> Similarly, it is forbidden to use a Cohen for a personal task. However, if the Cohen foregoes his honor, it is permitted.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 144:9</ref>
#If there's no Levi and there is a Kohen in Shul, the Kohen who received the first Aliyah should also receive the second Aliyah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 135:8</ref>
#The following is the order of those who should receive an Aliyah:
##A groom on the day of his wedding,
##a groom on the [[Shabbat]] before his wedding, provided that this is his first marriage
##a bar mitzvah boy on the [[Shabbat]] after his bar mitzvah
##a sandak who holds the baby for the Milah
##a sandak who carries baby in for the Milah
##the husband of a woman who gave birth to a girl if the mother comes to shul
##the husband of a woman who gave birth to a boy if the mother comes to shul
##a groom on the [[Shabbat]] after his wedding if the wedding was on Wednesday or later in the week, provided that this is the first marriage of either the groom or the bride
##a person with [[Yahrzeit]] for a parent on that day
##the father of a boy who is going to have a Milah that day
##a person with a [[Yahrzeit]] in the coming week
##a mohel who performed a Milah that day
##a sandak on the [[Shabbat]] before the Milah
##the father of the boy on the [[Shabbat]] before the Milah
##the mohel of the baby on the [[Shabbat]] before the Milah<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 78:11. For more detailed lists see Magen Avraham 282:18 and Biur Halacha 136 s.v. Beshabbat. </ref>
#If there is a double parsha, the gabbai should ensure that the parshiyot are connected with the fourth Aliyah.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 78:3</ref>
#If a Yisrael takes the first aliyah when a Cohen is in the shul, some poskim hold that it doesn't count towards the count of Aliyot needed, while others hold it does count.<ref>Pri Chadash 135:6 holds that the aliyah of a yisrael in place of a Cohen doesn't count for an aliyah based on Gittin 59b. However, the Nodeh BeYehuda OC 2:14 argues that it counts and the gemara only meant that it is a common misconception. Mishna Brurah 135:20 and Halacha Brurah 135 accept the Nodeh Beyehuda.</ref>

===Father and Son Receiving Consecutive Aliyot===
# A father and son, as well as two brothers, should not receive an aliyah one after another because of Ayin Hara.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 141:6 based on Kolbo</ref>
# Some say that the same is true of a grandfather and grandson. However, in a case of need, it is permitted.<ref>Mishna Brurah 141:19</ref>
# It is permitted for a father and son to receive two consecutive aliyot in two Sifrei Torah, such as Chatan Torah and Chatan Bereshit.<ref>Mishna Brurah 141:20 writes that it is permitted to give a father and son two aliyot back to back in two sifrei torah, such as when Maftir is from a second Sefer Torah. Dirshu on Mishna Brurah 141:19 cites numerous poskim who are lenient in the case of Chatan Torah and Chatan Bereshit. </ref>
# If the congregation's minhag is that the person who receives the aliyah is not called up by name, then a father and son, or two brothers, can be called up for consecutive aliyot, as there is no ayin hara.<ref>Rama 141:6, Mishna Brurah 141:21</ref>
#Ideally, a father and son as well as two brothers shouldn't receive hagbah and gelilah together. However, if they were already called up, then it is permitted. If the congregation's minhag is that those who perform hagbah and gelilah are not called up by name, nor is a mi shaberech recited using their names, then it is permitted for a father and son, and two brothers, to do hagbah and gelilah.<ref>https://www.yeshiva.org.il/ask/113897</ref>

==Hosafot (Additional Aliyot)==
#The custom among Sefaradim is to add many aliyot on Shabbat and Holidays. However, Ashkenazim only add aliyot on [[Simchat Torah]].<ref> Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 282:1,2</ref>
#Some have the minhag not to add any aliyot when there’s a double parsha.<ref>Nefesh Harav p. 139 cites Rav Moshe Solovietchik that one shouldn't add any hosafot when there's a double parsha to avoid the dispute of how they should be added.</ref>
#On Mondays and Thursdays there are no additional aliyot.<ref> Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 135:1. Taz 135:1 cites the Gemara which explains that since people need to get to work, it's inappropriate to add aliyot and delay them. </ref> However if there are two grooms or two fathers who will be performing a [[brit milah]], the custom among Ashkinazim is to add a fourth aliya.<ref> Rama Orach Chayim 135:1</ref>

===Repeating Aliyot===

#One shouldn't repeat pesukim one just read for one aliyah for another aliyah, rather one should read new pesukim or add on new pesukim.<ref>Rama 282:2 writes that it is forbidden to repeat pesukim for one aliyah that one just read for another aliyah. Mishna Brurah 282:10 and Aruch HaShulchan 282:8 confirm this position as well. Although Shulchan Aruch 282:2 permits, the Kaf HaChaim 282:19 writes that one shouldn't do so, though a community which has such a practice has what to rely upon. See Shu"t Heichal Yitzchak (Orach Chaim Siman 6),
Yabia Omer (vol. 6 Orach Chaim Siman 26:4, vol. 9 Orach Chaim Siman 27), and Chazon Ovadia (Shabbat vol. 2 page 222). See Nehar Mitzrayim (Orach Chaim Hilchot Tefilah) for a humorous anecdote about how the Egyptian community used to go overboard with extra aliyot on a Simcha and then make the Chazzan do Mussaf beKol Ram because of the lateness of the hour. The first time Chacham Refael Aharon ben Shimon experienced this as rav of a Kehillah, he went over to the Baal Simcha who was attempting to persuade the Shaliach Tzibbur to do Mussaf beKol Ram and told him that "You gave everyone else an Aliyah. Now Hashem wants one, too." After that,
there was no more Mussaf beKol Ram in his shul.</ref>
#Even those who are lenient to allow repeating pesukim for an aliyah can't consider it to be one of the seven aliyot of Shabbat.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 137:6, Mishna Brurah 282:9, Aruch HaShulchan 282:8</ref>

==Procedure When Going up to the Torah==
===Brachot===

#Before receiving an aliya, a person should recite the bracha of אשר בחר בנו מכל העמים ונתן לנו את תורתו ברוך אתה ה' נותן התורה.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 139:8</ref>
#After getting an aliya a person should recite the bracha אשר נתן לנו תורת אמת וחיי העולם נטע בתוכינו ברוך אתה ה' נותן התורה.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 139:10. Ramban Niddah 51b s.v. ha explains that even though generally there's no bracha for completing a mitzvah which you have a mitzvah to continue since there's no bracha for a sin but for completing kriyat hatorah which is a takana of the rabbis there is a bracha after completing the mitzvah.</ref>
#A person should make sure to recite the brachot aloud so that at least ten people can hear them and answer amen.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 139:6 writes that the brachot need to be aloud and if they aren't some say that they need to be repeated. Biur Halacha s.v. vehabrachot concludes that although it is reasonable that they need to be heard by ten people so that it is considered a bracha in a congregation, after the fact even if ten people didn't hear the bracha they don't need to be repeated.</ref>
#If a person made a mistake and said the bracha of Asher Natan Lanu before the Aliyah then he can correct it by saying the bracha of Asher Bachar Banu after the Aliyah.<ref>Mishna Brurah 139:15 citing the Magen Avraham</ref>

===Pointing to the Place===
# If the baal koreh started in the wrong place and they need to roll the sefer torah, Ashkenazim hold that a new bracha is necessary before starting the aliyah since the oleh didn't have in mind the reading in another place. If the wrong place was within what they were going to read today but it was just beyond where they were supposed to start, some poskim hold that one doesn't have to recite a new bracha. Therefore, one who doesn't recite a bracha in that case has what to rely on.<ref>Mishna Brurah 140:9. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 140:3 quotes two opinions about whether a new bracha is necessary when the oleh intended that the aliyah would begin in one place and it came out that it was a mistake and sefer needs to be rolled. </ref> Sephardim hold that in all cases one doesn't make a new bracha.<ref>Kaf HaChayim on Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 140:15 writes that we apply the principle of safek brachot lhakel even though it is unlike the standard ruling of following the second opinion in Shulchan Aruch.</ref>
# If the baal koreh started in the wrong place but it was just in another spot in the same column or an adjacent column that was revealed when the sefer was opened before the bracha, a new bracha is not necessary. If the other spot was earlier than the necessary spot it is preferable to start from where the oleh thought the aliyah should have started and continue until the point where the aliyah actually needs to begin and then a few more pesukim from there.<ref>Mishna Brurah 140:9</ref>
# For example if the baal koreh started with נשא את ראש בני קהת instead of נשא את ראש בני גרשון and they needed to roll the sefer, Ashkenazim hold that the oleh needs to make a new bracha, while Sephardim hold that one should not recite a new bracha.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21647&st=&pgnum=153 Tikkun Yisachar] writes that once it happened in his shul that the baal koreh started at the last aliya of bamidbar instead of the beginning of parshat naso. He required the oleh to recite a new bracha. He adds that Rav Yosef Karo was in attendance and he didn't protest. Yikra Dtzibura p. 194 cites that Chida (Ldovid Emet 6:62) and Rav Ovadia Yosef in his comments on Mikrei Kodesh Hilchot Kriyat Hatorah hold in this case that we would not require a new bracha.</ref>

===Reading Along with the Baal Koreh===
#The one who goes up to the torah should read along with the baal koreh quietly.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 141:2, Yechave Daat 4:11 based on Rosh Megilla 3:1 and 10</ref>
# It is permitted for the one getting the aliyah to be the baal koreh himself and you don't have to worry that someone will feel embarrassed that he doesn't know how to lein and he needs the baal koreh since at some points even those who know how to lein will ask the baal koreh to read.<ref>Igrot Moshe OC 4:91:7</ref>

===The Proper Way to Hold the Sefer Torah===

#When one is called to the Torah for an Aliya, he should hold onto the Sefer Torah while reciting the Beracha. See note for proper procedure.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 139:11. Rabbi Yosef Chaim (Ben Ish Chai Parashat Toledot Halacha 18) elaborates on the details of how precisely one should hold the Torah. He writes that when one is called to the Torah, he should first look at the text and see the first verse that will be read. He should then cover the writing with a cloth, and the text should remain covered until after the Beracha. While reciting the Beracha, one should hold onto the Torah scroll, his right hand should hold onto the right scroll, and his left hand should hold the left scroll. One should hold the Torah itself, and not the casing. As it is improper to directly touch the parchment, one should hold the Torah with a cloth, such as his Tallit. After completing the Beracha, one should remove his left hand from the Torah but continue holding the Torah with his right hand. He should continue holding onto the Torah with his right hand throughout the reading of the Torah. The Ben Ish Hai notes that this procedure is based upon the teachings of the Arizal, as written in Sha’ar Ha’kavanot. </ref>
#It is forbidden to hold onto to the parchment of the sefer torah without an intervening cloth, whether one is involved with rolling the sefer torah during kriyat hatorah or any other time.<ref>[[Megillah]] 32a says that a person who holds the parchment of a sefer torah without a covering of his hands he doesn't receive reward for the mitzvah he did while holding onto the sefer torah. Chazon Ovadyah ([[Shabbat]] vol 2, p. 266) writes that its forbidden to hold onto the parchment during kriyat hatorah or at any other time.</ref>

==Behavior During the Torah Reading==
===Listening to the Kriyat HaTorah===

#Even if the baal koreh pronounces the words in another dialect than one usually uses, such as an Ashekanzi listening to a Sephardi baal koreh, one fulfills one's obligation. The only times for which one should be strict to hear the Kriyat Hatorah from someone who uses the same pronunciation as oneself is Parshat Zachor and Parshat Parah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 282:15</ref>

===Standing for Kriyat HaTorah===

#It’s permissible to sit during Kriyat HaTorah<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 146:4 </ref> and that is the minhag. Some are strict to stand during Kriyat HaTorah so as to hear it as if one is receiving it from Har Sinai when Bnei Yisrael were standing.<ref>Rama 146:4 cites that this was the practice of the Maharam. Mishna Brurah 176:19 quotes the Bach who explains that even the Maharam agrees that, strictly speaking, standing is not required.</ref> Nonetheless, one who has difficulty standing and therefore cannot focus on the leining should sit.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:19</ref>
#During [[Barchu]] and Baruch HaMiverech LeOlam VeEd one should stand.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:18 writes that according to everyone, one must stand at this point because this is a davar she’bekedusha</ref> However, many don’t stand and the minhag has what to rely on.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:18-20, Piskei Teshuvot 146:6. See Ba'er Heitiv 146:5 who quotes Magen Avraham that one should stand for brachot hatorah and the Shaar HaTziyun 146:20 who disagrees. One would have thought it would be required to stand for the entire Torah reading just as we stand for any davar sh’be’kedusha (i.e. Kaddish, Barechu, and other parts of the service that require a minyan). However, Beit Hillel explain that since the Torah says regarding Kriat Shema “uvi’lechtecha va’derech” (Devarim 6:7), one may recite the Shema in any position (in Berachot 10a). By extension, Rav Soloveitchik thought that the same could be applied to any recital of psukim from the Torah and even during the berachot before the kriat ha’torah that one may listen in any position ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/802935/rabbi-hershel-schachter/inyonei-krias-hatorah/ Rav Schachter on yutorah.org “Inyonei Krias Hatorah” min. 56]). This is recorded in Nefesh Harav p. 124. However, see Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:141 who quotes the Brikser Rav who comes to an opposite conclusion that one must stand. Piskei Tshuvot 146:6 quotes from Rav Chayim Vital who testifies about the Arizal that he would always sit during the leining and the Barechu preceding the leining.</ref>
#One may not stand in a shul where the local rabbi sits because of acting arrogantly ([[Yuhara]]).<ref>Rabbi Hershel Schachter in a [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/802935/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Inyonei_Krias_Hatorah# shiur on yutorah.org "Inyonei Krias HaTorah"] (min 55) based on Baba Kama 86b where it says that any talmid who observes a midat chasidut which his rebbi doesn’t observe in the presence of his rebbi deserves to be excommunicated. See also Yalkut Yosef 145:12</ref>
#One should face the Sefer Torah during kriyat hatorah and not have one's back to the Torah.<ref>Rambam (Talmud Torah 10:10), Shulchan Aruch YD 282:1. [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/726345/rabbi-hershel-schachter/lesser-known-laws-of-torah-reading/ Rav Schachter (Hilchot Kriyat HaTorah II:10)] writes that some hold that if one doesn't face the kriyat hatorah one doesn't fulfill one's obligation.</ref>

====Standing for Aseret Hadibrot====
#Some have the custom to stand for the Aseret Hadibrot.<ref>The [[Rambam]] (Sh"t Harambam Siman 46) writes that we should prevent others from following the custom to stand because there is a concern that allowing people to stand will lead to a lack of Emunah in the sense that people might come to believe that the Aseret Hadibrot are more significant than the other psukim in the Torah. The [[Chida]] writes that since we read the Torah every Shabbat, we demonstrate that the entire Torah is true and we thus need not fear that people might begin to think that the Aseret Dibrot are more significant than other pesukim in the Torah. Additionally, Rav Hershel Schachter ([http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2010/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html The Aseres Hadibros]) writes that the fact that we read the pesukim differently (i.e. by stopping after each dibur as if there is a sof passuk) is an indication that we are attempting to reenact Ma'amad Har Sinai, thus perhaps also for this reason it would be permitted to stand.</ref> This is the prevalent Ashkenazic custom.<ref>Sh"t Igrot Moshe OC 4:22. Siddur Beit Yaakov, Shaarei Ephraiim, and the Chida (all quoted in Dirshu 494:3) had this custom. This custom is based on the idea that we strive to remember and even emulate the manner in which the Aseret Hadibrot were given at Har Sinai. Just as at Har Sinai the entire Jewish nation stood in awe and even trembled, so too, when we read the Aseret Hadibrot in shul, many stand in an effort to re-reexperience Matan Torah. See, however, R’ Elyashiv (in his shiurim on Berachot 12a), who writes the Rambam is truly correct that one should not stand. 
See [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/741705/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/ten-minute-halacha-standing-for-the-reading-of-aseres-hadibros/ Ten Minute Halacha: Standing for the reading of aseres hadibros] by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz for more background</ref> However, the Sephardic Minhag is not to stand for Aseret HaDibdrot,<ref>Yalkut Yosef 145-6:12 and 14, Shu"t Yechave Daat 1:29, Rav Chaim David Halevi in Shu"t Aseh Lecha Rav 6:21, [https://jewishlink.news/features/18941-standing-for-the-aseret-hadibrot-not-at-a-sephardic-kehilla Rabbi Chaim Jachter ]. Chacham Ovadia Yosef (Yechave Daat 1:29 and Yalkut Yosef 145:12 writes that one should stop others from standing specifically for the Aseret Hadibrot. All the more so, if someone decides to stand in a place where there are many Talmidei Chachamim who know the halacha and sitting, one should stop him, as the person standing will otherwise be perceived as haughty. Chacham Ovadia concludes that many poskim who permit standing simply lost the teshuva of the [[Rambam]].</ref> except among Moroccans, who do stand.<ref>Rabbi Shalom Messas (Shemesh U'magen [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21372&st=&pgnum=151 1:57], [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21291&pgnum=114 3:55:3]) defends the practice to stand even for Sephardim. [http://www.moroccanhalacha.com/standing-for-the-ten-commandments/ Rabbi Mordechai Lebhar ]writes that this is the prevalent custom for Moroccans. (Magen Avot, Orach Chaim 1:5)</ref> Others recommend giving the aliya to the rabbi so that everyone will stand anyway.<ref>Ish Matzliach 5: page 200 </ref>
# If one typically stands for the reading of the Torah throughout the rest of the year, there is certainly no issue standing during the reading of the aseret hadibrot.<ref>The issue the Rambam posed is simply not relevant if one is standing during the leining all year as no one will come to think that certain psukim are more important than others. Also, see Rav Hershel Schachter ([http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2010/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html The Aseres Hadibros]) </ref>
# Some hold that in a shul where many are standing one should nonetheless remain seated so as to teach others the proper practice.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (in his shiurim on Berachot 12a) writes the Rambam is truly correct that one should not stand, and, therefore, even if everyone is standing, one should remain sitting because everyone else is acting incorrectly.</ref> Nonetheless, others argue that one should join the practice of others around him and stand even if it is typically his custom to sit.<ref>Chacham Ovadia Yosef (Chazon Ovadia Yom Tov pg. 314). Dirshu Mishna Brura 494:3 quotes Sh"t Dvar Shmuel and Avuhav 276 that in a place where everyone stands you should not stop this practice, because the intent is clear that people are trying to beautify their mitzvah performance as if they are going to greet the Shechina. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach writes that since everyone knows that we are standing as a zecher le’ma'amad har sinai we should not stop people who stand. Since we also stand for other portions of the Torah such as Shirat Ha’yam we therefore need not be concerned. 
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein writes (O.C 4:22) that although logically it would seem to make sense to forbid people to stand, since on a practical level it has never happened that heretics have convinced Jews who are not knowledgeable that some pesukim in the Torah are more important than others, we are therefore permitted to stand. Thus, if you are coming from a place where they never stood and you arrive at a place where everyone is standing you should join them.</ref> Some suggest that, in this scenario, he should stand from the beginning of the parsha or at least from the beginning of the aliya so as not to give off the impression that the psukim of the Aseret Hadibrot are more important than the rest of the Torah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (145:14) writes that an individual who is in a shul in which they stand and he does not have the ability to change the practice of the shul should ensure to stand from the beginning of the Torah reading or at the very least from the moment the person called up for the aliya of the Aseret Hadibrot lest he end up sitting amongst everyone else who is standing which will be perceived as a disgrace to the Kedusha of the Aseret Hadibrot.</ref>

===Talking During Kriyat HaTorah===

#From the time the Sefer Torah is opened to make the [[Brachot HaTorah]] it is forbidden to speak at all even words of Torah. Giving a halachic ruling is forbidden unless it’s in order to prevent someone from doing a prohibition and it’s impossible to signal to him.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 146:2, Mishna Brurah 146:4-5 </ref>
#Someone who speaks during Kriyat HaTorah is culpable for serious transgressions including disgracing Torah by ignoring listening to Torah, making a Chilul Hashem, potentially [[Lashon Hara]], Rechilut or other forbidden speech, speaking mundane words in a shul and the punishments include having one’s [[Tefillah]] discarded and a trangession that’s too great to bear.<ref>Beiur Halacha 146 s.v. VeHaNachon </ref>
#Even between Aliya’s it’s forbidden to talk but it’s permissible to learn [[Shenayim Mikra VeEchad Targum]] and some permit learn other things, yet others emphasize not to learn with someone else between Aliya’s because it may continue into Kriyat HaTorah.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:6, 15 </ref>
#It is forbidden to talk during the haftara as well.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:4 </ref>

===Learning Torah During Kriyat HaTorah===

#It is forbidden to learn Torah during kriyat hatorah. The only permissible way to learn is if: (a) one already heard Kriyat HaTorah (or one will hear another [[minyan]]), (b) there are ten others who are listening to Kriyat HaTorah, (c) one is sitting on the side and facing away from the congregation, indicating that he already heard Kriyat HaTorah, (d) one already was learning before the Sefer Torah was open, and (e) one is learning quietly.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 146:2, Aruch Hashulchan 146:5, Piskei Teshuvot 146:4.
*The Gemara Sotah 39a establishes that it is forbidden to learn in the middle of kriyat hatorah, however, the rishonim try to explain how why Rav Sheshet was allowed to turn his face away and learn during kriyat hatorah as recorded in Brachot 8a. Tosfot (Brachot 8a s.v. Rav Sheshet) says that he learned quietly. The Rif (Megillah 14b) answers that he learned all the time and as such he was exempt from certain mitzvot (torato umanuto). The Rosh Brachot 1:7 cites both opinions. Rabbenu Yonah (Brachot 4a s.v. Rav Sheshet) writes that if he turns away his face before they start kriyat hatorah then he can learn since he is indicating that he isn't involved with kriyat hatorah now (and he going to fulfill that obligation another time). The Bahag (cited by Rif Megillah 14b) holds that in all cases it is only permitted to learn if there are already ten people listening to the kriyat hatorah. The Shulchan Aruch 146:2 cites all four of the above opinions. Mishna Brurah 146:9 cites the Eliya Rabba that today we don't have someone who learns all the time (torato umanuto). The Aruch Hashulchan 146:5 writes that it is only permitted to learn if one already started before they start kriyat hatorah, one turned away one's face, there are ten others who are listening to the kriyat hatorah, and one is learning quietly.</ref>
#Some say it is proper for everyone in the congregation to read along with the Baal Koreh word by word in order to listen better and have intent, while most poskim hold that it everyone should be quiet and listen intently.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:15 quoting Magen Avraham says to read along with Baal Koreh, while Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 24:3 and Piskei Teshuvot 146:5 say that it’s better to listen quietly. </ref>

==Laws for the Baal Koreh (the Reader)==
===Amen===

#Although usually one may not respond [[Amen]] louder than the blessing to which one is responding, the person reading the Torah may say [[Amen]] in a loud voice. This is acceptable because we want to alert the congregation that the reading is beginning.<ref>Sh"t Rivivot Ephraim 1:106 </ref>

===Accidentally Skipped a Word or Pasuk===

#On [[Shabbat]], if the one who read the Torah missed a word or [[Pasuk]], one needs to repeat that [[Pasuk]]. Even if the Sefer Torah was already returned to the aron, one should take out the Torah and read from the beginning of that [[Pasuk]] and two other [[Pesukim]] as well.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 137:3, Mishna Brurah 137:8. Nishmat Adam 31:1 writes that one does not need to read the pesukim in order and if one is repeating for a missed one pasuk one doesn't need to continue to read everything afterwards in order.</ref>

===Correcting Mistakes===

#According to Sephardim, if the Baal Koreh makes a mistake even if it doesn't change the meaning the congregation should correct him and he should fix it. After the fact, if they already finished the aliyah they shouldn't go back to the mistaken pasuk.<ref>The Rambam Tefillah 12:6 writes that the Baal Koreh should be corrected even for a small nuance. The Shulchan Aruch 142:1 adopts the opinion of the Rambam. Although the Mishna Brurah 142:1 implies that the Shulchan Aruch agrees with the Rama, the Kaf Hachaim 142:1 clarifies that this isn't the case. Kaf Hachaim indeed proves from the Zohar and other kabbalistic sources that every single punctuation and musical note (trup) is vital to the kriyat hatorah. (See also Mishna Brurah 143:21 that the Rama often argues with the Shulchan Aruch even without writing Yesh Omrim.) </ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, if the Baal Koreh makes a mistake only if it changes the meaning should they correct him.<ref>The Rambam Tefillah 12:6 implies that the Baal Koreh should be corrected even if he makes a mistake on one nuance in the pasuk. However, the Tur 142:1 cites the Manhig who sounds like you don't have to correct the Baal Koreh at all. The Mahari Ibn Chaviv (cited by Bet Yosef 142:1) proposes a compromise based on the Rosh. Only if the mistake changes the meaning of the words then the Baal Koreh should be corrected. The Rama 142:1 rules like the Mahari Ibn Chaviv.</ref>
#Just like the Baal Koreh has to be careful not to make mistakes, so too the one taking the Aliyah needs to as well.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 142:1</ref>

==When is Kriyat Hatorah Done?==
# When is there is an obligation to do Kriyat Hatorah? On Mondays, Thursdays, and Shabbat afternoons there is an obligation to do Kriyat Hatorah with 3 aliyot, on Rosh Chodesh and Chol Hamoed 4 aliyot, on Yom Tov 5 aliyot, on Yom Kippur 6 aliyot, and on Shabbat 7 aliyot.<ref>Mishna Megillah 21a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 135:1, O.C. 423:1, O.C. 663:1, O.C. 488:3, O.C. 494:1, O.C. 621:1, and O.C. 282:1.</ref>
# If a congregation missed doing Kriyat Hatorah during Shacharit of Monday they can do it in the afternoon at [[Mincha]] or afterwards,<ref>Mishna Brurah 135:1, Piskei Teshuvot 135:3. Mishna Brurah explains that essentially the mitzvah of Kriyat Hatorah applies all day. Piskei Teshuvot further supports this from the Goren Dovid OC 5, Mahari Asad 51, Teshuva Mahava 29, Maharshag 2:92, Bet Shaarim OC 50, Pri Hasadeh 3:1, Bet Yisrael 20, Shevet Halevi 4:15, 5:16, Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:145, and Tzitz Eliezer 13:27. He cites that once the Chatom Sofer was traveling and missed Kriyat Hatorah Shacharit of Monday and made it up at mincha. He summarizes that the poskim notes that it is only permitted after the fact that it wasn't possible for an extenuating circumstance they couldn't do it in the morning.</ref> however, they can not make it up on Tuesday.<ref>Ateret Zekenim 135:1 writes that it is possible to make up Kriyat Hatorah on Tuesday if the congregation missed it on Monday. However, the Eliyah Rabba 135:2 disagrees since we only make up Kriyat Hatorah of Shabbat since we miss an entire parsha and not Monday and Thursday which we complete on Shabbat either way. Biur Halacha 135:2 s.v. Shabbat and Yalkut Yosef 135:3 concur with the Eliyah Rabba. Halacha Brurah 135:6 agrees that it is impossible to make up Kriyat Hatorah of Monday on Tuesday. He quotes many that hold this way as well including Pri Megadim E"A 135:4, Machasit Hashekel 135:4, Birkei Yosef 135:2, Ldovid Emet 9:1, Emet Lyakov (Taut Kriyat Hatorah 1), Magen Giborim E"H 135:4, Maharil Diskin (Kuntres Acharon 5:8), Kaf Hachaim 135:8, Yabia Omer OC 4:17:7, and Aruch Hashulchan 135:7.</ref>
# If the congregation missed Kriyat Hatorah on Shabbat morning, most poskim hold that they can make it up Shabbat afternoon with 7 aliyot before mincha, while others hold that it can't be made up.<reF>Dagul Mirvava 135:2 holds that one can make up the Kriyat Hatorah of the morning on Shabbat in the afternoon. Shaar Hatziyun 135:3 extrapolates from there to making up on a Monday and Thursday afternoon. However, Chida in Chaim Shaal 2:16 disagrees and thinks that one may not make up a Kriyat Hatorah in the afternoon at all since it wasn't an establishment of chazal to read a whole parsha in the afternoon. Yabia Omer 4:17:5 and Halacha Brurah 135:5 accept the Chida and apply it to Monday and Thursday as well. The language of Yabia Omer's conclusion is that it is better not to do the Kriyat Hatorah and be passive, however, someone who does has what to rely upon.</ref>

==Mi Sheberach==

#When reciting the name of the person in a Mi sheberach the minhag is to recite the person name and his mother's name such as ploni ben plonit.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 368), Yabia Omer OC 2:11. He cites several reasons for this minhag. 1) Since generally the identification of the mother is more certain than the father that is why the minhag was established with the mother's name (Zohar Lech Lecha p. 84a, Kaf Hachaim 284:37, Maharshal in Chachmat Shlomo Shabbat 66b). So as not to embarrass a child of a Jewish mother and a non-Jewish father we mention the mother's name always (Yafeh Lelev 3:605). 2) It is hinted to in the pasuk of "והושיעה לבן אמתך" (Tehillim 86:16) and "ואני עבדך בן אמתך" (Tehillim 116:16) (Zohar ibid., Melamed Lhoil OC 1:23). 3) Chazal said that symbolically the flesh comes from a person's mother and one's bones from one's father. Therefore, while a person is alive the Mi sheberach is made using the mother's name and after he's dead we use the father's name (Rashi Kiddushin 30b, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pagefeed/hebrewbooks_org_41862_170.pdf Mekor Chesed 242:1]). 4) It is more effective to pray for mercy using the mother's name since she isn't accountable for bitul torah (Ben Yehoyada Brachot 55b). </ref> If the mother's name isn't known you can use the father's name for a Mi sheberach.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 2:11:5</ref>
#In a hashkava (Sephardic prayer for a deceased person, similar to Kel Maleh for Ashkenazim) Ashkenazim mention the name of a person's father and the Sephardic custom is to mention the mother's name.<ref>Melamed Lhoil 1:23, Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 368) based on Shabbat 66b, Kaf Hachaim 284:37, Yabia Omer 2:11.</ref>

==Haftarah (Haftorah)==
===Brachot on the Haftarah===
#One does not answer [[amen]] after the words Neemarim BeEmet but only after VeTzedek.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:3</ref>
#At the end of the closing brachot of the Haftarah, according to Sephardim the maftir should answer Amen to his own bracha.<ref>Yerushalmi Brachot Perek 7, quoted by Rif Brachot 33b and Rosh 7:11. Ritva Hilchot Brachot 6:5, Pekudat HaLeviim (Ra’ah) Brachot 45b, Birkeh Yosef OC 215:1, Yosef Ometz 68, Ben Ish Hai vol. 1 Masei Seif 14, Kaf HaChaim OC 215:1, Yechave Daat 2:23, Yabia Omer vol. 8 OC 25:10 and vol 9 OC 108:102, Ohr LeTzion vol. 2 page 134, Halichot Olam vol. 2 page 130, Birkat Hashem vol. 1 6:18. See [[Answering_Amen_to_Your_Own_Bracha]]</ref>

===The Type of Book to Read the Haftarah From===
#The best thing to use for Haftorah is a handwritten complete sefer of Navi.<ref>Gemara Gittin 60b, Magen Avraham 284:1. See however, Yachava Daat 5:26 who questions whether it is really better since once it was permitted once in history because it was impossible otherwise perhaps that halachic leniency is canonized. In fact, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1725&st=&pgnum=207 Chikrei Lev 1:57] holds that once it was permitted to write an incomplete sefer the leniency continues and that's why the minhag is not to use a complete sefer. </ref>
#Some poskim hold that it is better to use a handwritten Haftorah sefer instead of a printed complete Tanach.<ref>Rav Ovadia in Yachava Daat 5:26 holds that it is better to use a handwritten haftorah sefer instead of a printed Tanach since it has more kedusha as many poskim hold printing a sefer isn't considered ketiva. Chazon Ish 60:11 (cited by Dirshu) held that there's no preference for a printed tanach than an incomplete sefer since a printed tanach is made of separate pages and is considered a sefer that chazal wouldn't warrant to write. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shulchan Shlomo 284:1, cited by Dirshu) holds that it is better to use a sefer haftorah than a printed Chumash. See Rav Poalim 4:33 who writes that a sefer haftorot is an invalid sefer and once it is invalid it doesn't matter if it is invalid in one way or multiple ways. See also [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1725&st=&pgnum=208 Chikrei Lev 1:57]. </ref> Some hold it is better to use a printed Tanach than a handwritten Haftorah sefer.<ref>Magen Avraham 284:1 writes that it is better to use a printed Tanach or complete sefer of Navi rather than a chumash with printed haftorah. He explains that it is better since a printed sefer is considered a properly written sefer and therefore if it is complete it is warranted by chazal. Taz 284:2 also agrees that printing is like ketiva.</ref>
===The Text to Read for the Haftarah===
#If it is a double parsha, the Haftorah comes from the second parsha.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:6</ref>
===Proper Conduct During the Haftarah Reading===
#One may not speak when the maftir is reading the Haftorah.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:4</ref>
#If the haftorah is being read from a complete handwritten sefer only the maftir should read it and everyone should listen. However, if they are using a printed sefer or a handwritten incomplete sefer such as a Haftorah sefer, the maftir should read the Haftorah aloud and the rest of the congregation should read along quietly. If one is still in the middle of the Haftorah and the Maftir finished the Haftorah, one should pause and listen to the [[Brachot]].<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:5.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Rabba and Rav Yosef in Gemara Gittin 60a state that one can't read from a Sefer Haftorot since it isn't supposed to be written since it isn't a complete Sefer of Tanach. However, the Gemara concludes that it is permitted since it is otherwise impossible for every congregation to have a complete set of Navi klafim handwritten. Why shouldn't you read it if it isn't shouldn't be written? The Meiri seems that once the rabbis said it was forbidden to write they also didn't want people to read from it once it was written. However, the Ritva Gittin 60a explains that since the incomplete sefer shouldn't be written reading from it is like reading pesukim by heart, which is forbidden. Similarly, the Chatom Sofer O.C. 1:68 explains that reading from an incomplete sefer is forbidden just like reading by heart since both of them are forms of transmitting Torah that could lead to mistakes. According to that approach, assuming like Tosfot Temurah 14b s.v. devarim it is forbidden to read from an incomplete sefer for others. Tosfot Temurah holds that one could read pesukim by heart for oneself but not to exempt others. Gra 49:2 holds that opinion is correct. Magen Avraham 49:1 is concerned for that opinion. Accordingly, Chatom Sofer concludes that if they are reading the haftorah from an incomplete sefer the congregation should read to themselves. Gra in Maaseh Rav n. 136 and Mishna Brurah 284:11 agree with that logic.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Ritva and Meiri write that the halacha is that it is permitted to write an incomplete sefer because of Et Laasot LaHashem. Kol Bo siman 20 quotes the Rashba who writes that one can read the haftorah from an incomplete sefer. Bet Yosef 284:1 quotes this.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Magen Avraham 284:5 quotes the Arizal who said that a person should read the haftorah to oneself and listen to the brachot. Pri Megadim E"A 284:5 points out that everyone should read along quietly and listen to the congregational reading otherwise if no one listens to the congregational reading and just reads silently it isn't a reading of a tzibur. Maaseh Rav n. 136 also makes it clear that one should read word by word with the Shaliach Tzibur. </ref> Some say that the minhag is that everyone just listens quietly irrelevant of what it is being read from.<ref>Chatom Sofer O.C. 1:68 agrees with the approach of the Arizal and Gra to read along quietly but adds that the minhag is that everyone listens without reading along.</ref>

==Links==

*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/802935/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Inyonei_Krias_Hatorah# Inyonei Krias Hatorah] by Rav Herschel Schachter

==Sources==
<references />

{{Prayers}}
[[Category:Shabbat]]
[[Category:Prayer]]

Kriyat HaTorah

2024-08-18T22:13:50Z

Bchernigoff: /* Who Should do Gelilah */

Kriyat Hatorah (heb. קריאת התורה; trans. reading the Torah) refers to the mitzvah of reading the Torah publicly on Mondays, Thursdays, Shabbat and holidays.
[[Image:Kriyat_hatorah.png|200px|right]]
==Taking out the Sefer Torah==
===Peticha (Opening the Ark)===

#The honor of opening the Aron (Ark) and passing the Sefer Torah to the Shaliach Tzibur or the one who is going to carry it is a great honor and not automatically granted to the Shaliach Tzibbur.<ref>Rama 147:2 citing the Mordechai. Mishna Brurah 147:15 comments that when someone performs Peticha, he passes the Sefer Torah to the Shaliach Tzibbur, who then carries it to the Bimah.</ref>
#When opening the parochet (curtain) of the Aron, it's acceptable to move the curtain either from left to right or from right to left. Some say that it's best to open the parochet from left to right.<ref>Perisha 128:23 writes that the concept of always moving from left to right (reference Zevachim 62b) only applies to when you have to turn, but not if you're simply moving in a straight line. According to this logic, one can open the curtain of the Aron in either direction. Bear Moshe 5:38:1 agrees with the Perisha. However, he recommends that if a new shul opens that they should institute the practice to open the parochet from left to right in order to satisfy the view that you need to turn to the right even when things are in a straight line. (The concept of lighting Chanuka candles doesn't seem to fit this model). </ref>
#There is a minhag to give Peticha to someone who's wife is in her ninth month of pregnancy.<ref>Kaf Hachaim cited by Dirshu 147</ref>
#There is a minhag to give Peticha to a man who is getting married that upcoming week or recently got married.<ref>Dirshu 147</ref>

===Hotza'ah (Removing the Sefer Torah)===
# The minhag is to recite Barich Shemey while removing the Sefer Torah from the Aron.<Ref>Mishna Brurah 134:13</ref> Some say it before the Torah is taken out,<ref>[https://halachablog.com/2016/11/10/the-prayer-of-brich-shmei-%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9A-%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%94/ Halachablog] quoting the minhag of Sephardim and the Munkatcher Rebbe</ref> while others say it only after the Torah is taken out.<ref>[https://halachablog.com/2016/11/10/the-prayer-of-brich-shmei-%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9A-%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%94/ Halachablog] quoting Igrot Moshe 4:70 and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/726345/rabbi-hershel-schachter/lesser-known-laws-of-torah-reading/ Rav Hershel Schachter]</ref> Sephardim recite barich shemey when the sefer Torah is still in the Aron and the Torah is opened.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Maamar Mordechai 2:13)</ref>
#The minhag is to kiss the Sefer Torah when it is carried out of the Aron but one shouldn't touch the Siddur to the Sefer Torah and kiss that since it is appears as though you're using the Siddur as an extension of your hand in a disrespectful way.<ref>Rav Chaim Kanievsky (quoted by Ohel Yakov Kavod Ukedushat Sefarim p. 1)</ref>
#If the Sefer Torah taken out of the Aron is not in the right place, it should be rolled to the right place. One should not return it to the Aron and take out the Torah which is rolled to the right place.<ref>Igrot Moshe OC 2:37 writes that if they took out the wrong Sefer Torah, there is a dispute between earlier poskim whether or not it's considered disrespectful to return it back to the Aron, as people may think that it's invalid. The Gemara (Yoma 70a) says that it's forbidden to use two Sifrei Torah for one aliyah since people will think that the first one is invalid. However, this concern doesn't exist when switching Sifrei Torah between aliyot. Based on this, one can argue that if they haven't yet started reading the Torah, that's the equivalent of being between aliyot, and there's no concern of appearing invalid if they switch it for the other Sefer Torah. On the other hand, since they didn't read from this Sefer Torah at all, it might give off the impression that it's invalid. Rav Moshe concludes that one who follows either opinion has what to rely upon. However, if the congregation doesn't mind, then they should roll it as opposed to returning it. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer OC 8:15:4 and Halacha Brurah 144:5 agree.</ref> Some poskim hold that it's better to return the Sefer Torah to the Aron and take out the one which is already rolled to the right spot.<ref>Mayim Chayim Mashash 2:19 notes that although this issue is a debate amongst the poskim, it's nonetheless better to return the Sefer Torah, since rolling it in public isn't respectful to the congregation's time (tircha d'tzibura), and beyond this, people will engage in idle and frivolous chatter while waiting. </ref>
# Some observe a very old minhag not to take out a Sefer Torah twice in one shul for two different minyanim.<ref>Mishpatei Shmuel 3 writes that once the shul already davened and read from the Torah, another minyan of people shouldn't daven in the same shul with the same Torah, because it might look like they're invalidating the Torah and the first reading didn't count. Alternatively, it isn't respectful to have a second minyan in one shul when they should have joined with the first one. Knesset Hagedola (Hagahot Hatur 144:3) cites this.</ref>

==Hagbah (Raising the Torah)==
===When to Do Hagbah===
#There is a mitzvah when taking out a Sefer Torah for kriyat hatorah to open it up and show it to the whole congregation.<ref>Masechet Sofrim 14:14</ref> Ashkenazim do this after kriyat hatorah and Sephardim do it beforehand.<ref>Shulchan Aruch and Rama O.C. 134:2</ref>
#In some Sephardic communities, they carry the Sefer Torah from the Aron to the Bimah while it is open so that everyone can see it better. Other Sephardic communities have the minhag of having it closed while it's taken out.<ref>Vayisbor Yosef 5:9 cites the Halachot Ketanot 2:255 and Rav Shmuel Meyuchas (Tefillah 12:5) as saying that minhag Yerushalayim was to carry the Sefer Torah to the Bimah with it open so that more people could see it. Vayisbor Yosef quotes many sources regarding this minhag and establishes that this was the minhag in Israel and Syria but not in Egypt. Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Toldot no. 16) writes that the minhag Baghdad was to carry it open and then do another hagbah when the Sefer Torah got to the Bimah. Yabia Omer OC 7:16 writes that this was the minhag of Yerushalayim.</ref>
#There is no hagbah on the Sefer Haftarah (the scroll used for the Haftarah) and it shouldn't be open when brought to the bimah.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 7:16 explains that the reason we perform Hagbah is so that everyone can see the letters in the Sefer Torah. There is no need for this by the Haftarah, so we don't carry the Sefer Haftarah while it's open. Rav Ovadia concludes that if there is a community with a minhag to carry out the Sefer Haftarah while it's open, if they won't listen to stop their minhag, then they can continue to follow their practice. </ref>
#Some Sephardim have the minhag to carry the Sefer Torah back to the aron closed<ref>Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Toldot no. 16)</ref> and some have the minhag to carry it back open.<ref>Yaskil Avdi 8:24:5:3, Yabia Omer 7 OC 16</ref>
===How to Do Hagbah===
#During Hagbah, the Sefer Torah should be opened so that three columns are seen. However, it depends on the strength of the one doing Hagbah (Magbiyah); if he's stronger then he can open it more than three columns, and if he's weaker then he can open less than three columns.<ref>The Mishna Brurah 134:8 quotes the Magen Avraham who says that the sefer torah should be opened so that 3 columns can be seen. The Magen Avraham suggests that 3 is specific. Mishna Brurah concludes that it all depends on the strength of the Magbiyah. If he's strong he can do more than 3 columns and if he's weaker less than 3. Bikarei Shemo 14:14 p. 241 suggests that the reason 3 columns should be open is because doing so is an expression of kavod hatorah to see it wide open.</ref> Sephardim only open the Sefer Torah as much as it opens, which is generally around one column, and that fulfills the obligation.<ref>Halacha Brurah end of 134:19 writes that Sephardim open the Sefer Torah only so much as the case can open. It isn't a concern that it isn't opened to 3 columns and it is similar to the Mishna Brurah 134:8 who says a weak person doesn't need to open the sefer to 3 columns.</ref>
#While performing Hagbah, it is permitted to touch the Atzei Chayim (wooden poles) of the Sefer Torah. Some are strict not to, and if one is stringent in this matter to hold the atzei chayim with a tallit or cloth, he should do so in a inconspicuous manner so others don't notice.<ref>The Bach 147:1 writes that it's forbidden to directly hold the atzei chayim of the Sefer Torah. Rather, one should hold them using a cloth or a tallit. The Mishna Brurah 147:2 writes that the halacha is that it's permitted to touch the atzei chayim. He adds that someone who is stringent should only do so in an inconspicuous fashion, as others might perceive his stringency as him being pretentious (mechzi k'yehura). Chazon Ish (cited by Dirshu 147:4) holds that it is permitted to hold the atzei chayim and that one doesn't need to be strict. </ref>
#During Hagbah, some people turn to the right and then to the left so that everyone can see the letters of the Sefer Torah,<ref>Masechet Sofrim 14:14 rights that one should show the open Sefer Torah to the right and to the left. Shulchan Aruch 134:2 codifies this. Mishna Halachot 11:103 writes that the minhag is just to turn to the right and to the left, and there is no need to turn completely around.</ref> while others turn to the right in a full circle.<ref>Beer Sheva (Shevuot 15b s.v. umzeh) explains that the Hagbah should be done performed while turning around coutnerclockwise.

Shevet Halevi 9:26 writes that it is best to turn all the way around with the Sefer Torah and cites the Mishna Brurah as a support. Orchot Rabbenu (v. 3 p. 216) writes that the Chazon Ish would turn around completely, first turning to the right and going counterclockwise. For example, if the shul is towards the east he faces the east, south, west, north, and east again. Then he would turn to the right again. See Mishna Brurah 134:9.</ref>
#Ashkenazim have the Magbiyah (the person doing Hagbah) raise the Sefer Torah so that the words are facing towards him, and he raises it high so that it is seen above his head behind him.<ref>Rama 147:4, Mishna Brurah 147:16</ref> Sephardim do it such that the words are facing the people looking at the Sefer Torah.<ref>Bach 134 writes that the Maharam held that Hagbah should be with the Sefer Torah facing the people. Maamar Mordechai 134:1 disagrees. Halacha Brurah 134:20 writes that the Sephardic minhag is to turn the words of the Sefer Torah to the congregation. Baruch Hashem siman 20 agrees because he proves from Eruvin 97b that the greatest way to honor a Sefer is to have it open for the public to read and turning it to the Magbiyah is less respectful. A similar idea is found in Minchat Yechiel 2:85 who writes that it is always an honor to the Torah to have it facing the people. That is the way it is placed in the Aron, the way it should be carried to the Bimah, and the way it sits on the Bimah. That's symbolized with the concept of "Yaar Hashem Panav Eylecha," that Hashem's countenance should face you. </ref>

===Who Should Do Hagbah===
#The honor of Hagbah is very great and the reward for it is tantamount to the reward for all of those who got aliyot combined. Therefore, the honor should be given to the greatest Talmid Chacham present.<ref>Gemara Megillah 32a, Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1. Even though the Shulchan Aruch writes that the honor should be given to the greatest of those who got an aliyah today, the Mishna Brurah 147:6 writes that the minhag today is to give the Hagbah to the greatest in the shul.</ref> If someone buys the honor he has first rights.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1, Mishna Brurah 147:8</ref>
#Someone weak or has shaky hands shouldn't do Hagbah. He should turn down the honor. Also, the gabbay shouldn't give Hagbah to such a person.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:7</ref>
===What to Do during Hagbah===
#During Hagbah the congregation looks at the writing of the Sefer Torah<ref>Mishna Brurah 134:12 clarifies that וזאת התורה is only recited for seeing the writing in the sefer torah.</ref> and says "וזאת התורה אשר שם משה לפני בני ישראל".<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 134:2</ref> This applies to men as well as women in shul at the time of hagbah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Lisha Ulbat 9:38)</ref>
#During psukei dzimra, birchot kriyat shema, or shema a person should not interrupt for hagbah. Rather he should look at the torah and think about the pasuk of וזאת התורה.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 134:8</ref> If he's in between psukei dzimra and brachot kriyat shema he can recite the pasuk for hagbah as usual.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 51:14</ref>
#If someone is in the middle of putting on tefillin of rabbenu tam when they do hagbah they should stop to answer וזאת התורה.<Ref>Vayivarech Dovid (Tefillin p. 45) writes that a person should interrupt putting on tefillin of rabbenu tam to recite the pasuk of וזאת התורה during hagbah.</ref>

==Gelilah==
===Who Should do Gelilah===
#Even though in theory it is possible for the same person to do both Hagbah and Gelilah as was the custom in the days of the Gemara,<ref>Rashi Megillah 32a</ref> today the minhag is to have one person do Hagbah, and someone else do Gelilah.<ref>Bet Yosef 147:4 citing the Maharik, Mishna Brurah 147:17</ref>
#The honor of Gelilah is very great, but is nevertheless generally given to children to get them to practice mitzvot.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:7</ref>
#The honor of passing the ''gartel'' (belt around the Sefer Torah) and ''mantel'' (cloth on the Sefer Torah) to the person who does Gelilah, is a separate honor from the actual performance of Gelilah. If someone were to buy Gelilah, they don't automatically acquire the honor of passing the ''gartel'' and ''mantel''.<ref>Mordechai end of Megillah cited by Bet Yosef 147:2, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:2</ref>
===How to Do Gelilah===
#During Gelilah, the words of the Sefer Torah should face the Magbiyah, not the one doing Gelilah.<ref>Mahari Ibn Chaviv in Bet Yosef 147:4, Rama 147:4, Mishna Brurah 18. Mahari Ibn Chaviv explains that once the Magbiyah didn't it the Sefer Torah shouldn't be turned around for the benefit of the golel since it isn't respectful to have the Sefer Torah turned for the convenience of a person.</ref>
#The ''gartel'' is wrapped around the Sefer Torah so that the knot, buckle, or velcro latch that opens and closes is attached in front of the words of the Sefer Torah. This way the next time the Sefer Torah is opened it can opened up with the words facing upward and the latch unfastened without having to flip over the Sefer Torah onto its back disrespectfully.<ref>Tosfot Megillah 32a citing Rabbenu Chananel, Rosh cited by Bet Yosef 147:4, Tur, and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:4, Mishna Brurah 147:18</ref>

==Touching the Klaf of a Sefer Torah==
#It is forbidden to touch the klaf (parchment) of a Sefer Torah barehanded. Even merely touching it briefly is forbidden.<ref>Gemara Megillah 32a, Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 23:4, Mishna Brurah 147:1</ref> A sofer who needs to touch the klaf in order to fix it may do so.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:1</ref> However, some say that one only needs to be careful not to touch the parchment of a Sefer Torah while it's being read or between Aliyot.<ref>Ben Ish Chai S"S Toledot 18 </ref>
#It is forbidden to touch the klaf even after washing one's hands.<ref>The Mordechai, cited by Bet Yosef 147:1, permits touching a Sefer Torah after having washed one's hands. The Rama 147:1 rules that it is forbidden to touch a sefer torah even after washing one's hands. Mishna Brurah 147:4 agrees with Rama.</ref>
#According to many Rishonim, it is forbidden to touch the klaf of a book of Navi or Ketuvim that was written with ink on a klaf.<ref>Bet Yosef 147:1 citing the Agudah, Rama 147:1 is strict. However, Birkei Yosef 147:1 citing Shev Yakov 11 is lenient.</ref> However, the minhag is that one may touch the klaf he has washed his hands. For example, for Megillat Esther, the minhag is to touch the klaf after having washed one's hands.<ref>Rama 147:1 and Mishna Brurah 147:3</ref>
#A person should be very careful while doing Gelilah not to touch the klaf directly. If the klaf needs to be straightened, then one should do so while holding the klaf with a tallit or cloth.<ref>Gemara Megillah 32a states that someone who touches the klaf of a Sefer Torah with their bare hands will be buried bare. The Gemara is troubled by this and instead concludes that he will be buried without the mitzvah that he was involved with at that time. Tur and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 147:1 codify this halacha. Mishna Brurah 147:2 gives as an example that if the klaf isn't straight and needs to be fixed it can be done with the use of a tallit or cloth.</ref>
#It is permitted to touch other Seforim that aren't written on a Klaf with one's bare hands. However, if one's hands are dirty, then he shouldn't touch the Sefer until he cleans his hands.<ref>Mishna Brurah 147:3</ref>

==Reading the Torah (Getting an Aliyah)==
===Who Can get an Aliya===
====Women====
#Women may not receive aliyot.<ref>Gemara Megillah 23a. The Gemara explains that the issue with women receiving Aliyot is "kavod ha'tzibbur", the dignity of the congregation. Bet Yosef 53 writes that a congregation can be mochel on their kavod with respect to having a child be shaliach tzibur. Bach argues. [https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?v=77736 Rav Yitzchak Yosef (Motzei Shabbat Ki Tisa 5779 min 21)] explained that even though according to the precise halakha women can receive aliyot, practically speaking they cannot because of the fifth volume of Shulchan Aruch.</ref>

====Child====

#Some poskim permit giving an aliya to a child who is old enough to understand who he is blessing. The child may even count among the seven.<ref>Yechave Daat 4:23</ref> Other poskim write that a child may only receive Maftir.<ref>Mishna Brura 282:12, Mikor Chaim 3: pg. 110, [http://tvunah.org/%D7%A2%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%AA-%D7%A7%D7%98%D7%9F-%D7%9C%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94/ Rav Osher Weiss]</ref>

====Blind====
#There is much discussion about a blind person receiving an aliya.<ref>see [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/853127/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/ten-minute-halacha-may-a-blind-person-get-an-aliya-/ May a Blind Person Get an Aliya] by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz</ref> The minhag in most Sephardic communities is to allow it.<ref>See Tzitz Eliezer 11:10</ref>
====Non-observant====
# One should not give an aliyah to someone who publicly violates Shabbat.<ref>Igrot Moshe 4:91:8</ref>

===Order of Priority in Giving Out Aliyot===

#There's is a mitzvah to give the Cohen the first Aliyah and the honor of doing [[Zimmun]].<ref>Gittin 59b and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 144:8</ref> Similarly, it is forbidden to use a Cohen for a personal task. However, if the Cohen foregoes his honor, it is permitted.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 144:9</ref>
#If there's no Levi and there is a Kohen in Shul, the Kohen who received the first Aliyah should also receive the second Aliyah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 135:8</ref>
#The following is the order of those who should receive an Aliyah:
##A groom on the day of his wedding,
##a groom on the [[Shabbat]] before his wedding, provided that this is his first marriage
##a bar mitzvah boy on the [[Shabbat]] after his bar mitzvah
##a sandak who holds the baby for the Milah
##a sandak who carries baby in for the Milah
##the husband of a woman who gave birth to a girl if the mother comes to shul
##the husband of a woman who gave birth to a boy if the mother comes to shul
##a groom on the [[Shabbat]] after his wedding if the wedding was on Wednesday or later in the week, provided that this is the first marriage of either the groom or the bride
##a person with [[Yahrzeit]] for a parent on that day
##the father of a boy who is going to have a Milah that day
##a person with a [[Yahrzeit]] in the coming week
##a mohel who performed a Milah that day
##a sandak on the [[Shabbat]] before the Milah
##the father of the boy on the [[Shabbat]] before the Milah
##the mohel of the baby on the [[Shabbat]] before the Milah<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 78:11. For more detailed lists see Magen Avraham 282:18 and Biur Halacha 136 s.v. Beshabbat. </ref>
#If there is a double parsha, the gabbai should ensure that the parshiyot are connected with the fourth Aliyah.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 78:3</ref>
#If a Yisrael takes the first aliyah when a Cohen is in the shul, some poskim hold that it doesn't count towards the count of Aliyot needed, while others hold it does count.<ref>Pri Chadash 135:6 holds that the aliyah of a yisrael in place of a Cohen doesn't count for an aliyah based on Gittin 59b. However, the Nodeh BeYehuda OC 2:14 argues that it counts and the gemara only meant that it is a common misconception. Mishna Brurah 135:20 and Halacha Brurah 135 accept the Nodeh Beyehuda.</ref>

===Father and Son Receiving Consecutive Aliyot===
# A father and son, as well as two brothers, should not receive an aliyah one after another because of Ayin Hara.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 141:6 based on Kolbo</ref>
# Some say that the same is true of a grandfather and grandson. However, in a case of need, it is permitted.<ref>Mishna Brurah 141:19</ref>
# It is permitted for a father and son to receive two consecutive aliyot in two sifrei torah, such as Chatan Torah and Chatan Beresheet.<ref>Mishna Brurah 141:20 writes that it is permitted to give a father and son two aliyot back to back in two sifrei torah with the maftir in another sefer torah. Dirshu on Mishna Brurah 141:19 citing numerous poskim who are lenient in the case of Chatan Torah and Chatan Beresheet.</ref>
# If the minhag is not to call up the person by name it isn't any ayin hara.<ref>Rama 141:6, Mishna Brurah 141:21</ref>
#Ideally a father and son or two brothers shouldn't take hagbah and gelilah together but after the fact if they were already called up it is permitted. If the minhag isn't to call up the one who did hagbah or gelilah by name and not to do a mi shaberech for them by name it is permitted even initially.<ref>https://www.yeshiva.org.il/ask/113897</ref>

==Hosafot (Additional Aliyot)==
#The custom among Sefaradim is to add many aliyot on Shabbat and Holidays, however Ashkenazim only add aliyot on [[Simchat Torah]].<ref> Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 282:1,2</ref>
#Some have the minhag not to add any aliyot when there’s a double parsha.<ref>Nefesh Harav p. 139 cites Rav Moshe Solovietchik that one shouldn't add any hosafot when there's a double parsha to avoid the dispute of how they should be added.</ref>
#On Mondays and Thursdays there are no additional aliyot.<ref> Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 135:1</ref> However if there are two grooms or two fathers who will be performing a [[brit milah]] the custom among Ashkinazim is to add a fourth aliya.<ref> Rama Orach Chayim 135:1</ref>

===Repeating Aliyot===

#One shouldn't repeat pesukim one just read for one aliyah for another aliyah, rather one should read new pesukim or add on new pesukim.<ref>Rama 282:2 writes that it is forbidden to repeat pesukim for one aliyah that one just read for another aliyah. Mishna Brurah 282:10 and Aruch HaShulchan 282:8 confirm this position as well. Although Shulchan Aruch 282:2 permits, the Kaf HaChaim 282:19 writes that one shouldn't do so, though a community which has such a practice has what to rely upon. See Shu"t Heichal Yitzchak (Orach Chaim Siman 6),
Yabia Omer (vol. 6 Orach Chaim Siman 26:4, vol. 9 Orach Chaim Siman 27), and Chazon Ovadia (Shabbat vol. 2 page 222). See Nehar Mitzrayim (Orach Chaim Hilchot Tefilah) for a humorous anecdote about how the Egyptian community used to go overboard with extra aliyot on a Simcha and then make the Chazzan do Mussaf beKol Ram because of the lateness of the hour. The first time Chacham Refael Aharon ben Shimon experienced this as rav of a Kehillah, he went over to the Baal Simcha who was attempting to persuade the Shaliach Tzibbur to do Mussaf beKol Ram and told him that "You gave everyone else an Aliyah. Now Hashem wants one, too." After that,
there was no more Mussaf beKol Ram in his shul.</ref>
#Even those who are lenient to allow repeating pesukim for an aliyah can't consider it to be one of the seven aliyot of Shabbat.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 137:6, Mishna Brurah 282:9, Aruch HaShulchan 282:8</ref>

==Procedure When Going up to the Torah==
===Brachot===

#Before getting an aliya a person should recite the bracha of אשר בחר בנו מכל העמים ונתן לנו את תורתו ברוך אתה ה' נותן התורה.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 139:8</ref>
#After getting an aliya a person should recite the bracha אשר נתן לנו תורת אמת וחיי העולם נטע בתוכינו ברוך אתה ה' נותן התורה.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 139:10. Ramban Niddah 51b s.v. ha explains that even though generally there's no bracha for completing a mitzvah which you have a mitzvah to continue since there's no bracha for a sin but for completing kriyat hatorah which is a takana of the rabbis there is a bracha after completing the mitzvah.</ref>
#A person should make sure to recite the brachot aloud so that at least ten people can hear them and answer amen.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 139:6 writes that the brachot need to be aloud and if they aren't some say that they need to be repeated. Biur Halacha s.v. vehabrachot concludes that although it is reasonable that they need to be heard by ten people so that it is considered a bracha in a congregation, after the fact even if ten people didn't hear the bracha they don't need to be repeated.</ref>
#If a person made a mistake and said the bracha of Asher Natan Lanu before the Aliyah then he can correct it by saying the bracha of Asher Bachar Banu after the Aliyah.<ref>Mishna Brurah 139:15 citing the Magen Avraham</ref>

===Pointing to the Place===
# If the baal koreh started in the wrong place and they need to roll the sefer torah, Ashkenazim hold that a new bracha is necessary before starting the aliyah since the oleh didn't have in mind the reading in another place. If the wrong place was within what they were going to read today but it was just beyond where they were supposed to start, some poskim hold that one doesn't have to recite a new bracha. Therefore, one who doesn't recite a bracha in that case has what to rely on.<ref>Mishna Brurah 140:9. Shulchan Aruch O.C. 140:3 quotes two opinions about whether a new bracha is necessary when the oleh intended that the aliyah would begin in one place and it came out that it was a mistake and sefer needs to be rolled. </ref> Sephardim hold that in all cases one doesn't make a new bracha.<ref>Kaf HaChayim on Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 140:15 writes that we apply the principle of safek brachot lhakel even though it is unlike the standard ruling of following the second opinion in Shulchan Aruch.</ref>
# If the baal koreh started in the wrong place but it was just in another spot in the same column or an adjacent column that was revealed when the sefer was opened before the bracha, a new bracha is not necessary. If the other spot was earlier than the necessary spot it is preferable to start from where the oleh thought the aliyah should have started and continue until the point where the aliyah actually needs to begin and then a few more pesukim from there.<ref>Mishna Brurah 140:9</ref>
# For example if the baal koreh started with נשא את ראש בני קהת instead of נשא את ראש בני גרשון and they needed to roll the sefer, Ashkenazim hold that the oleh needs to make a new bracha, while Sephardim hold that one should not recite a new bracha.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21647&st=&pgnum=153 Tikkun Yisachar] writes that once it happened in his shul that the baal koreh started at the last aliya of bamidbar instead of the beginning of parshat naso. He required the oleh to recite a new bracha. He adds that Rav Yosef Karo was in attendance and he didn't protest. Yikra Dtzibura p. 194 cites that Chida (Ldovid Emet 6:62) and Rav Ovadia Yosef in his comments on Mikrei Kodesh Hilchot Kriyat Hatorah hold in this case that we would not require a new bracha.</ref>

===Reading Along with the Baal Koreh===
#The one who goes up to the torah should read along with the baal koreh quietly.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 141:2, Yechave Daat 4:11 based on Rosh Megilla 3:1 and 10</ref>
# It is permitted for the one getting the aliyah to be the baal koreh himself and you don't have to worry that someone will feel embarrassed that he doesn't know how to lein and he needs the baal koreh since at some points even those who know how to lein will ask the baal koreh to read.<ref>Igrot Moshe OC 4:91:7</ref>

===The Proper Way to Hold the Sefer Torah===

#When one is called to the Torah for an Aliya, he should hold onto the Sefer Torah while reciting the Beracha. See note for proper procedure.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 139:11. Rabbi Yosef Chaim (Ben Ish Chai Parashat Toledot Halacha 18) elaborates on the details of how precisely one should hold the Torah. He writes that when one is called to the Torah, he should first look at the text and see the first verse that will be read. He should then cover the writing with a cloth, and the text should remain covered until after the Beracha. While reciting the Beracha, one should hold onto the Torah scroll, his right hand should hold onto the right scroll, and his left hand should hold the left scroll. One should hold the Torah itself, and not the casing. As it is improper to directly touch the parchment, one should hold the Torah with a cloth, such as his Tallit. After completing the Beracha, one should remove his left hand from the Torah but continue holding the Torah with his right hand. He should continue holding onto the Torah with his right hand throughout the reading of the Torah. The Ben Ish Hai notes that this procedure is based upon the teachings of the Arizal, as written in Sha’ar Ha’kavanot. </ref>
#It is forbidden to hold onto to the parchment of the sefer torah without an intervening cloth, whether one is involved with rolling the sefer torah during kriyat hatorah or any other time.<ref>[[Megillah]] 32a says that a person who holds the parchment of a sefer torah without a covering of his hands he doesn't receive reward for the mitzvah he did while holding onto the sefer torah. Chazon Ovadyah ([[Shabbat]] vol 2, p. 266) writes that its forbidden to hold onto the parchment during kriyat hatorah or at any other time.</ref>

==Behavior During the Torah Reading==
===Listening to the Kriyat HaTorah===

#Even if the baal koreh pronounces the words in another dialect than one usually uses, such as an Ashekanzi listening to a Sephardi baal koreh, one fulfills one's obligation. The only times for which one should be strict to hear the Kriyat Hatorah from someone who uses the same pronunciation as oneself is Parshat Zachor and Parshat Parah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 282:15</ref>

===Standing for Kriyat HaTorah===

#It’s permissible to sit during Kriyat HaTorah<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 146:4 </ref> and that is the minhag. Some are strict to stand during Kriyat HaTorah so as to hear it as if one is receiving it from Har Sinai when Bnei Yisrael were standing.<ref>Rama 146:4 cites that this was the practice of the Maharam. Mishna Brurah 176:19 quotes the Bach who explains that even the Maharam agrees that, strictly speaking, standing is not required.</ref> Nonetheless, one who has difficulty standing and therefore cannot focus on the leining should sit.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:19</ref>
#During [[Barchu]] and Baruch HaMiverech LeOlam VeEd one should stand.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:18 writes that according to everyone, one must stand at this point because this is a davar she’bekedusha</ref> However, many don’t stand and the minhag has what to rely on.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:18-20, Piskei Teshuvot 146:6. See Ba'er Heitiv 146:5 who quotes Magen Avraham that one should stand for brachot hatorah and the Shaar HaTziyun 146:20 who disagrees. One would have thought it would be required to stand for the entire Torah reading just as we stand for any davar sh’be’kedusha (i.e. Kaddish, Barechu, and other parts of the service that require a minyan). However, Beit Hillel explain that since the Torah says regarding Kriat Shema “uvi’lechtecha va’derech” (Devarim 6:7), one may recite the Shema in any position (in Berachot 10a). By extension, Rav Soloveitchik thought that the same could be applied to any recital of psukim from the Torah and even during the berachot before the kriat ha’torah that one may listen in any position ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/802935/rabbi-hershel-schachter/inyonei-krias-hatorah/ Rav Schachter on yutorah.org “Inyonei Krias Hatorah” min. 56]). This is recorded in Nefesh Harav p. 124. However, see Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:141 who quotes the Brikser Rav who comes to an opposite conclusion that one must stand. Piskei Tshuvot 146:6 quotes from Rav Chayim Vital who testifies about the Arizal that he would always sit during the leining and the Barechu preceding the leining.</ref>
#One may not stand in a shul where the local rabbi sits because of acting arrogantly ([[Yuhara]]).<ref>Rabbi Hershel Schachter in a [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/802935/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Inyonei_Krias_Hatorah# shiur on yutorah.org "Inyonei Krias HaTorah"] (min 55) based on Baba Kama 86b where it says that any talmid who observes a midat chasidut which his rebbi doesn’t observe in the presence of his rebbi deserves to be excommunicated. See also Yalkut Yosef 145:12</ref>
#One should face the Sefer Torah during kriyat hatorah and not have one's back to the Torah.<ref>Rambam (Talmud Torah 10:10), Shulchan Aruch YD 282:1. [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/726345/rabbi-hershel-schachter/lesser-known-laws-of-torah-reading/ Rav Schachter (Hilchot Kriyat HaTorah II:10)] writes that some hold that if one doesn't face the kriyat hatorah one doesn't fulfill one's obligation.</ref>

====Standing for Aseret Hadibrot====
#Some have the custom to stand for the Aseret Hadibrot.<ref>The [[Rambam]] (Sh"t Harambam Siman 46) writes that we should prevent others from following the custom to stand because there is a concern that allowing people to stand will lead to a lack of Emunah in the sense that people might come to believe that the Aseret Hadibrot are more significant than the other psukim in the Torah. The [[Chida]] writes that since we read the Torah every Shabbat, we demonstrate that the entire Torah is true and we thus need not fear that people might begin to think that the Aseret Dibrot are more significant than other pesukim in the Torah. Additionally, Rav Hershel Schachter ([http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2010/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html The Aseres Hadibros]) writes that the fact that we read the pesukim differently (i.e. by stopping after each dibur as if there is a sof passuk) is an indication that we are attempting to reenact Ma'amad Har Sinai, thus perhaps also for this reason it would be permitted to stand.</ref> This is the prevalent Ashkenazic custom.<ref>Sh"t Igrot Moshe OC 4:22. Siddur Beit Yaakov, Shaarei Ephraiim, and the Chida (all quoted in Dirshu 494:3) had this custom. This custom is based on the idea that we strive to remember and even emulate the manner in which the Aseret Hadibrot were given at Har Sinai. Just as at Har Sinai the entire Jewish nation stood in awe and even trembled, so too, when we read the Aseret Hadibrot in shul, many stand in an effort to re-reexperience Matan Torah. See, however, R’ Elyashiv (in his shiurim on Berachot 12a), who writes the Rambam is truly correct that one should not stand. 
See [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/741705/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/ten-minute-halacha-standing-for-the-reading-of-aseres-hadibros/ Ten Minute Halacha: Standing for the reading of aseres hadibros] by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz for more background</ref> However, the Sephardic Minhag is not to stand for Aseret HaDibdrot,<ref>Yalkut Yosef 145-6:12 and 14, Shu"t Yechave Daat 1:29, Rav Chaim David Halevi in Shu"t Aseh Lecha Rav 6:21, [https://jewishlink.news/features/18941-standing-for-the-aseret-hadibrot-not-at-a-sephardic-kehilla Rabbi Chaim Jachter ]. Chacham Ovadia Yosef (Yechave Daat 1:29 and Yalkut Yosef 145:12 writes that one should stop others from standing specifically for the Aseret Hadibrot. All the more so, if someone decides to stand in a place where there are many Talmidei Chachamim who know the halacha and sitting, one should stop him, as the person standing will otherwise be perceived as haughty. Chacham Ovadia concludes that many poskim who permit standing simply lost the teshuva of the [[Rambam]].</ref> except among Moroccans, who do stand.<ref>Rabbi Shalom Messas (Shemesh U'magen [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21372&st=&pgnum=151 1:57], [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21291&pgnum=114 3:55:3]) defends the practice to stand even for Sephardim. [http://www.moroccanhalacha.com/standing-for-the-ten-commandments/ Rabbi Mordechai Lebhar ]writes that this is the prevalent custom for Moroccans. (Magen Avot, Orach Chaim 1:5)</ref> Others recommend giving the aliya to the rabbi so that everyone will stand anyway.<ref>Ish Matzliach 5: page 200 </ref>
# If one typically stands for the reading of the Torah throughout the rest of the year, there is certainly no issue standing during the reading of the aseret hadibrot.<ref>The issue the Rambam posed is simply not relevant if one is standing during the leining all year as no one will come to think that certain psukim are more important than others. Also, see Rav Hershel Schachter ([http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2010/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html The Aseres Hadibros]) </ref>
# Some hold that in a shul where many are standing one should nonetheless remain seated so as to teach others the proper practice.<ref>Rav Elyashiv (in his shiurim on Berachot 12a) writes the Rambam is truly correct that one should not stand, and, therefore, even if everyone is standing, one should remain sitting because everyone else is acting incorrectly.</ref> Nonetheless, others argue that one should join the practice of others around him and stand even if it is typically his custom to sit.<ref>Chacham Ovadia Yosef (Chazon Ovadia Yom Tov pg. 314). Dirshu Mishna Brura 494:3 quotes Sh"t Dvar Shmuel and Avuhav 276 that in a place where everyone stands you should not stop this practice, because the intent is clear that people are trying to beautify their mitzvah performance as if they are going to greet the Shechina. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach writes that since everyone knows that we are standing as a zecher le’ma'amad har sinai we should not stop people who stand. Since we also stand for other portions of the Torah such as Shirat Ha’yam we therefore need not be concerned. 
Rabbi Moshe Feinstein writes (O.C 4:22) that although logically it would seem to make sense to forbid people to stand, since on a practical level it has never happened that heretics have convinced Jews who are not knowledgeable that some pesukim in the Torah are more important than others, we are therefore permitted to stand. Thus, if you are coming from a place where they never stood and you arrive at a place where everyone is standing you should join them.</ref> Some suggest that, in this scenario, he should stand from the beginning of the parsha or at least from the beginning of the aliya so as not to give off the impression that the psukim of the Aseret Hadibrot are more important than the rest of the Torah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (145:14) writes that an individual who is in a shul in which they stand and he does not have the ability to change the practice of the shul should ensure to stand from the beginning of the Torah reading or at the very least from the moment the person called up for the aliya of the Aseret Hadibrot lest he end up sitting amongst everyone else who is standing which will be perceived as a disgrace to the Kedusha of the Aseret Hadibrot.</ref>

===Talking During Kriyat HaTorah===

#From the time the Sefer Torah is opened to make the [[Brachot HaTorah]] it is forbidden to speak at all even words of Torah. Giving a halachic ruling is forbidden unless it’s in order to prevent someone from doing a prohibition and it’s impossible to signal to him.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 146:2, Mishna Brurah 146:4-5 </ref>
#Someone who speaks during Kriyat HaTorah is culpable for serious transgressions including disgracing Torah by ignoring listening to Torah, making a Chilul Hashem, potentially [[Lashon Hara]], Rechilut or other forbidden speech, speaking mundane words in a shul and the punishments include having one’s [[Tefillah]] discarded and a trangession that’s too great to bear.<ref>Beiur Halacha 146 s.v. VeHaNachon </ref>
#Even between Aliya’s it’s forbidden to talk but it’s permissible to learn [[Shenayim Mikra VeEchad Targum]] and some permit learn other things, yet others emphasize not to learn with someone else between Aliya’s because it may continue into Kriyat HaTorah.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:6, 15 </ref>
#It is forbidden to talk during the haftara as well.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:4 </ref>

===Learning Torah During Kriyat HaTorah===

#It is forbidden to learn Torah during kriyat hatorah. The only permissible way to learn is if: (a) one already heard Kriyat HaTorah (or one will hear another [[minyan]]), (b) there are ten others who are listening to Kriyat HaTorah, (c) one is sitting on the side and facing away from the congregation, indicating that he already heard Kriyat HaTorah, (d) one already was learning before the Sefer Torah was open, and (e) one is learning quietly.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 146:2, Aruch Hashulchan 146:5, Piskei Teshuvot 146:4.
*The Gemara Sotah 39a establishes that it is forbidden to learn in the middle of kriyat hatorah, however, the rishonim try to explain how why Rav Sheshet was allowed to turn his face away and learn during kriyat hatorah as recorded in Brachot 8a. Tosfot (Brachot 8a s.v. Rav Sheshet) says that he learned quietly. The Rif (Megillah 14b) answers that he learned all the time and as such he was exempt from certain mitzvot (torato umanuto). The Rosh Brachot 1:7 cites both opinions. Rabbenu Yonah (Brachot 4a s.v. Rav Sheshet) writes that if he turns away his face before they start kriyat hatorah then he can learn since he is indicating that he isn't involved with kriyat hatorah now (and he going to fulfill that obligation another time). The Bahag (cited by Rif Megillah 14b) holds that in all cases it is only permitted to learn if there are already ten people listening to the kriyat hatorah. The Shulchan Aruch 146:2 cites all four of the above opinions. Mishna Brurah 146:9 cites the Eliya Rabba that today we don't have someone who learns all the time (torato umanuto). The Aruch Hashulchan 146:5 writes that it is only permitted to learn if one already started before they start kriyat hatorah, one turned away one's face, there are ten others who are listening to the kriyat hatorah, and one is learning quietly.</ref>
#Some say it is proper for everyone in the congregation to read along with the Baal Koreh word by word in order to listen better and have intent, while most poskim hold that it everyone should be quiet and listen intently.<ref>Mishna Brurah 146:15 quoting Magen Avraham says to read along with Baal Koreh, while Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 24:3 and Piskei Teshuvot 146:5 say that it’s better to listen quietly. </ref>

==Laws for the Baal Koreh (the Reader)==
===Amen===

#Although usually one may not respond [[Amen]] louder than the blessing to which one is responding, the person reading the Torah may say [[Amen]] in a loud voice. This is acceptable because we want to alert the congregation that the reading is beginning.<ref>Sh"t Rivivot Ephraim 1:106 </ref>

===Accidentally Skipped a Word or Pasuk===

#On [[Shabbat]], if the one who read the Torah missed a word or [[Pasuk]], one needs to repeat that [[Pasuk]]. Even if the Sefer Torah was already returned to the aron, one should take out the Torah and read from the beginning of that [[Pasuk]] and two other [[Pesukim]] as well.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 137:3, Mishna Brurah 137:8. Nishmat Adam 31:1 writes that one does not need to read the pesukim in order and if one is repeating for a missed one pasuk one doesn't need to continue to read everything afterwards in order.</ref>

===Correcting Mistakes===

#According to Sephardim, if the Baal Koreh makes a mistake even if it doesn't change the meaning the congregation should correct him and he should fix it. After the fact, if they already finished the aliyah they shouldn't go back to the mistaken pasuk.<ref>The Rambam Tefillah 12:6 writes that the Baal Koreh should be corrected even for a small nuance. The Shulchan Aruch 142:1 adopts the opinion of the Rambam. Although the Mishna Brurah 142:1 implies that the Shulchan Aruch agrees with the Rama, the Kaf Hachaim 142:1 clarifies that this isn't the case. Kaf Hachaim indeed proves from the Zohar and other kabbalistic sources that every single punctuation and musical note (trup) is vital to the kriyat hatorah. (See also Mishna Brurah 143:21 that the Rama often argues with the Shulchan Aruch even without writing Yesh Omrim.) </ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, if the Baal Koreh makes a mistake only if it changes the meaning should they correct him.<ref>The Rambam Tefillah 12:6 implies that the Baal Koreh should be corrected even if he makes a mistake on one nuance in the pasuk. However, the Tur 142:1 cites the Manhig who sounds like you don't have to correct the Baal Koreh at all. The Mahari Ibn Chaviv (cited by Bet Yosef 142:1) proposes a compromise based on the Rosh. Only if the mistake changes the meaning of the words then the Baal Koreh should be corrected. The Rama 142:1 rules like the Mahari Ibn Chaviv.</ref>
#Just like the Baal Koreh has to be careful not to make mistakes, so too the one taking the Aliyah needs to as well.<ref>Kaf Hachaim 142:1</ref>

==When is Kriyat Hatorah Done?==
# When is there is an obligation to do Kriyat Hatorah? On Mondays, Thursdays, and Shabbat afternoons there is an obligation to do Kriyat Hatorah with 3 aliyot, on Rosh Chodesh and Chol Hamoed 4 aliyot, on Yom Tov 5 aliyot, on Yom Kippur 6 aliyot, and on Shabbat 7 aliyot.<ref>Mishna Megillah 21a, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 135:1, O.C. 423:1, O.C. 663:1, O.C. 488:3, O.C. 494:1, O.C. 621:1, and O.C. 282:1.</ref>
# If a congregation missed doing Kriyat Hatorah during Shacharit of Monday they can do it in the afternoon at [[Mincha]] or afterwards,<ref>Mishna Brurah 135:1, Piskei Teshuvot 135:3. Mishna Brurah explains that essentially the mitzvah of Kriyat Hatorah applies all day. Piskei Teshuvot further supports this from the Goren Dovid OC 5, Mahari Asad 51, Teshuva Mahava 29, Maharshag 2:92, Bet Shaarim OC 50, Pri Hasadeh 3:1, Bet Yisrael 20, Shevet Halevi 4:15, 5:16, Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:145, and Tzitz Eliezer 13:27. He cites that once the Chatom Sofer was traveling and missed Kriyat Hatorah Shacharit of Monday and made it up at mincha. He summarizes that the poskim notes that it is only permitted after the fact that it wasn't possible for an extenuating circumstance they couldn't do it in the morning.</ref> however, they can not make it up on Tuesday.<ref>Ateret Zekenim 135:1 writes that it is possible to make up Kriyat Hatorah on Tuesday if the congregation missed it on Monday. However, the Eliyah Rabba 135:2 disagrees since we only make up Kriyat Hatorah of Shabbat since we miss an entire parsha and not Monday and Thursday which we complete on Shabbat either way. Biur Halacha 135:2 s.v. Shabbat and Yalkut Yosef 135:3 concur with the Eliyah Rabba. Halacha Brurah 135:6 agrees that it is impossible to make up Kriyat Hatorah of Monday on Tuesday. He quotes many that hold this way as well including Pri Megadim E"A 135:4, Machasit Hashekel 135:4, Birkei Yosef 135:2, Ldovid Emet 9:1, Emet Lyakov (Taut Kriyat Hatorah 1), Magen Giborim E"H 135:4, Maharil Diskin (Kuntres Acharon 5:8), Kaf Hachaim 135:8, Yabia Omer OC 4:17:7, and Aruch Hashulchan 135:7.</ref>
# If the congregation missed Kriyat Hatorah on Shabbat morning, most poskim hold that they can make it up Shabbat afternoon with 7 aliyot before mincha, while others hold that it can't be made up.<reF>Dagul Mirvava 135:2 holds that one can make up the Kriyat Hatorah of the morning on Shabbat in the afternoon. Shaar Hatziyun 135:3 extrapolates from there to making up on a Monday and Thursday afternoon. However, Chida in Chaim Shaal 2:16 disagrees and thinks that one may not make up a Kriyat Hatorah in the afternoon at all since it wasn't an establishment of chazal to read a whole parsha in the afternoon. Yabia Omer 4:17:5 and Halacha Brurah 135:5 accept the Chida and apply it to Monday and Thursday as well. The language of Yabia Omer's conclusion is that it is better not to do the Kriyat Hatorah and be passive, however, someone who does has what to rely upon.</ref>

==Mi Sheberach==

#When reciting the name of the person in a Mi sheberach the minhag is to recite the person name and his mother's name such as ploni ben plonit.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 368), Yabia Omer OC 2:11. He cites several reasons for this minhag. 1) Since generally the identification of the mother is more certain than the father that is why the minhag was established with the mother's name (Zohar Lech Lecha p. 84a, Kaf Hachaim 284:37, Maharshal in Chachmat Shlomo Shabbat 66b). So as not to embarrass a child of a Jewish mother and a non-Jewish father we mention the mother's name always (Yafeh Lelev 3:605). 2) It is hinted to in the pasuk of "והושיעה לבן אמתך" (Tehillim 86:16) and "ואני עבדך בן אמתך" (Tehillim 116:16) (Zohar ibid., Melamed Lhoil OC 1:23). 3) Chazal said that symbolically the flesh comes from a person's mother and one's bones from one's father. Therefore, while a person is alive the Mi sheberach is made using the mother's name and after he's dead we use the father's name (Rashi Kiddushin 30b, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pagefeed/hebrewbooks_org_41862_170.pdf Mekor Chesed 242:1]). 4) It is more effective to pray for mercy using the mother's name since she isn't accountable for bitul torah (Ben Yehoyada Brachot 55b). </ref> If the mother's name isn't known you can use the father's name for a Mi sheberach.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 2:11:5</ref>
#In a hashkava (Sephardic prayer for a deceased person, similar to Kel Maleh for Ashkenazim) Ashkenazim mention the name of a person's father and the Sephardic custom is to mention the mother's name.<ref>Melamed Lhoil 1:23, Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 368) based on Shabbat 66b, Kaf Hachaim 284:37, Yabia Omer 2:11.</ref>

==Haftarah (Haftorah)==
===Brachot on the Haftarah===
#One does not answer [[amen]] after the words Neemarim BeEmet but only after VeTzedek.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:3</ref>
#At the end of the closing brachot of the Haftarah, according to Sephardim the maftir should answer Amen to his own bracha.<ref>Yerushalmi Brachot Perek 7, quoted by Rif Brachot 33b and Rosh 7:11. Ritva Hilchot Brachot 6:5, Pekudat HaLeviim (Ra’ah) Brachot 45b, Birkeh Yosef OC 215:1, Yosef Ometz 68, Ben Ish Hai vol. 1 Masei Seif 14, Kaf HaChaim OC 215:1, Yechave Daat 2:23, Yabia Omer vol. 8 OC 25:10 and vol 9 OC 108:102, Ohr LeTzion vol. 2 page 134, Halichot Olam vol. 2 page 130, Birkat Hashem vol. 1 6:18. See [[Answering_Amen_to_Your_Own_Bracha]]</ref>

===The Type of Book to Read the Haftarah From===
#The best thing to use for Haftorah is a handwritten complete sefer of Navi.<ref>Gemara Gittin 60b, Magen Avraham 284:1. See however, Yachava Daat 5:26 who questions whether it is really better since once it was permitted once in history because it was impossible otherwise perhaps that halachic leniency is canonized. In fact, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1725&st=&pgnum=207 Chikrei Lev 1:57] holds that once it was permitted to write an incomplete sefer the leniency continues and that's why the minhag is not to use a complete sefer. </ref>
#Some poskim hold that it is better to use a handwritten Haftorah sefer instead of a printed complete Tanach.<ref>Rav Ovadia in Yachava Daat 5:26 holds that it is better to use a handwritten haftorah sefer instead of a printed Tanach since it has more kedusha as many poskim hold printing a sefer isn't considered ketiva. Chazon Ish 60:11 (cited by Dirshu) held that there's no preference for a printed tanach than an incomplete sefer since a printed tanach is made of separate pages and is considered a sefer that chazal wouldn't warrant to write. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shulchan Shlomo 284:1, cited by Dirshu) holds that it is better to use a sefer haftorah than a printed Chumash. See Rav Poalim 4:33 who writes that a sefer haftorot is an invalid sefer and once it is invalid it doesn't matter if it is invalid in one way or multiple ways. See also [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1725&st=&pgnum=208 Chikrei Lev 1:57]. </ref> Some hold it is better to use a printed Tanach than a handwritten Haftorah sefer.<ref>Magen Avraham 284:1 writes that it is better to use a printed Tanach or complete sefer of Navi rather than a chumash with printed haftorah. He explains that it is better since a printed sefer is considered a properly written sefer and therefore if it is complete it is warranted by chazal. Taz 284:2 also agrees that printing is like ketiva.</ref>
===The Text to Read for the Haftarah===
#If it is a double parsha, the Haftorah comes from the second parsha.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:6</ref>
===Proper Conduct During the Haftarah Reading===
#One may not speak when the maftir is reading the Haftorah.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:4</ref>
#If the haftorah is being read from a complete handwritten sefer only the maftir should read it and everyone should listen. However, if they are using a printed sefer or a handwritten incomplete sefer such as a Haftorah sefer, the maftir should read the Haftorah aloud and the rest of the congregation should read along quietly. If one is still in the middle of the Haftorah and the Maftir finished the Haftorah, one should pause and listen to the [[Brachot]].<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 79:5.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Rabba and Rav Yosef in Gemara Gittin 60a state that one can't read from a Sefer Haftorot since it isn't supposed to be written since it isn't a complete Sefer of Tanach. However, the Gemara concludes that it is permitted since it is otherwise impossible for every congregation to have a complete set of Navi klafim handwritten. Why shouldn't you read it if it isn't shouldn't be written? The Meiri seems that once the rabbis said it was forbidden to write they also didn't want people to read from it once it was written. However, the Ritva Gittin 60a explains that since the incomplete sefer shouldn't be written reading from it is like reading pesukim by heart, which is forbidden. Similarly, the Chatom Sofer O.C. 1:68 explains that reading from an incomplete sefer is forbidden just like reading by heart since both of them are forms of transmitting Torah that could lead to mistakes. According to that approach, assuming like Tosfot Temurah 14b s.v. devarim it is forbidden to read from an incomplete sefer for others. Tosfot Temurah holds that one could read pesukim by heart for oneself but not to exempt others. Gra 49:2 holds that opinion is correct. Magen Avraham 49:1 is concerned for that opinion. Accordingly, Chatom Sofer concludes that if they are reading the haftorah from an incomplete sefer the congregation should read to themselves. Gra in Maaseh Rav n. 136 and Mishna Brurah 284:11 agree with that logic.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> The Ritva and Meiri write that the halacha is that it is permitted to write an incomplete sefer because of Et Laasot LaHashem. Kol Bo siman 20 quotes the Rashba who writes that one can read the haftorah from an incomplete sefer. Bet Yosef 284:1 quotes this.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Magen Avraham 284:5 quotes the Arizal who said that a person should read the haftorah to oneself and listen to the brachot. Pri Megadim E"A 284:5 points out that everyone should read along quietly and listen to the congregational reading otherwise if no one listens to the congregational reading and just reads silently it isn't a reading of a tzibur. Maaseh Rav n. 136 also makes it clear that one should read word by word with the Shaliach Tzibur. </ref> Some say that the minhag is that everyone just listens quietly irrelevant of what it is being read from.<ref>Chatom Sofer O.C. 1:68 agrees with the approach of the Arizal and Gra to read along quietly but adds that the minhag is that everyone listens without reading along.</ref>

==Links==

*[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/802935/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Inyonei_Krias_Hatorah# Inyonei Krias Hatorah] by Rav Herschel Schachter

==Sources==
<references />

{{Prayers}}
[[Category:Shabbat]]
[[Category:Prayer]]

Brit Milah

2024-08-18T18:39:34Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

==Importance of the Mitzva of Milah==

#The mitzva of milah is equivalent to all other mitzvot in the Torah combined.<ref>Nedarim 32a </ref>
#Without the mitzva of milah, the world would not exist.<ref>Nedarim 32a </ref>
#In the merit of brit milah, Hashem split the sea for the Jewish people <ref>Yalkut Shimoni Yirmiyahu 33 [321] </ref>
#In the merit of brit milah, Aharon Hakohen entered the Kodesh Hakodashim every year.<ref>Vayikra Rabba 21:5</ref>

==The Night Before==
===Berit Yitzchak===

#In Sephardic communities, it is customary on the night before a Berit Mila to assemble ten men in the home, as well as Torah scholars, to read special passages from the Zohar, in order to give the baby protection.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 5, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Shulchan Aruch Kitzur 163:8, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2334 Rabbi Eli Mansour]</ref> There is value to reading Zohar even if one doesn't understand it.<ref>Chaim Shaal 1:75:2, Yabia Omer 1:26:10</ref>
#During this event, the mother should come to the side room and recite Birkat Ha’gomel.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 10, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2334 Rabbi Eli Mansour]</ref>
#One does not need to eat bread at the meal for the night of the bris, and if one chooses to do so, it would not qualify as a seudat mitzva, and thus would not allow for eating meat during the nine days.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 8</ref>
#If the brit is pushed off past the 8th day, one should do the learning the night before the bris instead of on the 8th night.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 11</ref>
#If the brit is on Shabbat morning, one should do the learning on Thursday night, and if possible to gather ten people to learn on Friday night.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 11 </ref>

==Obligation of the Mitzvah of Brit Milah==

#A father is obligated to perform a Brit Milah (circumcision) on his son or to appoint a pious Mohel to do so on his behalf.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1, Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 12.

*The Gemara Kiddushin 29a states that a father is obligated to perform a Brit Milah for his son. Some Rishonim assume that the entire obligation on the father is to make sure that the Milah takes place, but he doesn't need to personally perform it nor even appoint a Mohel, as long as it is taken care of. These rishonim include the Maharach Or Zaruah (responsa n. 11) and Tosfot Rid (Kiddushin 29a s.v. Otto). However, most rishonim assume that there is an obligation upon the father to actually perform the Milah, and if he doesn't know how, then he should appoint a Mohel to do it for him. These Rishonim include the Rambam (Milah 1:1), Darkei Moshe (YD 264:1), and Rosh Chullin 6:8.
*The Ohr Zaruah (v. 2, Siman 107) writes that if the father knows how to do the Milah, but nonetheless asks a Mohel to do it for him, he is losing out on his mitzvah. Shach CM 382:4 agrees. The Darkei Moshe 264:1 argues that we always use the principle of agency (Shaliach Adam KeMoto, Kiddushin 41a), and that this mitzvah should be no different. The Kesot CM 382:2 defends the Ohr Zaruah saying that Brit Milah is a mitzvah that needs to be done with your body, and can't be delegated to be done by someone else.</ref>
#The father of the baby should stand near the Mohel (the one who is performing the circumcision) in order to show that the Mohel is his proxy.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>

==When a Brit Milah should take place==

#The Brit Milah is performed on the eighth day after the baby's birth.<ref>Vayikra 12:3, Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 262:1</ref> It may not be performed before the eighth day. If it is done before the eighth day, there is a dispute if the child should have a hatafat dam brit ceremony on the eighth day.<ref>Rama Y.D. 262:1 rules that bdiavad (after the fact), a milah performed during the day before the eighth day is acceptable. However, if the Milah is performed at night before the eighth day, even if it's the eighth night, then hatafat dam brit would be required. Shach 262:2 disagrees and requires a hatafat dam brit in all cases if the Milah was performed before the eighth day. Shach notes that Hatafah in this case wouldn't be performed on Shabbat. Bear Heitiv 262:1 cites the Shach.</ref>
#It is permitted for a Jewish doctor to perform a hospital circumcision for a non-religious Jew before the eighth day.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/931524/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-hospital-circumcision/ Rabbi Lebowitz] explained that according to the aforementioned Rama, the Milah would bdiavad (after the fact) acceptable in this case. Nonetheless, even according to Shach who believes it to be ineffective, that doesn't make it forbidden to do. Since it might make the child not an arel it is permitted for the doctor to do it. They should be aware that they cut the necessary amount that it would be a valid circumcision according to the halacha, the anesthesia and the clamps used today that allow for a little bleeding wouldn't invalidate the circumcision. He concluded by quoting Rav Mordechai Willig as permitting this.</ref>
#The Brit Milah may be performed any time during the day, after [[HaNetz HaChama]], however, one should make an effort to fulfill the mitzvah of Brit Milah early in the morning because of "Zarizin Makdimin LeMitzvot".<ref>Pesachim 4a says that the Brit Milah may be performed any time during the day but those who have alacrity in fulfilling mitzvot will do it early. The gemara learns this concept of Zarizin Makdimin LeMitzvot from Avraham Avinu when he went to perform the Akeda early in the morning. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 262:1 codifies this as halacha.</ref>
#If one performed the Brit Milah before [[HaNetz HaChama]] after [[Olot HaShachar]] one fulfills one's obligation.<ref>[[Megillah]] 20a, Rama 262:1</ref>
#If it will cause a fight among the family to perform the Brit Milah very early, one may delay it, but one should still try to make it as early as possible.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>
#If there is a concern of a health risk to the baby, the Brit Milah should be delayed until the baby is healthy. Once the baby is healthy, in the case of some illnesses the Brit Milah should be performed without delay, while in other cases, the Brit Milah is only performed after 8 days after the baby became healthy.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 262:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:4</ref> Needless to say, because of the complexity of these issues, it is incumbent for a person to consult an Orthodox Rabbi to assess the situation. For more details about a delayed Milah, see the [[#A Delayed Milah]] section.
#If a baby is born during [[Bein HaShemashot]], since there is a doubt whether it was day or night, the Brit Milah is performed on the ninth day from the baby's birth.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 162:4</ref>Because of the complexity involved in practically determining [[Bein HaShemashot]] an Orthodox Rabbi should be consulted.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:6</ref>

==Brachot for the Brit Milah==

#The father of the baby makes the Bracha "ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם אשר קידשנו במצותיו וציונו להכניסו בבריתו של אברהם אבינו" (“Baruch Atta Hashem Elokenu Melech HaOlam Asher Kiddeshanu BeMitzvotav VeTzivanu LeHachniso BeBrito Shel Avraham Avinu”) before the Milah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1 writes that this Bracha should be made after the cutting of the Orlah before the Periyah, however, Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot vol 2 pg 60) writes that the minhag is to make it before the Milah and the Birchat Hamilah altogether. Yalkut Yosef Milah p. 77 writes that the minhag of Israel, Bavel, and Eastern Sephardi countries is to recite Lhachniso before the Milah. Even though Shulchan Aruch holds like the Rosh (Shabbat 14:10, Teshuva 26:1) that it can be said afterwards, the Rambam (Rav Avraham Ben HaRambam cited by Yabia Omer OC 2:17:7) and Rif (Teshuva 293) hold it should be said beforehand.</ref> This bracha should be said standing.<ref>Rama YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:7 </ref>
#The Mohel makes the Bracha "ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם אשר קידשנו במצותיו וציונו על המילה" (“Baruch Atta Hashem Elokenu Melech HaOlam Asher Kiddeshanu BeMitzvotav VeTzivanu Al HaMilah”) prior to the Milah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef 8:4 </ref> The text is the same whether it is the father or the mohel reciting it.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:3</ref> This bracha should be said standing.<ref>Rama YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:7 </ref>
#According to Sephardim, a Shehechiyanu is recited at the Brit Milah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:7, Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot vol 2 pg 72) </ref> According to Ashkenazim a [[Shehecheyanu]] is not said at the Brit Milah except when a father is doing a Brit Milah for a firstborn son who is obligated in [[Pidyon HaBen]].<ref>Rama YD 265:7 </ref> Today, the Ashkenazic minhag is not to recite Shechiyanu outside of Israel.<ref>Otzar Habrit 3:15:21</ref>
#Next Hagefen is made on wine and then the bracha of Asher Kidesh Yedid MeBeten.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:18 </ref> The text is אשר קידש ידיד מבטן, אל חי חלקנו צורנו צוה להציל ידידות שארנו משחת.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:19</ref> The one who recited this bracha should taste the wine before the paragraph of "אלוקינו ואלוקי אבותינו קיים את הילד וכו'" and naming the baby.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:20, Yabia Omer 7:23</ref> It is sufficient to taste the wine and not drink a cheekful.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:22</ref>
#When the one reciting the bracha says ואומר לך בדמייך חיי the mohel takes a drop of wine and places it on the lips of the baby.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:21</ref>
#When reciting the bracha of אשר קידש ידיד מבטן Ashkenazim have the Sandak stand and hold the baby (Amidah Lbrachot)<ref>Otzar Habrit 3:15:23</ref>, while Sephardim have the Sandak continue to sit.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:26</ref>
#After the bracha of אשר קידש ידיד מבטן there is a prayer said for the welfare of the baby and the mother and in that paragraph the baby is named.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:27</ref>
#If the Brit Milah takes place on [[Shabbat]], if the one making the [[Brachot]] didn't yet make [[Kiddush]], he should drink from the cup of wine a Melo Lugmav (cheekful) and another [[Revi'it]].<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 77:14</ref> Sephardim hold that altogether he should drink a Reviyit or a Melo Lugmav.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:23</ref>
#The father of the baby and mohel don't need to close their eyes or cover the nakedness of the baby when reciting the brachot.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:10</ref>

==Mohel==

#Sephardim hold that a woman can be a mohel.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 264:1</ref> Ashkenazim hold that a woman shouldn't be a mohel but if there's no man available she should do the milah.<ref>Rama Y.D. 264:1 writes that since some hold that a woman can't do milah the minhag is to specifically get a male mohel.</ref>

==Sandakut (holding of the baby)==

#One should appoint a pious Sandak.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>
#The father of the baby should place the baby on the lap of the Sandak.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, one shouldn't appoint the same person as a Sandak if he was already a Sandak for another one of one's sons.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>

==Brit Milah Ceremony==

#When the baby is brought in, those in attendance should say Baruch Haba Beshem Hashem out loud. The father of the baby says the pasuk אשרי תבחר ותקרב ישכון חצריך and those standing there answer נשבעה בטוב ביתך קדוש היכלך.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:1</ref>
#Everyone in attendance of the Brit Milah should stand except for the Sandak who is holding the baby.<ref>Rama Y.D. 265:1 cites the Maharam who made n allusion to the concept of standing for a Brit Milah from ויעמד העם בברית (Melachim 2:23:3). This is codified by the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:2 and Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:2.</ref>
#After the Bracha of LeHachniso, those in attendance should answer [[Amen]] and add "כשם שנכנס לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה למצוות ולמעשים טובים" - "Keshem SheNichnas LaBrit Ken Yikanes LeTorah ULeChpah ULeMaasim Tovim".<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:2, Otzar Habrit 3:15:20</ref> Sephardim have the practice to say "כשם שהכנסתו לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה למצוות ולמעשים טובים" unless the father isn't there in which case they say "כשם שנכנס לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה למצוות ולמעשים טובים".<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:5</ref>
#The mohel places the baby on the Kiseh of Eliyahu and says זה כסא של אליהו הנביא מלאך הברית.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:8</ref>
#Some have the practice to have candles lit in honor of the Brit Milah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:9</ref>
#The minhag is to bury the orlah skin in dirt. Some say ונחש עפר לחמו when doing so.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:14</ref>
#Immediately after the brachot of the father the Sephardic minhag is to recite the 13 middot of Rachamim.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:17</ref>
#At the end of the milah the Sephardic minhag of Yerushalayim is to recite שיר המעלות אשרי כל ירא ה' and Kaddish Yemey Shelemah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:27</ref>

===Tallit and Tefillin for Brit Milah===

#The Ashkenazic minhag is for everyone involved and observing the milah to keep on Tefillin for the Brit Milah since the Brit Milah is a sign between us and Hashem and so is the Tefillin.<ref>Mishna Brurah 25:55, Piskei Teshuvot 25:29. Avnei Yishfeh 7:7:8 explains that unlike Shabbat or Yom Tov which are a day that is a sign between us and Hashem, brit milah is a temporary mitzvah and doesn't not require removing tefillin. Siach Tzadikim (Brit Milah p. 145) quotes the practice of the Satmer Rebbe to remove his tefillin for milah because the brit milah is a sign like Shabbat and tefillin is also a sign.</ref> Sephardim, however, have the practice not to keep on Tefillin, yet those who do have the practice to leave on Tefillin have what to rely upon.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:7:2)</ref>
#If the milah is on a Rosh Chodesh and the congregation already took off their tefillin many hold that they should not put it back on for the Brit Milah. The Ashkenazic minhag is that the father of the baby, the Mohel, and Sandak put back on their tefillin,<ref>Piskei Teshuvot 25:29</ref> while Sephardim have the practice not to put them back on.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:7:2)</ref>
#The minhag is for sandak and father of the baby to wear a tallit during the brit milah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:7:2)</ref>

===Minyan for Brit===

#When possible a Brit Milah should be done in the presence of a [[minyan]]<ref>Pirkei Drabbi Eliezer ch. 19, Maharil (Milah n. 2), Tur 265:6 citing Rav Sar Shalom, Piskei Maharach Or Zaruah (Milah n. 36), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 265:6. Pirkei Drabbi Eliezer ch. 19 postulates that Hashem always made public testimonies in the presence of ten people. It then applies this dictum to Brit Milah, Chalitza, and Sheva Brachot for a wedding.</ref> in order to publicize the fact that a crucial mitzvah is being performed to bring the child into the covenant of Avraham Avinu. Additionally, it is a opportune moment to thank Hashem in public for the healthy birth of a baby boy.<ref>[http://www.chabad.org.il/Magazines/Article.asp?ArticleID=9093&CategoryID=1683 chabad.org.il]. See Otzar Habrit p. 183 and 238</ref>
#Some say that one should not delay a brit milah in order to get a minyan for the milah, while others allow delaying.<ref>Mishna Halachot 19:196 responded to Az Nidbaru 14:46 who held that it is better to do the milah immediately and not wait for a minyan in order to fulfill zerizut. Mishna Halachot argues that it is better to wait for the minyan even if it means waiting until after chatzot. Obviously though he doesn't allow delaying the brit milah for no reason.</ref>
#One should not delay a brit milah in order to get a minyan for the seuda.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1495&pgnum=263 Maharam Shik YD 386] writes that to perform a mitzvah in a more enhanced manner it is permitted to delay it as we see by Birkat Halevana. However, having a minyan for the brit milah isn't a sufficient reason to delay the milah.</ref>
#A person doesn't have to mevatel Torah to participate in a brit milah unless there wouldn't be a minyan without him.<ref>Lhorot Natan YD 15:65</ref>

==The Meal of the Brit Milah==

#It is a proper practice to make a meal on the day of a Brit Milah and it is considered a Seudat Mitzvah. <ref>Pirkei DRabbi Eliezer ch. 29, Shulchan Aruch YD 265:12, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:8. See Gemara [[Shabbat]] 130a</ref>
#The practice is not to invite people to this meal because there is an issue for someone who was invited to a meal of Brit Milah and didn't attend.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Shulchan Aruch Kitzur 163:8, Bayit HaYehudah vol. 10 pg. 182, see also [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/750891/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Inviting_People_to_a_Bris Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz] </ref>

===Meat or Dairy===

#Ideally the meal should have meat but one fulfills the minhag even with chicken or fish.<ref>Magen Avraham 249:6 citing the Maharshal requires meat for a brit milah meal. Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot 2:11:3 based on Taamei Haminhagim writes that the meal should have meat initially but if that's not possible it could have chicken or fish. Rabbenu Bechay Beresheet 21:8 writes that the minhag to have a seuda after a Brit Milah is based on the party Avraham made for Yitzchak and the midrash writes that the party was for fact he was able to give Yitzchak a Milah. </ref>
#Those who are lenient to have dairy for the milah meal should at least serve wine.<ref>[http://www.torahweb.org/torah/docs/rsch/RavSchachter-Corona-56-January-31-2021.pdf Rav Schachter (Corona teshuva #56)]</ref>

===Bread===

#The meal should be a bread meal.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot 2:11:3</ref>

===Minyan===

#The minhag is to have a minyan for the seudah of a brit milah.<ref>Rama Y.D. 265:12, Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot 2:11:2</ref> If one didn't have a minyan the seudah is still valid.<ref>Otzar Habrit 3:17:4 p. 239 writes that even if there wasn’t a minyan present at the seudat brit milah the seuda is still a seuda and the minyan isn’t the halacha but a minhag. Bechorat Habrit 265:66 says ten is enough but it isn't critical. See also Maharam Shik YD 386.</ref>
#If one would otherwise learn Torah one does not need to [[Bitul Torah|mevatel Torah]] in order to go to a seuda of a Brit Milah unless there wouldn't be a [[minyan]] at the seuda.<ref>Lhorot Natan YD 15:65 and Yabia Omer YD 4:19. Yabia Omer cites Maharshag 2:125 who explains that it is more important to learn Torah than to go to a seudat mitzvah and he quotes that the Maharam Shik told him this as good advice. He qualifies it that if there's a chance that there wouldn't be a minyan without him it is better to go to the seuda than to learn. Yabia Omer asks why indeed should he mevatel Torah in order to make the minyan if that is a mitzvah that isn't critical to have a minyan for the seuda. He answers that since having a minyan is an enhancement of the mitzvah (Rama Y.D. 265:12) we would mevatel Torah to make sure that happens and it is considered as a mitzvah that couldn't be done without you (Moed Katan 9b and Meiri there). Dibrot Eliyahu 8:62 cites and agrees with Yabia Omer. Lhorot Natan YD 15:65 comes to the same conclusion on his own.</ref>
#A brit milah which falls out on Sukkot must have the seuda of a Brit Milah in the Sukkah. If the Sukkah isn't big enough for everyone to enter, they should have a minyan have the seuda in the Sukkah and not eat outside the Sukkah. If they can't even fit a minyan, some say that they can eat outside the Sukkah with a minyan and others argue that they should have a seuda with fewer people in the Sukkah even without a minyan rather than eat outside the Sukkah.<ref>Maharik 179 cited by Rama O.C. 640:6 holds that the seuda of brit milah needs to be in the sukkah. The Biur Halacha 640:6 s.v. vseudat explains that if the Sukkah isn't big enough for everyone they should just have a minyan eat the seuda. If they can't even fit that, he quotes the Magen Avraham 640:13 who says that they can eat the seuda outside the Sukkah, while the Gra holds that you should have a sueda without a minyan rather than eat outside the Sukkah. Biur Halacha seems to favor the Gra in citing the Pri Megadim and Bikurei Yaakov to support that contention. Aruch Hashulchan 640:15 is very lenient to have the seuda outside the Sukkah if they don't fit.</ref>

==A Delayed Milah==

#A delayed Milah may not take place on [[Shabbat]] or [[Yom Tov]].<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:4</ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, one may perform a delayed Brit Milah on Thursday or Friday even if it will cause a situation of Pikuach Nefesh, however, Sephardim hold that one should not perform a delayed Brit Milah on Thursday or Friday. <ref>*The Gemara [[Shabbat]] 19a quotes the Briatta which states that one may not board a boat in order to travel on [[Shabbat]] unless one got on before 3 days before [[Shabbat]] (whether or not this includes Wednesday, see Mishna Brurah 248:4).
*The Rif ([[Shabbat]] 7a-b) explains that the reason for this restriction is that if one boards a boat within 3 days of [[Shabbat]] it will negatively impact the passenger’s oneg [[Shabbat]] (enjoyment of [[Shabbat]]), however, if it’s started earlier the passengers will get used to it and be able to enjoy [[Shabbat]]. The Rosh ([[Shabbat]] 1:38) and Rambam ([[Shabbat]] 30:13) agree with this reason.
*However, the Baal HaMoer (on Rif) explains that the reason that one may not board a boat close to [[Shabbat]] is because it’s likely that there will be life threatening danger which will necessitate a violation of [[Shabbat]]. However, when it is begun earlier there’s no issue because the obligation to prepare not to violate [[Shabbat]] even for life threatening danger doesn’t begin (explained by Mishna Brurah 248:8).
*The Rashbatz 1:21 originates based on the Baal HaMoer’s concept that a convert shouldn’t schedule his Brit Milah on Thursday because it will lead to a violation of [[Shabbat]] (if he doesn’t recover fully) and the same would be true of a baby who had his Brit Milah delayed. This is codified by the Tur and S”A YD 268. [Interestingly, the Taz explains that even if there’s no concern of a violation of [[Shabbat]] there’s an issue of ruining oneg [[Shabbat]] and so it would be forbidden to do the delayed Brit Milah on Thursday or Friday.]
*However, the Shach YD 266:18 argues on the Rashbetz that the Baal HaMoer would permit just like it’s permitted to board a boat on Friday for the purpose of a mitzvah (S”A OC 248:1) and Brit Milah is a tremendous mitzvah. The Magen Avraham 331:9, Mishna Brurah 331:33, and Sh”t HaRanach 38 (quoted by Tzitz Eliezer 12:43) agree with the Shach.
*The Chida in Birkei Yosef 248 quotes several achronim who defended the Rashbetz by saying that it was only permitted to board a boat on Friday for a mitzvah if one stipulated with the group that they wouldn’t continue to travel on [[Shabbat]] (S”A 248:1) and since there’s no way to make such a stipulation regarding Milah it’s forbidden to do it within 3 days of [[Shabbat]] like the Baal HaMoer.
*Sh”t Yabia Omer YD 5:23, Menuchat Ahava (vol 1, 1:6), and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (comments to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:4) accept the Chida as halacha.
*However, the Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 12:43 rejects the Chida because he points out that the Tashbetz himself wasn’t sure whether to hold like Rebbe that one must stipulate or Rabben Shimon and one wouldn’t have to stipulate and only as a stringency did the Tashbetz hold like Rebbe. The Tzitz Eliezer concludes that it’s illogical that the Tashbetz would have postponed the Milah from Thursday just because of a stringency of holding like Rebbe. [See further in the Birkei Yosef who gives a second defense of the Rashbetz and Tzitz Eliezer who rejects it as well.]</ref>
#Everyone agrees that if a baby boy is born during the [[Bein HaShemashot]] (halachic twilight) on Wednesday can have the Brit Milah on Thursday next week. <ref>Menuchat Ahava (vol 1, 1:7) and Sh”t Yabia Omer YD 5:23(4) explain that since the Brit Milah’s original time was set for Thursday because of a doubt it’s not considered like it was delayed specifically for that time. </ref>

==Milah On Shabbat==

#Sephardim hold that when there is a milah on Shabbat they shouldn’t have one mohel do the milah and another do the priyah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 267:12.</ref> There is a dispute if it is true for Yom Tov as well.<ref>Otzer Brit v. 2 p. 379 writes Yam Shel Shlomo Yevamot 8:3 is machmir even on Yom Tov but we don't follow it (Petach Habayit). Or Yisrael p. 308 n. 42 writes it is asur even on yom tov. Yalkut Yosef Shabbat v. 4 p. 326 331:14 we hold that you shouldn't have two mohalim. It is clear from the footnote that it applies also to yom tov.</ref>
#A father can do a brit on Shabbat even if he could have someone else do it.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 338</ref>
#Regarding putting away the milah knife after the milah see [[General_laws_of_Muktzeh#Muktzeh_that.E2.80.99s_in_already_in_one.E2.80.99s_hands]].
#If the mohel knows that by doing the milah on Shabbat the relatives will come to violate Shabbat to get there or the like, many poskim hold that they should push it off to Sunday.<ref>Shevet Halevi 1:205:331, 4:135:1, Orot Hahalacha p. 1164. Minchat Yitzchak 3:35:3-6 also seems to agree with this as he writes that it is lifnei iver for the mohel to do the milah on Shabbat if he knows that the family will drive there on Shabbat. However, since the mohel knew that if he didn't do it, another non-religious mohel would it is only mesaya. With some other factors he's lenient because of that consideration.</ref> Others hold that they should nonetheless do the milah on Shabbat.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 6:3</ref>
#A mohel who is asked to do a milah on Shabbat and he is worried about going and seeing violations of Shabbat, he should nonetheless go and do the milah.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:156. He explains that seeing chilul Shabbat is certainly a negative thing, however, that consideration is not a reason to delay a milah.</ref>

==Procedure of Milah==

#There are two parts to every Milah, the milah and the priyah. Milah entails cutting the Orlah skin which covers the Atarah and priyah entails peeling back the thin membrane beneath that skin until the Atarah is uncovered.<ref>The Mishna (Shabbat 133a) outlines the 3 stages of milah including milah, priyah, and metsisah. For a discussion of metsisah see further. Rashi s.v. mohalin refers to cutting the orlah skin. Rambam (Milah 2:2) elaborates that the orlah skin is the skin that covers the Atarah. Rashi s.v. veporin writes that priyah is peeling back the membrane covering the tip of the gid. Rambam (Milah 2:2) elaborates the priyah is the membrane underneath the orlah skin. </ref>
#The last stage of milah is metsisah. There is a great controversy whether this is considered a ritual part of the milah procedure or simply a medical practice of the days of the gemara and wouldn't be necessary today.<ref>The Mishna (Shabbat 133a) writes that metsisah is the last stage of milah. The gemara (133b) comments that the reason that is practiced on Shabbat is because if it isn't done there is a critical danger to the baby's life. The Rambam (Milah 2:2) echoes this and says that metsisah is for medical reasons. The Tiferet Yisrael (Boaz Shabbat 19:1) writes that the entire purpose of metsisah is medical and if nowadays it causes a medical danger it doesn't need to be done. See also the Maharam Shik (OC 152) takes the position that there is no danger with metsisah. However, the [http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&pgnum=264 Mishkenot Yacov (YD 63)] writes that drawing blood (hatafat dam) is an integral part of the ritual milah. He proves this from the Zohar and Rashi (Shabbat 134a s.v. lekarchei).</ref> There is a further discussion if metsisah should be done with one's mouth or a utensil.<ref>Har Tzvi (YD 214) writes that since there are dangers with doing metsisah with one's mouth, one may do it with a utensil.</ref> Because of the danger involved, many poskim hold that one should not and may not do metsisah with one's mouth.<ref>Rav Hershel Schachter in a shiur on [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/798611/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Hilchos_Shabbos_3_-_Choleh_BeShabbos_&_Kiddush# yutorah.org ("Hilchos Shabbos 3" min 27-30)] said that there is a real danger to the life of the baby with doing metsisah with one's mouth and it is foolish to continue doing it today. A number of poskim are quoted in an article by David Shabtai and Raymond Sultan entitled Medical Risk Taking in Halacha in 'Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, 2006. See also the Binyan Tzion 23 who writes that a mohel who does metsisah must be certain that he is not infected with herpes and cause the baby to become infected. Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot v. 2 ch. 6 fnt. 1 writes that one may use metzitza bkli such as with a tube if there's a concern of danger, otherwise it is done with one's mouth as the Sdei Chemed (Kuntres Metzitza) writes.

*With respect to the general question of relying on doctors to ascertain that there's no danger see Rav Kook's teshuva about metzitza in Daat Kohen YD 140 who argues that we can never rely on doctors to make such a claim. Yabia Omer OC 7:53 likes this idea.</ref>
#It is permitted to wear gloves for brit milah.<ref>[https://www.torahmusings.com/2013/09/must-a-mohel-wear-gloves/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on torahmusings.com] citing Rav Schachter and Rav Zilberstein Pesachim 57</ref>
#It is the minhag for the mohel to dip his finger in the wine to feed it to the baby while the pasuk of "בדמייך חיי" is recited.<ref>Magen Avraham 269:1 records the minhag to give some of the wine to the baby at the brit milah. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:8:21) writes that the minhag is that the mohel dips his finger in the wine and gives a drop of the wine to the baby during the recitation of בדמייך חיי.</ref>

==Related Pages==

#[[Shalom Zachor]]
#[[Pidyon HaBen]]

==Links==

*[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/802797/rabbi-hershel-schachter/inyonei-milah/ Inyonei Milah] by Rabbi Hershel Schachter
*[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739319/rabbi-zvi-sobolofsky/hilchos-milah/ Hilchos Milah] by Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky

==Sources==
<references />
[[Category:Lifecycles]]

Brit Milah

2024-08-18T18:28:20Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

==Importance of the Mitzva of Milah==

#The mitzva of milah is equivalent to all other mitzvot in the Torah combined.<ref>Nedarim 32a </ref>
#Without the mitzva of milah, the world would not exist.<ref>Nedarim 32a </ref>
#In the merit of brit milah, Hashem split the sea for the Jewish people <ref>Yalkut Shimoni Yirmiyahu 33 [321] </ref>
#In the merit of brit milah, Aharon Hakohen entered the Kodesh Hakodashim every year.<ref>Vayikra Rabba 21:5</ref>

==The Night Before==
===Berit Yitzchak===

#In Sephardic communities, it is customary on the night before a Berit Mila to assemble ten men in the home, as well as Torah scholars, to read special passages from the Zohar, in order to give the baby protection.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 5, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Shulchan Aruch Kitzur 163:8, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2334 Rabbi Eli Mansour]</ref> There is value to reading Zohar even if one doesn't understand it.<ref>Chaim Shaal 1:75:2, Yabia Omer 1:26:10</ref>
#During this event, the mother should come to the side room and recite Birkat Ha’gomel.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 10, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2334 Rabbi Eli Mansour]</ref>
#One does not need to eat bread at the meal for the night of the bris, and if one chooses to do so, it would not qualify as a seudat mitzva, and thus would not allow for eating meat during the nine days.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 8</ref>
#If the brit is pushed off past the 8th day, one should do the learning the night before the bris instead of on the 8th night.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 11</ref>
#If the brit is on Shabbat morning, one should do the learning on Thursday night, and if possible to gather ten people to learn on Friday night.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 11 </ref>

==Obligation of the Mitzvah of Brit Milah==

#A father is obligated to perform a Brit Milah (circumcision) on his son or to appoint a pious Mohel to do so on his behalf.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1, Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot Vol. 2 pg. 12.

*The Gemara Kiddushin 29a states that a father is obligated to perform a Brit Milah for his son. Some Rishonim assume that the entire obligation on the father is to make sure that the Milah takes place, but he doesn't need to personally perform it nor even appoint a Mohel, as long as it is taken care of. These rishonim include the Maharach Or Zaruah (responsa n. 11) and Tosfot Rid (Kiddushin 29a s.v. Otto). However, most rishonim assume that there is an obligation upon the father to actually perform the Milah, and if he doesn't know how, then he should appoint a Mohel to do it for him. These Rishonim include the Rambam (Milah 1:1), Darkei Moshe (YD 264:1), and Rosh Chullin 6:8.
*The Ohr Zaruah (v. 2, Siman 107) writes that if the father knows how to do the Milah, but nonetheless asks a Mohel to do it for him, he is losing out on his mitzvah. Shach CM 382:4 agrees. The Darkei Moshe 264:1 argues that we always use the principle of agency (Shaliach Adam KeMoto, Kiddushin 41a), and that this mitzvah should be no different. The Kesot CM 382:2 defends the Ohr Zaruah saying that Brit Milah is a mitzvah that needs to be done with your body, and can't be delegated to be done by someone else.</ref>
#The father of the baby should stand near the Mohel (the one who is performing the circumcision) in order to show that the Mohel is his proxy.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>

==When a Brit Milah should take place==

#The Brit Milah is performed on the eighth day after the baby's birth.<ref>Vayikra 12:3, Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 262:1</ref> It may not be performed before the eighth day. If it is done before the eighth day, there is a dispute if the child should have a hatafat dam brit ceremony on the eighth day.<ref>Rama Y.D. 262:1 rules that bdiavad (after the fact), a milah performed during the day before the eighth day is acceptable. However, if the Milah is performed at night before the eighth day, even if it's the eighth night, then hatafat dam brit would be required. Shach 262:2 disagrees and requires a hatafat dam brit in all cases if the Milah was performed before the eighth day. Shach notes that Hatafah in this case wouldn't be performed on Shabbat. Bear Heitiv 262:1 cites the Shach.</ref>
#It is permitted for a Jewish doctor to perform a hospital circumcision for a non-religious Jew before the eighth day.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/931524/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/from-the-rabbis-desk-hospital-circumcision/ Rabbi Lebowitz] explained that doing a milah before the eighth day might not be effective and have to do it again. But since the Rama holds it is effective it is still worthwhile to do the milah. Even if it is ineffective and they would need a hatafat dam brit later that doesn't make it forbidden to do. Since it might make the child not an arel it is permitted for the doctor to do it. They should be aware that they cut the necessary amount that it would be a valid circumcision according to the halacha, the anesthesia and the clamps used today that allow for a little bleeding wouldn't invalidate the circumcision. He concluded by quoting Rav Mordechai Willig as permitting this.</ref>
#The Brit Milah may be performed any time during the day, after [[HaNetz HaChama]], however, one should make an effort to fulfill the mitzvah of Brit Milah early in the morning because of "Zarizin Makdimin LeMitzvot".<ref>Pesachim 4a says that the Brit Milah may be performed any time during the day but those who have alacrity in fulfilling mitzvot will do it early. The gemara learns this concept of Zarizin Makdimin LeMitzvot from Avraham Avinu when he went to perform the Akeda early in the morning. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 262:1 codifies this as halacha.</ref>
#If one performed the Brit Milah before [[HaNetz HaChama]] after [[Olot HaShachar]] one fulfills one's obligation.<ref>[[Megillah]] 20a, Rama 262:1</ref>
#If it will cause a fight among the family to perform the Brit Milah very early, one may delay it, but one should still try to make it as early as possible.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>
#If there is a concern of a health risk to the baby, the Brit Milah should be delayed until the baby is healthy. Once the baby is healthy, in the case of some illnesses the Brit Milah should be performed without delay, while in other cases, the Brit Milah is only performed after 8 days after the baby became healthy.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 262:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:4</ref> Needless to say, because of the complexity of these issues, it is incumbent for a person to consult an Orthodox Rabbi to assess the situation. For more details about a delayed Milah, see the [[#A Delayed Milah]] section.
#If a baby is born during [[Bein HaShemashot]], since there is a doubt whether it was day or night, the Brit Milah is performed on the ninth day from the baby's birth.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 162:4</ref>Because of the complexity involved in practically determining [[Bein HaShemashot]] an Orthodox Rabbi should be consulted.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:6</ref>

==Brachot for the Brit Milah==

#The father of the baby makes the Bracha "ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם אשר קידשנו במצותיו וציונו להכניסו בבריתו של אברהם אבינו" (“Baruch Atta Hashem Elokenu Melech HaOlam Asher Kiddeshanu BeMitzvotav VeTzivanu LeHachniso BeBrito Shel Avraham Avinu”) before the Milah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1 writes that this Bracha should be made after the cutting of the Orlah before the Periyah, however, Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot vol 2 pg 60) writes that the minhag is to make it before the Milah and the Birchat Hamilah altogether. Yalkut Yosef Milah p. 77 writes that the minhag of Israel, Bavel, and Eastern Sephardi countries is to recite Lhachniso before the Milah. Even though Shulchan Aruch holds like the Rosh (Shabbat 14:10, Teshuva 26:1) that it can be said afterwards, the Rambam (Rav Avraham Ben HaRambam cited by Yabia Omer OC 2:17:7) and Rif (Teshuva 293) hold it should be said beforehand.</ref> This bracha should be said standing.<ref>Rama YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:7 </ref>
#The Mohel makes the Bracha "ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם אשר קידשנו במצותיו וציונו על המילה" (“Baruch Atta Hashem Elokenu Melech HaOlam Asher Kiddeshanu BeMitzvotav VeTzivanu Al HaMilah”) prior to the Milah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef 8:4 </ref> The text is the same whether it is the father or the mohel reciting it.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:3</ref> This bracha should be said standing.<ref>Rama YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:7 </ref>
#According to Sephardim, a Shehechiyanu is recited at the Brit Milah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:7, Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot vol 2 pg 72) </ref> According to Ashkenazim a [[Shehecheyanu]] is not said at the Brit Milah except when a father is doing a Brit Milah for a firstborn son who is obligated in [[Pidyon HaBen]].<ref>Rama YD 265:7 </ref> Today, the Ashkenazic minhag is not to recite Shechiyanu outside of Israel.<ref>Otzar Habrit 3:15:21</ref>
#Next Hagefen is made on wine and then the bracha of Asher Kidesh Yedid MeBeten.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 265:1, Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:18 </ref> The text is אשר קידש ידיד מבטן, אל חי חלקנו צורנו צוה להציל ידידות שארנו משחת.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:19</ref> The one who recited this bracha should taste the wine before the paragraph of "אלוקינו ואלוקי אבותינו קיים את הילד וכו'" and naming the baby.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:20, Yabia Omer 7:23</ref> It is sufficient to taste the wine and not drink a cheekful.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:22</ref>
#When the one reciting the bracha says ואומר לך בדמייך חיי the mohel takes a drop of wine and places it on the lips of the baby.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:21</ref>
#When reciting the bracha of אשר קידש ידיד מבטן Ashkenazim have the Sandak stand and hold the baby (Amidah Lbrachot)<ref>Otzar Habrit 3:15:23</ref>, while Sephardim have the Sandak continue to sit.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:26</ref>
#After the bracha of אשר קידש ידיד מבטן there is a prayer said for the welfare of the baby and the mother and in that paragraph the baby is named.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:27</ref>
#If the Brit Milah takes place on [[Shabbat]], if the one making the [[Brachot]] didn't yet make [[Kiddush]], he should drink from the cup of wine a Melo Lugmav (cheekful) and another [[Revi'it]].<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 77:14</ref> Sephardim hold that altogether he should drink a Reviyit or a Melo Lugmav.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:23</ref>
#The father of the baby and mohel don't need to close their eyes or cover the nakedness of the baby when reciting the brachot.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:10</ref>

==Mohel==

#Sephardim hold that a woman can be a mohel.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 264:1</ref> Ashkenazim hold that a woman shouldn't be a mohel but if there's no man available she should do the milah.<ref>Rama Y.D. 264:1 writes that since some hold that a woman can't do milah the minhag is to specifically get a male mohel.</ref>

==Sandakut (holding of the baby)==

#One should appoint a pious Sandak.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>
#The father of the baby should place the baby on the lap of the Sandak.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, one shouldn't appoint the same person as a Sandak if he was already a Sandak for another one of one's sons.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:1</ref>

==Brit Milah Ceremony==

#When the baby is brought in, those in attendance should say Baruch Haba Beshem Hashem out loud. The father of the baby says the pasuk אשרי תבחר ותקרב ישכון חצריך and those standing there answer נשבעה בטוב ביתך קדוש היכלך.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:1</ref>
#Everyone in attendance of the Brit Milah should stand except for the Sandak who is holding the baby.<ref>Rama Y.D. 265:1 cites the Maharam who made n allusion to the concept of standing for a Brit Milah from ויעמד העם בברית (Melachim 2:23:3). This is codified by the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:2 and Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:2.</ref>
#After the Bracha of LeHachniso, those in attendance should answer [[Amen]] and add "כשם שנכנס לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה למצוות ולמעשים טובים" - "Keshem SheNichnas LaBrit Ken Yikanes LeTorah ULeChpah ULeMaasim Tovim".<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:2, Otzar Habrit 3:15:20</ref> Sephardim have the practice to say "כשם שהכנסתו לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה למצוות ולמעשים טובים" unless the father isn't there in which case they say "כשם שנכנס לברית כן תכניסהו לתורה ולחופה למצוות ולמעשים טובים".<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:5</ref>
#The mohel places the baby on the Kiseh of Eliyahu and says זה כסא של אליהו הנביא מלאך הברית.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:8</ref>
#Some have the practice to have candles lit in honor of the Brit Milah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:9</ref>
#The minhag is to bury the orlah skin in dirt. Some say ונחש עפר לחמו when doing so.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:14</ref>
#Immediately after the brachot of the father the Sephardic minhag is to recite the 13 middot of Rachamim.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:17</ref>
#At the end of the milah the Sephardic minhag of Yerushalayim is to recite שיר המעלות אשרי כל ירא ה' and Kaddish Yemey Shelemah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Milah 8:27</ref>

===Tallit and Tefillin for Brit Milah===

#The Ashkenazic minhag is for everyone involved and observing the milah to keep on Tefillin for the Brit Milah since the Brit Milah is a sign between us and Hashem and so is the Tefillin.<ref>Mishna Brurah 25:55, Piskei Teshuvot 25:29. Avnei Yishfeh 7:7:8 explains that unlike Shabbat or Yom Tov which are a day that is a sign between us and Hashem, brit milah is a temporary mitzvah and doesn't not require removing tefillin. Siach Tzadikim (Brit Milah p. 145) quotes the practice of the Satmer Rebbe to remove his tefillin for milah because the brit milah is a sign like Shabbat and tefillin is also a sign.</ref> Sephardim, however, have the practice not to keep on Tefillin, yet those who do have the practice to leave on Tefillin have what to rely upon.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:7:2)</ref>
#If the milah is on a Rosh Chodesh and the congregation already took off their tefillin many hold that they should not put it back on for the Brit Milah. The Ashkenazic minhag is that the father of the baby, the Mohel, and Sandak put back on their tefillin,<ref>Piskei Teshuvot 25:29</ref> while Sephardim have the practice not to put them back on.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:7:2)</ref>
#The minhag is for sandak and father of the baby to wear a tallit during the brit milah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:7:2)</ref>

===Minyan for Brit===

#When possible a Brit Milah should be done in the presence of a [[minyan]]<ref>Pirkei Drabbi Eliezer ch. 19, Maharil (Milah n. 2), Tur 265:6 citing Rav Sar Shalom, Piskei Maharach Or Zaruah (Milah n. 36), Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 265:6. Pirkei Drabbi Eliezer ch. 19 postulates that Hashem always made public testimonies in the presence of ten people. It then applies this dictum to Brit Milah, Chalitza, and Sheva Brachot for a wedding.</ref> in order to publicize the fact that a crucial mitzvah is being performed to bring the child into the covenant of Avraham Avinu. Additionally, it is a opportune moment to thank Hashem in public for the healthy birth of a baby boy.<ref>[http://www.chabad.org.il/Magazines/Article.asp?ArticleID=9093&CategoryID=1683 chabad.org.il]. See Otzar Habrit p. 183 and 238</ref>
#Some say that one should not delay a brit milah in order to get a minyan for the milah, while others allow delaying.<ref>Mishna Halachot 19:196 responded to Az Nidbaru 14:46 who held that it is better to do the milah immediately and not wait for a minyan in order to fulfill zerizut. Mishna Halachot argues that it is better to wait for the minyan even if it means waiting until after chatzot. Obviously though he doesn't allow delaying the brit milah for no reason.</ref>
#One should not delay a brit milah in order to get a minyan for the seuda.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1495&pgnum=263 Maharam Shik YD 386] writes that to perform a mitzvah in a more enhanced manner it is permitted to delay it as we see by Birkat Halevana. However, having a minyan for the brit milah isn't a sufficient reason to delay the milah.</ref>
#A person doesn't have to mevatel Torah to participate in a brit milah unless there wouldn't be a minyan without him.<ref>Lhorot Natan YD 15:65</ref>

==The Meal of the Brit Milah==

#It is a proper practice to make a meal on the day of a Brit Milah and it is considered a Seudat Mitzvah. <ref>Pirkei DRabbi Eliezer ch. 29, Shulchan Aruch YD 265:12, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:8. See Gemara [[Shabbat]] 130a</ref>
#The practice is not to invite people to this meal because there is an issue for someone who was invited to a meal of Brit Milah and didn't attend.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Shulchan Aruch Kitzur 163:8, Bayit HaYehudah vol. 10 pg. 182, see also [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/750891/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Inviting_People_to_a_Bris Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz] </ref>

===Meat or Dairy===

#Ideally the meal should have meat but one fulfills the minhag even with chicken or fish.<ref>Magen Avraham 249:6 citing the Maharshal requires meat for a brit milah meal. Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot 2:11:3 based on Taamei Haminhagim writes that the meal should have meat initially but if that's not possible it could have chicken or fish. Rabbenu Bechay Beresheet 21:8 writes that the minhag to have a seuda after a Brit Milah is based on the party Avraham made for Yitzchak and the midrash writes that the party was for fact he was able to give Yitzchak a Milah. </ref>
#Those who are lenient to have dairy for the milah meal should at least serve wine.<ref>[http://www.torahweb.org/torah/docs/rsch/RavSchachter-Corona-56-January-31-2021.pdf Rav Schachter (Corona teshuva #56)]</ref>

===Bread===

#The meal should be a bread meal.<ref>Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot 2:11:3</ref>

===Minyan===

#The minhag is to have a minyan for the seudah of a brit milah.<ref>Rama Y.D. 265:12, Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot 2:11:2</ref> If one didn't have a minyan the seudah is still valid.<ref>Otzar Habrit 3:17:4 p. 239 writes that even if there wasn’t a minyan present at the seudat brit milah the seuda is still a seuda and the minyan isn’t the halacha but a minhag. Bechorat Habrit 265:66 says ten is enough but it isn't critical. See also Maharam Shik YD 386.</ref>
#If one would otherwise learn Torah one does not need to [[Bitul Torah|mevatel Torah]] in order to go to a seuda of a Brit Milah unless there wouldn't be a [[minyan]] at the seuda.<ref>Lhorot Natan YD 15:65 and Yabia Omer YD 4:19. Yabia Omer cites Maharshag 2:125 who explains that it is more important to learn Torah than to go to a seudat mitzvah and he quotes that the Maharam Shik told him this as good advice. He qualifies it that if there's a chance that there wouldn't be a minyan without him it is better to go to the seuda than to learn. Yabia Omer asks why indeed should he mevatel Torah in order to make the minyan if that is a mitzvah that isn't critical to have a minyan for the seuda. He answers that since having a minyan is an enhancement of the mitzvah (Rama Y.D. 265:12) we would mevatel Torah to make sure that happens and it is considered as a mitzvah that couldn't be done without you (Moed Katan 9b and Meiri there). Dibrot Eliyahu 8:62 cites and agrees with Yabia Omer. Lhorot Natan YD 15:65 comes to the same conclusion on his own.</ref>
#A brit milah which falls out on Sukkot must have the seuda of a Brit Milah in the Sukkah. If the Sukkah isn't big enough for everyone to enter, they should have a minyan have the seuda in the Sukkah and not eat outside the Sukkah. If they can't even fit a minyan, some say that they can eat outside the Sukkah with a minyan and others argue that they should have a seuda with fewer people in the Sukkah even without a minyan rather than eat outside the Sukkah.<ref>Maharik 179 cited by Rama O.C. 640:6 holds that the seuda of brit milah needs to be in the sukkah. The Biur Halacha 640:6 s.v. vseudat explains that if the Sukkah isn't big enough for everyone they should just have a minyan eat the seuda. If they can't even fit that, he quotes the Magen Avraham 640:13 who says that they can eat the seuda outside the Sukkah, while the Gra holds that you should have a sueda without a minyan rather than eat outside the Sukkah. Biur Halacha seems to favor the Gra in citing the Pri Megadim and Bikurei Yaakov to support that contention. Aruch Hashulchan 640:15 is very lenient to have the seuda outside the Sukkah if they don't fit.</ref>

==A Delayed Milah==

#A delayed Milah may not take place on [[Shabbat]] or [[Yom Tov]].<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:4</ref>
#According to Ashkenazim, one may perform a delayed Brit Milah on Thursday or Friday even if it will cause a situation of Pikuach Nefesh, however, Sephardim hold that one should not perform a delayed Brit Milah on Thursday or Friday. <ref>*The Gemara [[Shabbat]] 19a quotes the Briatta which states that one may not board a boat in order to travel on [[Shabbat]] unless one got on before 3 days before [[Shabbat]] (whether or not this includes Wednesday, see Mishna Brurah 248:4).
*The Rif ([[Shabbat]] 7a-b) explains that the reason for this restriction is that if one boards a boat within 3 days of [[Shabbat]] it will negatively impact the passenger’s oneg [[Shabbat]] (enjoyment of [[Shabbat]]), however, if it’s started earlier the passengers will get used to it and be able to enjoy [[Shabbat]]. The Rosh ([[Shabbat]] 1:38) and Rambam ([[Shabbat]] 30:13) agree with this reason.
*However, the Baal HaMoer (on Rif) explains that the reason that one may not board a boat close to [[Shabbat]] is because it’s likely that there will be life threatening danger which will necessitate a violation of [[Shabbat]]. However, when it is begun earlier there’s no issue because the obligation to prepare not to violate [[Shabbat]] even for life threatening danger doesn’t begin (explained by Mishna Brurah 248:8).
*The Rashbatz 1:21 originates based on the Baal HaMoer’s concept that a convert shouldn’t schedule his Brit Milah on Thursday because it will lead to a violation of [[Shabbat]] (if he doesn’t recover fully) and the same would be true of a baby who had his Brit Milah delayed. This is codified by the Tur and S”A YD 268. [Interestingly, the Taz explains that even if there’s no concern of a violation of [[Shabbat]] there’s an issue of ruining oneg [[Shabbat]] and so it would be forbidden to do the delayed Brit Milah on Thursday or Friday.]
*However, the Shach YD 266:18 argues on the Rashbetz that the Baal HaMoer would permit just like it’s permitted to board a boat on Friday for the purpose of a mitzvah (S”A OC 248:1) and Brit Milah is a tremendous mitzvah. The Magen Avraham 331:9, Mishna Brurah 331:33, and Sh”t HaRanach 38 (quoted by Tzitz Eliezer 12:43) agree with the Shach.
*The Chida in Birkei Yosef 248 quotes several achronim who defended the Rashbetz by saying that it was only permitted to board a boat on Friday for a mitzvah if one stipulated with the group that they wouldn’t continue to travel on [[Shabbat]] (S”A 248:1) and since there’s no way to make such a stipulation regarding Milah it’s forbidden to do it within 3 days of [[Shabbat]] like the Baal HaMoer.
*Sh”t Yabia Omer YD 5:23, Menuchat Ahava (vol 1, 1:6), and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (comments to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 163:4) accept the Chida as halacha.
*However, the Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 12:43 rejects the Chida because he points out that the Tashbetz himself wasn’t sure whether to hold like Rebbe that one must stipulate or Rabben Shimon and one wouldn’t have to stipulate and only as a stringency did the Tashbetz hold like Rebbe. The Tzitz Eliezer concludes that it’s illogical that the Tashbetz would have postponed the Milah from Thursday just because of a stringency of holding like Rebbe. [See further in the Birkei Yosef who gives a second defense of the Rashbetz and Tzitz Eliezer who rejects it as well.]</ref>
#Everyone agrees that if a baby boy is born during the [[Bein HaShemashot]] (halachic twilight) on Wednesday can have the Brit Milah on Thursday next week. <ref>Menuchat Ahava (vol 1, 1:7) and Sh”t Yabia Omer YD 5:23(4) explain that since the Brit Milah’s original time was set for Thursday because of a doubt it’s not considered like it was delayed specifically for that time. </ref>

==Milah On Shabbat==

#Sephardim hold that when there is a milah on Shabbat they shouldn’t have one mohel do the milah and another do the priyah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 267:12.</ref> There is a dispute if it is true for Yom Tov as well.<ref>Otzer Brit v. 2 p. 379 writes Yam Shel Shlomo Yevamot 8:3 is machmir even on Yom Tov but we don't follow it (Petach Habayit). Or Yisrael p. 308 n. 42 writes it is asur even on yom tov. Yalkut Yosef Shabbat v. 4 p. 326 331:14 we hold that you shouldn't have two mohalim. It is clear from the footnote that it applies also to yom tov.</ref>
#A father can do a brit on Shabbat even if he could have someone else do it.<ref>Shulchan Aruch OC 338</ref>
#Regarding putting away the milah knife after the milah see [[General_laws_of_Muktzeh#Muktzeh_that.E2.80.99s_in_already_in_one.E2.80.99s_hands]].
#If the mohel knows that by doing the milah on Shabbat the relatives will come to violate Shabbat to get there or the like, many poskim hold that they should push it off to Sunday.<ref>Shevet Halevi 1:205:331, 4:135:1, Orot Hahalacha p. 1164. Minchat Yitzchak 3:35:3-6 also seems to agree with this as he writes that it is lifnei iver for the mohel to do the milah on Shabbat if he knows that the family will drive there on Shabbat. However, since the mohel knew that if he didn't do it, another non-religious mohel would it is only mesaya. With some other factors he's lenient because of that consideration.</ref> Others hold that they should nonetheless do the milah on Shabbat.<ref>Tzitz Eliezer 6:3</ref>
#A mohel who is asked to do a milah on Shabbat and he is worried about going and seeing violations of Shabbat, he should nonetheless go and do the milah.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 1:156. He explains that seeing chilul Shabbat is certainly a negative thing, however, that consideration is not a reason to delay a milah.</ref>

==Procedure of Milah==

#There are two parts to every Milah, the milah and the priyah. Milah entails cutting the Orlah skin which covers the Atarah and priyah entails peeling back the thin membrane beneath that skin until the Atarah is uncovered.<ref>The Mishna (Shabbat 133a) outlines the 3 stages of milah including milah, priyah, and metsisah. For a discussion of metsisah see further. Rashi s.v. mohalin refers to cutting the orlah skin. Rambam (Milah 2:2) elaborates that the orlah skin is the skin that covers the Atarah. Rashi s.v. veporin writes that priyah is peeling back the membrane covering the tip of the gid. Rambam (Milah 2:2) elaborates the priyah is the membrane underneath the orlah skin. </ref>
#The last stage of milah is metsisah. There is a great controversy whether this is considered a ritual part of the milah procedure or simply a medical practice of the days of the gemara and wouldn't be necessary today.<ref>The Mishna (Shabbat 133a) writes that metsisah is the last stage of milah. The gemara (133b) comments that the reason that is practiced on Shabbat is because if it isn't done there is a critical danger to the baby's life. The Rambam (Milah 2:2) echoes this and says that metsisah is for medical reasons. The Tiferet Yisrael (Boaz Shabbat 19:1) writes that the entire purpose of metsisah is medical and if nowadays it causes a medical danger it doesn't need to be done. See also the Maharam Shik (OC 152) takes the position that there is no danger with metsisah. However, the [http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1095&pgnum=264 Mishkenot Yacov (YD 63)] writes that drawing blood (hatafat dam) is an integral part of the ritual milah. He proves this from the Zohar and Rashi (Shabbat 134a s.v. lekarchei).</ref> There is a further discussion if metsisah should be done with one's mouth or a utensil.<ref>Har Tzvi (YD 214) writes that since there are dangers with doing metsisah with one's mouth, one may do it with a utensil.</ref> Because of the danger involved, many poskim hold that one should not and may not do metsisah with one's mouth.<ref>Rav Hershel Schachter in a shiur on [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/798611/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Hilchos_Shabbos_3_-_Choleh_BeShabbos_&_Kiddush# yutorah.org ("Hilchos Shabbos 3" min 27-30)] said that there is a real danger to the life of the baby with doing metsisah with one's mouth and it is foolish to continue doing it today. A number of poskim are quoted in an article by David Shabtai and Raymond Sultan entitled Medical Risk Taking in Halacha in 'Journal of Halacha and Contemporary Society, 2006. See also the Binyan Tzion 23 who writes that a mohel who does metsisah must be certain that he is not infected with herpes and cause the baby to become infected. Yalkut Yosef Sova Semachot v. 2 ch. 6 fnt. 1 writes that one may use metzitza bkli such as with a tube if there's a concern of danger, otherwise it is done with one's mouth as the Sdei Chemed (Kuntres Metzitza) writes.

*With respect to the general question of relying on doctors to ascertain that there's no danger see Rav Kook's teshuva about metzitza in Daat Kohen YD 140 who argues that we can never rely on doctors to make such a claim. Yabia Omer OC 7:53 likes this idea.</ref>
#It is permitted to wear gloves for brit milah.<ref>[https://www.torahmusings.com/2013/09/must-a-mohel-wear-gloves/ Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz on torahmusings.com] citing Rav Schachter and Rav Zilberstein Pesachim 57</ref>
#It is the minhag for the mohel to dip his finger in the wine to feed it to the baby while the pasuk of "בדמייך חיי" is recited.<ref>Magen Avraham 269:1 records the minhag to give some of the wine to the baby at the brit milah. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot 2:8:21) writes that the minhag is that the mohel dips his finger in the wine and gives a drop of the wine to the baby during the recitation of בדמייך חיי.</ref>

==Related Pages==

#[[Shalom Zachor]]
#[[Pidyon HaBen]]

==Links==

*[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/802797/rabbi-hershel-schachter/inyonei-milah/ Inyonei Milah] by Rabbi Hershel Schachter
*[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/739319/rabbi-zvi-sobolofsky/hilchos-milah/ Hilchos Milah] by Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky

==Sources==
<references />
[[Category:Lifecycles]]

Shiva

2024-08-18T18:04:07Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

One whose relative has passed away has an obligation<ref>There is a difference of opinion as to whether this obligation is derabanan or deoraisa, see below.</ref> to engage in several practices of mourning. The week of mourning, which begins (under normal circumstances) from the time of burial and continues for seven days, is colloquially referred to as "shiva" and is associated with several laws and customs.

==Who and For Whom Does One "Sit Shiva"==
# There are seven relatives for whom one is obligated to mourn: one's (1) father, (2) mother, (3) son, (4) daughter, (5) sister, (6) brother, and (7) spouse.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 374:4. The Rambam in Hilchos Avel 2:1 considers the obligation of mourning for a spouse to be Midivreihem, which most (cf. Lechem Mishnah there) assume to mean that it is derabanan (although this is not the understanding of the Kesef Mishnah there). Ramban, however, in Toras HaAdam (Chavel ed.) page 213 believes that it must be deoraisa. Additionally, Ramban writes (to Vayikra 21:3) that mourning for one's married sister, or a married sister mourning for her brother, is only derabanan.</ref> One who is not biologically related to the deceased 'relative' is not obligated to mourn for them.<ref>Thus, an adopted child, strictly speaking, does not need to mourn for his/her parents. However, some have the practice to do so anyway out of respect and gratitude for their adopted parents. Pischei Teshuvah 374:3 writes that one should mourn for his/her step-parent.</ref>
# A ger (convert) is not obligated to mourn for his relatives.<ref>S.A 374:5 and Shach 374:4. </ref>
# The Rabbis decreed that one whose immediate relative (i.e. one of the seven described above) is in mourning should also act as if he himself is in mourning, as long as he is in the presence of his mourning relative.<ref>Gemara Moed Kattan 20b, Shulchan Aruch 376:6. See Tosfos there regarding one's spouse's relative</ref> Today, however, Rama believes that this rule is no longer in effect.<ref>Hagahos Maimoni Avel 2:2 writes that the mourners can forgo this right to have their relatives mourn with them, and so the Rama in 376:6 writes that it is assumed that today everyone relinquishes this right.</ref>
# Generally speaking, one does not mourn for a deceased person who has rebelled against Judaism,<ref>Sanhedrin 47a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 304:5 and Shach 304:8 (applying the Rosh and Mordechai Moed Kattan 886) that even one who sinned only for pleasure, but repeatedly, is also excluded from being mourned), </ref> or one who intentionally commits suicide (meabaid atzmo l'daat),<ref>Maseches Semachos 2:1, Shluchan Aruch Y.D. 345:1, against the opinion of Ramban in Toras HaAdam pg. 83</ref>. However, there are many possible exceptions to this rule, so every case must be determined by a qualified posek.<ref>cf. Chasam Sofer Sh"T Y.D. 326, Ritva Avodah Zarah 18a, Birkei Yosef Y.D. 341:2, Kol Bo Aveilus 1:4:3:39, Yabia Omer vol. 2, no. 24 miluim 15</ref>
# One does not mourn for a baby born prematurely who dies within thirty days of its birth, although there is considerable debate regarding how to determine "premature" in this context.<ref>Cf. Niddah 44b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D 374:8, Rama E.H. 156:4</ref>
# Children under bar mitzvah are not taught to observe aveilus. <ref>Derisha quoted in Taz 340:15 writes that in fact a child should be taught to observe aveilus, as the Gemara (Moed Kattan 26b) indicates that he should be taught to tear keriyah on the deceased. However, Dagul Merevavah there writes that there is no aveilus for children, and this is the common practice.</ref>
# There is a dispute regarding a boy who turns thirteen or a girl who turns twelve during the week or month after the burial of his/her relative, but the practice is for such a person to not observe aveilus at all.<ref>Rosh Moed Kattan 3:96, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 396, Taz 396:2</ref>
#We mourn over the loss of a Jew who wasn’t religious nowadays. <ref>Chazon Ovadia Aveilut v. 1 p. 538. His three reasons are the perhaps he did teshuva (Yad Yitzchak 3:149), perhaps avoiding mourning would lead to ayvah (Maharshag YD 1:25:6), and perhaps he was a tinok she’nishba (Emet LYakov 345:218).</ref> See [[Interactions with Non-Religious Jews]] for details.

==The Beginning and End of "Shiva"==
# Normally, aveilus begins from the end of the burial.<ref>Moed Kattan 27a (and elsewhere), according to R' Yehoshua regarding turning over the bed. Rashi (Kesuvos 4b) as understood by Ramban (Toras HaAdam pg. 156), holds that aveilus begins from the time that the casket is covered, even before it is placed in the ground, and the burial is only relevant if the body is buried without a casket. However, Shach (Y.D. 373:11) disputes this interpretation of Rashi, and Tosfos (Kesuvos 4b) write that aveilus begin when the stone covering is placed over the grave, or, if there is none, then it begins from the time that the relatives turn away from grave, having considered their burial complete. Bach (Tur Y.D. 375) believes that the Shulchan Aruch paskens like Rashi, but the based upon the Shach just cited, most assume that the aveilus does not begin until the end of the burial. According to Badei Hashulchan 375:2 quoting Daas Torah, the burial is not considered complete until the customary mound of earth is made marking the grave.</ref><ref>Although it is true that the aveilus does not begin until the completion of the burial, the period of aninus (at least for the purpose of davening) appears to end beforehand, from the beginning of the burial. Both Magen Avraham (O.C. 71:1) and Aruch Hashulchan (Y.D. 341:28) write that as soon as the body or casket begins to be covered by earth, the relatives may daven.</ref> Technically, the aveilim can keep their leather shoes on until they get home, but the custom is to remove them immediately after the burial.<ref>Ramban Toras HaAdam pg. 154, Shulchan Aruch 375:1. Badei Hashulchan Biurim "ve'achshav" writes that this may in fact be required according to the Magen Avraham O.C. 554:17, but the Aruch Hashulchan 375:5 writes that this is merely a custom which developed in order to symbolically display the onset of aveilus.</ref>
# If the mourner already davened maariv before shkiah, and then heard of his relative’s death, he cannot count that first day as one of the seven days of aveilus, but begins counting as if it were already past shkiah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D 375:11 and 402:11 and Shach 375:15, although cf. Levush there who writes, based on Rama to Y.D. 196:1 that the Rama argues. </ref>
# Aveilus is not practiced for the full seven days, but ends on the morning of the seventh day, because we say that מקצת היום ככולו, part of the last day counts as if it were a whole day.<ref>Moed Kattan 19b</ref> However, we do not apply this concept to keeping aveilus at night, and instead the mourners have visitors come in the morning and end aveilus when they leave.<ref>This is the practice as described by the Gemara Moed Kattan 21b. Tosfos there (s.v. “Afilu”) believe that the nighttime cannot count as a partial day, but Ramban (Toras HaAdam p. 215) disagrees. Maharam of Rothenberg, quoted in the Rosh (Moed Kattan 3:30) and paskened by Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 395:1) held that the concept of מקצת היום ככולו can be applied to the nighttime in principle, and is therefore relevant for the thirty days of aveilus, but nighttime does not suffice for ending the seven days because of a need to have a seven day count, similar to the count of a niddah. </ref>
===If a Relative Doesn't Go to the Funeral===
# According to Sephardim if a relative isn't going to the funeral but knows when the funeral is going to take place, he may not start aveilut until after the burial. After the fact if the asked a rabbi and the rabbi allowed him to start aveilut they can count those days towards the aveilut.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 100). The Rambam (Avel 1:5) and Shulchan Aruch YD 375:2 rule that if a relative escorts the dead to the end of the city and doesn't continue to travel to the funeral he starts his aveilut immediately as long as the funeral is so far that he doesn't know when the funeral is going to take place. Chazon Ovadia infers that if the relative knows when the funeral is going to take place he can't start observing aveilut before then. He quotes the Maharnach 2:51 and Radbaz 4:63 who also say this.</ref>
# If a relative hears about the death of a relative and he isn't going to be involved in the burial or funeral at all and doesn't know when the funeral is going to take place, some say that he can't start his aveilut until he knows that the burial was complete, while others hold that he starts his aveilut immediately. Most contemporary poskim follow the second opinion.<ref> The Gemara Moed Katan 22a states that if a relative sent the funeral procession on its way to a faraway place once he turns his face from the burial he begins his aveilut. This is codified in Shulchan Aruch 375:2. However, the Rosh (teshuva 27:5) writes that if a person observed aveilut before his relative was buried his aveilut doesn't count. There are two major approaches as to how to explain the difference between the Gemara and the Rosh.
* The Netsiv (Meishiv Dvar YD 27) holds that only if a person was involved with the burial and then sent the funeral procession off he begins his aveilut since he has completed his participation in the burial. However, if a person didn't do anything to contribute to the burial and was in another place he can't begin aveilut until after the burial.
* The Netsiv's son-in-law, Rav Rafael Shapira, quoted by Sdei Chemed (Avelut no. 14) argued that once a person despaired from making any further participation in the burial either because he did his part or because he is so distant that he can't do anything he begins aveilut. However, in the case of the Rosh the relatives didn't give up to do the burial, so they can't begin aveilut yet.
* Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 101) quotes the Chelkat Yakov 1:188, Maharsham 2:260, Shevet Halevi 3:168, and Igrot Moshe YD 1:253 who agreed with Rav Shapira.</ref>
# A relative who is not accompanying the meis to the place of burial begins the aveilus from the time that (s)he turns away from the meis,<ref>Moed Kattan 22a.</ref> as long as the burial is far enough that those relatives will certainly not make it to the burial.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2. Ramban (Toras HaAdam pg. 162, based on Rambam Avel 1:5) writes that this is only the case if the meis is being brought to a faraway city, and according to the Dagul Merevavah to Shach 375:1 is how the Shulchan Aruch paskens. However, the Behag (as quoted by Ramban, ibid.) appears to pasken that the relatives begin aveilus from the time that they turn away regardless of where the burial will be, and the Shulchan Aruch quotes this Behag in Y.D. 399:14. According to the Dagul Merevavah and Chachmas Adam (Matzeves Moshe 9), if the burial occurs in the same city, but a relative turns away from the procession and will certainly not return, such as on erev Yom Tov, this too would be enough to start aveilus.</ref> However, if the burial is being done in the city's cemetery, the aneinus ends without the aveilus beginning until those who were busy with the burial return<ref>Ramabn Toras HaAdam pg. 163, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2 as interpreted by Aruch Hashulchan 375:8 and paskened by Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:253 and Badei Hashulchan 375:11. However, Radbaz Sh"T 4:63 understands that even according to Ramban, once night falls, or once the relatives can be certain that the burial has occurred, they begin aveilus even if the burial occurred within their city despite not being present at the burial itself. See also Minchas Shelomo 1:91:25 regarding contemporary situations. In some situations, if the head of the family does not accompany the meis to the burial, then even the relatives who have stayed behind begin aveilus only after the burial. See Tosfos Moed Kattan 22a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2</ref>
===Completion of Shiva===
# On the seventh day of the mourning after the comforters leave the mourner can get up and that completes the shiva as part of the seventh day is considered like the whole day.<ref>Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 395:1. The Tur 395 cites a dispute if we apply the principle of a part of the day counts like the full day at night. The Bet Yosef quotes the Ramban (Torat Haadam Shaar Haavel, Inyan Haavelut s.v. amar rav amram n. 82) who holds that it does count but the Tosfot, Rosh, and Maharam hold it doesn't count. Shulchan Aruch follows the Maharam.</ref>
# If someone dies on Sunday and the shiva is completed on Shabbat, private aveilut is observed on Shabbat until after Shacharit Shabbat morning.<ref>Taz 402:5, Shach 402:4</ref>

==Prohibitions for the Avel==
# The avel is prohibited from working or leaving the house
# washing/bathing/anointing
# wearing shoes
# tashmish hamitah
# learning Torah<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 15a forbids learning Torah when one is a mourner based on the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:17. This is codified in Shulchan Aruch 384:1</ref>
# greeting others<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 15a forbids greeting others when one is a mourner based on the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:17. This is codified in Shulchan Aruch 385:1</ref>
# Today, the custom is not to turn over the beds or wrap one's head.<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 15a based on Yechezkel 24:17, Shulchan Aruch YD 386:1</ref> The custom is for a mourner to sleep in a bed and not the floor.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 211:1, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?sits=1&req=31174&st=%u05DC%u05D9%u05E9%u05DF Gesher Hachaim 1:20:10], Chazon Ovadia (Avelut v. 2 p. 255)</ref>
# laundering clothing and wearing freshly laundered clothing<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 15a based on Shmuel II 14:2, Shulchan Aruch YD 389:1</ref>
# haircutting and shaving<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 14b learned from the pasuk in Vayikra 10:6. This is codified in Shulchan Aruch YD 380:1</ref>
# other practices
===Doing Business During Shiva===
# It is forbidden for an avel to do work so that he is available to mourn properly and repent.<ref>Torat HaAdam (p. 170), Bach 380:3, Badei Hashulchan 380:10</ref> This prohibition includes doing business.<ref>Rambam (Avel 5:7) writes that just like doing work is forbidden so too doing business during aveilut is forbidden. The Nemukei Yosef (Moed Katan 13b) quotes one opinion as holding that it is permitted but that isn't accepted. Tur and Shulchan Aruch 380:3 follow the Rambam.</ref>
# Even if someone is very poor and needs to take tzedaka may not work during the first three days of aveilut. Afterwards, he can work in private. However, cursed are the neighbors of such a person that they didn't take care of him and made him work during aveilut.<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 21b establishes that it is forbidden for a person to work during aveilut even if they are so poor that they need tzedaka but after 3 days they can work in private. The Hagahot Maimoniyot 5:8 writes that after 3 days it is forbidden for anyone who isn't so poor that they need tzedaka. He quotes the Yerushalmi, Maharam, and Raavad who agree with this explanation unlike Rabbenu Shemaya. Tur and Shulchan Aruch 380:2 follow the Hagahot Maimoniyot. The Yerushalmi 3:5 adds that cursed are the neighbors who cursed him to work during aveilut. This is codified by Shulchan Aruch.</ref>
# If not doing a certain activity will cause a loss it is permitted to have others do the work for the avel. For example, if a person has a barrel of wine unsealed and it will spoil if he doesn't seal it, he can have someone else seal it for him.<ref>The Gemara Moed Katan 11b cites a dispute between Rav Shisha and Rav Ashi whether it is permitted for an avel to work during aveilut to avoid a loss. The Rif (Moed Katan 5a), Rosh (Moed Katan 2:1), and Rambam (Avel 5:10) all accept the opinion of Rav Shisha that it is forbidden. This is codified in Tur and Shulchan Aruch 380:4.</ref> If there is no one else available to do the work that is necessary to avoid the loss, according to Ashkenazim it is permitted after 3 days of aveilut or even within 3 days to avoid a large loss. However, Sephardim would forbid doing work by oneself even to avoid a loss and even if no one else is available.<ref>Rabban Gamliel (Moed Katan 11b) holds that it is permitted to do the work to avoid a loss if no one is available. The Tur 380:4 quotes the Rif and Rambam who don't hold like Rabban Gamliel, while the Ramban (p. 165) and Rosh (Avel 2:4) accept his opinion. The Shulchan Aruch 380:4 doesn't mention this leniency of Rabban Gamliel, while the Rama does, though he only applies it after 3 days or within 3 days if there's a large loss based on the Rabbenu Yerucham.</ref>
# If a person is in aveilut then his workers can't work either.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 380:5</ref>
# If a person is in aveilut some permit his wife to work out of the house, while others permit her only if she specifies that she is giving up her rights to having her husband provide for her sustenance for that week.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 130) writes that just like the Aval Rabati (5:1 codified by Shulchan Aruch 380:4) writes that it is forbidden for children of an avel to work if the money goes to the avel so too it is forbidden for the wife of an avel to work since her salary goes to her husband. Bet Dovid YD 181 agrees that it is forbidden for a wife of the avel to work. However, Chazon Ovadia continues that the Rashba (Bet Yosef EH 95), Rabbenu Yerucham, and Ritva (Ketubot 59b) as holding that if a woman works outside her house which she isn't obligated to do she keeps her salary. If so, Rav Ovadia concludes, a wife who works out of the house can work during shiva of her husband. Rav Ovadia adds that it is better for her to say that she gives up her rights to sustenance from her husband which in exchange means that she can keep her own salary. Peni Baruch (p. 460) quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as saying that a wife or family members of the avel who wants to work can specify that their profits not go to the avel that week. </ref>
# It is permitted to write in non-professional script during shiva if there is a need.<ref>Rama 380:2, Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 137)</ref> However, a sofer may not write or fix a sefer torah unless the congregation needs him since there is no other kosher sefer torah and no other sofer available.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 138) quoting Shaarim Hametzuyim Bhalacha 208:6</ref>
# It is permitted for an avel to sweep, cook, make the beds, and clean dishes during aveilut.<ref>Aval Rabati 11:9, Ramban (p. 173), Maharik 35:4, Mordechai (Moed Katan no. 929), Shulchan Aruch 380:22, Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 135)</ref>
# A doctor during aveilut can leave his house to help his patients.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 145), Minchat Shlomo 2:96:1</ref>
# If a company has to pay its workers (contracted per month or year) even if the company closes it would be considered a loss if the company closed when the owner was in aveilut. Therefore, the workers can continue to work even if the owner is in aveilut.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 380:6, Gesher Hachaim 1:21:2:2, Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 146). See Chazon Ovadia for his discussion of the opinion of the Chida who was strict and the proofs from others including the Nodeh Beyehuda that it is considered a loss.</ref>
# If a shochet is an avel and there is no other shochet available in the town he can work during aveilut since his activity is ochel nefesh.<ref>The Mordechai (Moed Katan no. 929) writes that cooking is permitted for an avel since it is permitted on Yom Tov. The Darkei Moseh 380:5 learns from the Mordechai that anything which is permitted on Yom Tov is permitted for an avel (which follows from the source of working during aveilut being that we compare aveilut and yom tov in Moed Katan 15b). Therefore, Rav Ovadia in Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 141) holds that it is permitted for a shochet to do shechita during aveilut if there's no one else available in town. He quotes that Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Drush Vchidush p. 107b) also said this. Gesher Hachaim 1:21:2:2 is also lenient. See, however, the Gilyon Maharsha 380:15 who quotes the Shvut Yakov 3:86 as holding that it is forbidden because of work and the Mahara Klosner who held that it is forbidden because he might not do a proper shechita because of his sorrow. </ref>
# If a person contracted someone for a specific job for a fixed cost and not paid for time, and then became an avel, that hired person can continue to work even though his employer is in aveilut. But he can only do the job outside the house of the mourner.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 380:18, Gesher Hachaim 1:21:2:5</ref>
# If a person rented a car to someone and then became an avel the renter can continue to use it but the owner can't rent it out again during shiva.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 380:15 quotes a dispute about the rented boat or animal of the mourner if the renter can rent it a second time when the owner is in aveilut. Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 151) follows the second opinion who is strict. However,
from Shulchan Aruch YD 380:14 it is clear that it is permitted for the renter to finish up the rental period that started before the owner became an avel.</ref>
# The mourner may not work. He can get someone else to do his work for him.<ref>Rama YD 380:16. Even though the Shach 380:17 disagrees with the reasoning of the Levush for the Rama, Gesher Hachaim 1:21:2:4 follows the Levush. The Shach would only permit it if there is a loss to the employer. </ref>
====Partners====
# If a partner in a company is an avel, the entire company has to close. The other partners who aren't in aveilut can work in their own houses in private unless it'll become known that the work is being done for the business at the time.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 380:21, Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 152). The Gesher Hachaim 1:21:2:7 writes that the minhag is to reopen the company after 3 days of aveilut. See Pitchei Teshuva 380:4 about a sale of the business to the other partners during shiva.</ref>
# If a partner in the company dies the partnership is undone and the other partner can work. This doesn't only apply if there are no inheritors of the deceased who will mourn him but even if the deceased has a child inheriting them and mourning them the other partner can work when the child is an avel since halachically the original partnership has been disbanded.<ref>Gesher Hachaim 1:21:2:10</ref>
# If before the relative dies a person sells the business to another person or to his partner then the business can stay open during aveilut. If the person already became an onen, in extenuating circumstances, he can sell the business to his partner or someone else during aninut.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 2:324, Gesher Hachaim 1:21:2:14, Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 159)</ref>

===Bathing===
# It is forbidden for a mourner to take a complete shower or bath whether it is hot or cold. It is permitted for the mourner to wash his hands, feet, and face with cold water<Ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 381:1</ref> but not hot or even lukewarm water.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 158) quotes the Tiferet Moshe who writes that lukewarm is considered warm for this halacha.</ref>
# The Ashkenazic minhag is not to shower or bathe during shloshim unless one is doing so to remove dirt. Some permit taking a cold shower.<ref>Rama YD 381:1 writes that the Ashkenazic minhag is not to shower all of shloshim. The Taz 381:1 quotes the Maharshal who says that the reason for the minhag is because it was common to take a haircut together with bathing and since taking a haircut is forbidden during shloshim the minhag wasn't to bathe for all of shloshim. The Darkei Moshe 381:3 cites the Maharam who explains the minhag based on a similarity to bathing and laundering. The Shach 381:1 writes that bathing in cold isn't bathing. It isn't clear if the Shach is referring to a full body shower or just one's hands, feet, and face. The Dagul Mirvavah 381:1 writes that the Shach is only discussing hands, feet, and face. The Pitchei Teshuva 381:2 quotes the Teshuat Chen who says that for others it is okay to rule that a cold full body shower is permitted in shloshim. Badei Hashulchan 381:16 concludes that it is permitted to take a cold shower in shloshim because some are lenient and also it is very difficult not to shower for 30 days.</ref> Sephardim don't have this minhag.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 164)</ref>
# If someone has two relatives pass away in succession and has to observe aveilut straight for longer than 7 days, after the first 7 days he may bathe immediately.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 381:4, Badei Hashulchan 381:34</ref>
# If someone will be in a lot of pain if he doesn't shower he may shower during shiva but not everyone is in this category.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 381:3</ref>
# It is forbidden for a woman who is in shiva to go to the [[Mikvaot|mikveh]]<ref>Shulchan Aruch 381:5</ref> and also a man who regularly goes to mikveh for davening may not go during shiva.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 159), Badei Hashulchan 381:18</ref> However, during shloshim, it is permitted for a niddah, for a man who regularly goes every day for davening or every week for Shabbat to go to the mikveh.<ref>Rama 381:5, Badei Hashulchan 381:18</ref>
# A woman may prepare herself for [[Hefsek Tahara and Shiva Nekiyim|hefsek tahara]] before shiva nekiyim during shiva by washing that area and between her legs even with hot water.<ref>Even though the Rama 381:5 doesn't allow this washing to prepare for the hefsek tahara during shiva except during shloshim, the Shach 381:3 and Taz 381:2 quote the Masat Binyamin who allows washing that area and between her legs even with hot water during shiva. Badei Hashulchan 381:38 and Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 2 p. 162) agree with the Masat Binyamin.</ref>

=== Anointing and Deodorant ===
# It is forbidden for an avel to use soap or anoint oneself with oil except to remove dirt.<ref>Gesher Hachaim 1:21:3:2</ref>
# Some poskim hold that it is permitted for an avel to use deodorant during shiva.<ref>Rav Mordechai Willig ([https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecturedata/1106391/Halachos-of-The-9-Days-and-Tisha-B%E2%80%99Av Hilchos Three Weeks Part 1, min 32])</ref>
===Learning Torah and Getting Aliyot===
# It is forbidden for a mourner in shiva to learn Torah including Tanach, Mishna, Gemara, Halacha, and Midrash.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 384:1</ref> However, it is permitted to learn by himself Iyov, Kinot, the sad parts of Yirmiyahu, and the laws of mourning.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 384:4</ref>
# If many people need the mourner to give a shiur it is permissible for him to teach Torah during shiva. The Ashkenazic minhag is not to give a shiur to one's students.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 384:1 and Rama</ref>
# It is forbidden for an to get an aliyah even if he's the only kohen in the shul.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 384:2</ref>
# The Sephardic minhag is that the mourner during shiva specifically isn't the shaliach tzibur.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 384:3</ref>
# A child who is in mourning shouldn't be held up from his learning during shiva because there is no chinuch on Aveilut.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 384:5, Shach 384:5</ref>
# If a person's seventh day of Shiva is Shabbat, it is better to wait until the comforters leave and the shiva is complete to do shenayim mikra.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Avelut v. 2 p. 206)</ref>

===Leaving the House===
# During shiva it is forbidden for the mourner to leave the house even to go to shul during the week<ref>Although the Mahari Geyitz (cited by Tur 393:3) held that a mourner can leave his house to go to shul each day, the Raavad and Ramban (p. 217, cited by Bet Yosef 393:3) dispute his opinion. The Shulchan Aruch 393:4 follows the Ramban. Yet, he adds that the Sephardic minhag was to leave the house for kriyat hatorah on Monday and Thursday. Pitchei Teshuva 393:2 cites a dispute between the Chaye Adam (Mesevet Moshe 8) and Magen Avraham 696:8 whether the mourner can leave his house if there won't be a minyan at the shiva house in order to participate in kaddish and kedusha.</ref>, to visit another mourner, or visit the cemetery.<ref>Moed Katan 21b, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 393:1</ref> The reason for this prohibition is that chazal wanted a mourner not to be distracted from the mourning especially with the company of others.<ref>Trumat Hadeshen (responsa 290)</ref>
# If a mourner needs to leave his house he can do so at night when people aren't around.<ref>Trumat Hadeshen (responsa 290), Rama 393:2</ref>
# Even to perform a mitzvah such as attending a milah or wedding an avel may not leave his house during shiva.<ref>The Rosh (responsa 27:2, cited by Bet Yosef 393:2) writes that even though a mourner is obligated in all of the mitzvot, that only includes mitizvot he can do on his own like tzitzit and tefillin. However, attending a wedding or milah as a chesed that isn't a cause for him to leave the house. The Tur and Shulchan Aruch 393:2 follow the Rosh in opposition to the Nemukei Yosef (Moed Katan 13b s.v. bmakom) who allows leaving the house for a mitzvah purpose.</ref>
# It is permissible after 3 days to visit another mourner's house and sit on the side of the mourners.<ref>Moed Katan 21b, Shulchan Aruch YD 393:1</ref> The Ashkenazic minhag is not to leave the house to visit another mourner.<Ref>Rama YD 393:1 writes that the minhag isn't to visit another mourner's house during shiva since we can't comfort mourners as they used to it is better to be passive and not leave the house.</ref> Similarly, it is permissible for the mourner after 3 days to go to the cemetery for another person's funeral and he stands together with the mourners.<ref>Tur and Shulchan Aruch 393:1, Mordechai (Moed Katan no. 895)</ref>
# A mourner within 3 days of the death who is the only mohel available can he leave his house to do a milah. He should first daven at home and at the time of the milah he should go to the shul. However, if it is possible to get another mohel it is forbidden.<ref>Hagahot Ashuri (Moed Katan 3:37). Rama 393:3 quotes the Hagahot Ashuri and the Bet Yosef. However, the Shach 393:6 wonders why the Rama even quoted the Bet Yosef.</ref> who only According to Sephardim it is permitted to be the mohel even if another mohel is available.<ref>Bet Yosef 393:3 writes that since the minhag was to go to shul for kriyat hatorah on Monday and Thursday then certainly to be the mohel it is permitted to leave the house.</ref>
# If the mourner needs to leave the house for a major need such as to prevent a major loss or the government needs him it permissible for him to leave the house.<ref>Tosfot (Moed Katan 29a s.v. im), Mordechai (Avel no. 896), Rama 393:2</ref>
===Laundry===
# There is a minhag to wear black clothing during the year of aveilut for a parent.<ref>The Maharitz Gayitz (cited by Bet Yosef 345:6) writes that the minhag is that mourners wear black. Rosh (Moed Katan no. 94) and Rambam (Torat Haadam p. 85) agree.</ref> In Israel it isn't the minhag.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 3, p. 60). He cites the Radvaz 4:62 who writes the minhag of Egypt was not to wear black.</ref> On Shabbat one should change his clothing to nice non-black clothing.<ref>Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Lech Lecha no. 18)</ref>

=== Sitting on a Chair ===

# The minhag is for a mourner to sit on a low bench during shiva.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1106392 Rav Mordechai Willig (Halachos of Three Weeks Part 2, min 61-63)] explains the minhag that everyone, even those who are not weak or old, sit on a low chair and not on the floor directly. </ref>

==Tefillin for a Mourner==
{{Tefillin_for_a_Mourner}}

==Aveilus on Shabbat and Yom Tov==
# For details see the [[Aveilut_on_Shabbat]] and [[Aveilut_on_Yom_Tov]] pages.

==Behavior towards Visitors==
# A mourner does not have to stand up for his/her guests, even if the guest is a Talmid Chacham or person of high stature.<ref>Moed Kattan 27b, Rama Yoreh Deah 376:1.</ref> However, if the mourner did stand, one need not tell him to sit, and doing so is considered a bad omen.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 376:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:2</ref>
# The avel should stand for a Sefer Torah.<ref>Sh"t Rivevos Efraim 7:230 quotes Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach is quoted as saying that even a mourner must stand for a sefer Torah if it passes by, although the Rivevos Efraim himself appears to be uncertain. Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 3 p. 74) agreed with Rav Shlomo Zalman.</ref>

==At the Beis Ha'Avel (or "Shiva House")==
See the [[Practices_in_the_Mourner%27s_House]] page.

==If a Relative Missed Mourning during Shiva==
# If someone didn't mourn during shiva intentionally or unintentionally he has to make it up and mourn within thirty days of the death.<ref>The Ramban (p. 216, cited by Bet Yosef 396:1) quotes a Raavad who says that if a person didn't mourn when he was supposed to he has to make it up within thirty days since it is a mitzvah and he didn't fulfill it yet. Shulchan Aruch 396:1 codifies the Raavad.</ref>
# If someone didn't tear keriya he can make it up during shiva but not afterwards. For a parent if someone didn't tear keriya within shiva he can even tear afterwards.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 340:18, 396:1</ref>
# If a person didn't mourn on the first few days but did mourn afterwards, even the beginning days count towards the shiva.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 396:2</ref>

==Chinuch for Mourning==
# If a child's relative died the child doesn't need to observe aveilut as there is no chinuch for aveilut.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 396:3, Dagul Mirvavah 340. See Taz 340:15 who quotes Derisha as arguing that there's chinuch on aveilut.</ref>
# If a child's relative died and the child becomes bar mitzvah'ed within shiva or within shloshim, the child is exempt from mourning altogether.<ref>
* The Maharam (cited by Rosh Moed Katan 3:96) held that once the child becomes bar mitzvah'ed he begins to observe aveilut from that time. His proof is Chullin 87a that if dirt covered blood that was supposed to be covered and then was uncovered he is obligated to cover the blood since a pushed off mitzvah isn't considered completely lost. So too, a child who didn't have to observe aveilut is exempt while he is a minor but once he becomes an adult he is obligated to mourn and a delayed mitzvah isn't completely lost.
* However, the Rosh (Moed Katan 3:96) argued with his teacher; he said that in the case of the blood, the mitzvah wasn't delayed, there was just an obstacle in the way and once the obstacle was removed the mitzvah is in place. However, a child is exempt from aveilut and fulfilling aveilut at a later time is considered a makeup of the original aveilut. Since he was exempt from the original aveilut he is also exempt from the makeup. His proof is from the gemara Chagiga 9a that a child who became bar mitzvah'ed between Pesach and Pesach Sheni he isn't obligated in Pesach Sheni since he was exempt from the original Pesach according to the opinion that Pesach Sheni is a makeup of Pesach.
* The Taz 396:2 has a third approach. He says that once aveilut was pushed off it is completely pushed off altogether. His proof is from Sanhedrin 47b that the relatives of a person who was killed by Bet Din don't have aveilut. The gemara asks but doesn't have kapara after he is buried and the body is affected by the burial. The second answer of the gemara is that once the aveilut wasn't fit to begin when he was buried, it can't didn't set in afterwards either.
* The Shulchan Aruch 396:3 follows the opinion of the Rosh, while the Bach 396:2 follows the opinion of the Maharam. The Taz accepts Shulchan Aruch for his own reason, and the Nekudat Hakesef argues with the Taz's proof. The Nekudat Hakesef's distinction is that when the person wasn't fit to be mourned over then the entire aveilut is totally pushed off, however, if there was aveilut but just the relative was exempt at the time then the aveilut can set it afterwards. </ref>
==Mourning for Two Relatives Simultaneously==
# If someone had two relatives who passed away he can observe aveilut for both of them at the same time. If they passed away with some separation he starts the second aveilut continues until it would have regularly finished just like if there would not been the first aveilut.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 402:9</ref>
==Informing Someone of Bad News==
# It is improper to be the bearer of bad news and as such there is no obligation to tell someone about his relative's death. However, if he is asked if someone died he can say someone ambiguous but he can't lie.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 402:12, Taz 402:8</ref> The Ashkenazic minhag is to inform the sons of the deceased so that they can say kaddish for their father.<ref>Rama YD 402:12</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Seudat Havrah

2024-08-18T17:55:11Z

Bchernigoff: Edited grammar

# It is forbidden for the mourner to eat his own food for the first meal after the aveilut begins. Instead, others should give him food for the seudat havrah.<ref>Moed Katan 27b</ref> Eating anything such as bread, meat, or vegetables is forbidden until the seudat havrah. However, he may have his own tea or coffee.<ref>Chazon Ovadia Aveilut 1 p. 488</ref>
# Some say that the Seudat Havrah should have meat. <ref>Maharitz Chiytz Brachot 7b citing Seder Hadorot s.v. Rabbi Yochanan. See Nedarim 56b which supports this.</ref>
# A seudat havrah is conducted even on Chol Hamoed, Chanuka, Purim, and Rosh Chodesh for the relatives who are mourning.<Ref>The Rosh (Moed Katan 3:59) argues with the Smag and Smak who hold that there is no seudat havrah on Chol Hamoed. Additionally, the Smag writes that everyone agrees that on Chanuka and Rosh Chodesh there is a seudat havrah. Shulchan Aruch YD 401:4 codifies the opinion of the Rosh and writes that there is a seudat havrah on Chol Hamoed, Chanuka, Rosh Chodesh, and also Purim.</ref>
# There is no seudat havrah on Yom Tov, even on Yom Tov Sheni. <ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 401:4. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (on Shulchan Aruch) explains that even though according to Shulchan Aruch it is possible to have mourning on Yom Tov Sheni, there is no seudat havrah since it is similar to a eulogy which isn't appropriate on Yom Tov. However, on Chol Hamoed, when there is no mourning, there is a seudat havrah as it isn't as emotional as a eulogy.</ref>
==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Tearing Keriya

2024-08-18T17:52:10Z

Bchernigoff: edited grammar and added some content

If one of someone's seven close relatives passes away<ref>S.A. Yoreh Deah 340:1. See S.A. Yoreh Deah 374:4 for the list of the seven close relatives. </ref>, one is obligated to tear one's garments as an act of [[mourning]].<ref>Kitzur S”A 195:1. The Rosh Moed Katan 3:44 quotes the Raavad as holding that tearing keriya is biblical, while the Ramban argues that it is only rabbinic. The Shach 340:2 cites the opinion of the Ramban.</ref> This obligation is called Keriyah (lit. tearing). One who does not tear when he or she is obligated, incurs the punishment of death in heavenly court, as is the case with other Rabbinic obligations<ref>Chachmat Adam, 152:1. See also Berachot 4b. </ref>. The details of this halacha are discussed below.
==Procedure==
===Standing===

#One must tear Keriyah while standing. If one did it while seated, one didn't fulfill his obligation. In such a situation, one should tear one's garment again<ref>Shulchan Aruch 340:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:1</ref> without a bracha.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:1</ref>
#An elderly or disabled person who can't stand should tear Keriyah while seated. <ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:1</ref>

===Where on the garment to rip===

#One should tear the front of the shirt from the collar downward (vertically) and not across. If one tore the back, the bottom, or the side, one didn't fulfill his obligation.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 340:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:2</ref>
#One must tear the garment where it was originally complete and not an area which was only sewn together. <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:2</ref>
#One who is [[mourning]] a parent should tear on the left side of one's body so as to uncover one's heart, but one who is [[mourning]] one of the other close relatives should tear on the right side of one's body. If someone tore Keriyah on the wrong side, then this is bdiavad (after the fact) acceptable.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:4</ref>

===How to do the tear===

#For a parent, one must tear with one’s hands, while for one of the other relatives, one can tear with one’s hands or with a knife. Even for a parent, the minhag is to start with a knife, and then the person tears downward a tefach.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:5, Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 229), Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:3</ref>
#The Sephardic minhag is that someone else does the kriyah for the mourner and then the mourner recites the bracha.<ref>Birkei Yosef 340:12, Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 229)</ref>

===Which Garments to Tear===

#One who is [[mourning]] any relative other than a parent should tear one's outer garment such as one's shirt, but not an outer garment which one only wears sometimes, such as a coat or jacket. <ref>Shulchan Aruch rules that one doesn't have to tear kriyah on an outer garment. The Taz 340:5 explains that this outer garment is something only worn for modesty in a shul or outdoors but not in a private house. The Nekudat Hakesef argues that the outer garment is only exempt if it is something worn for modesty just in shul, but if it is a garment always worn in the street, even if it isn't worn at home, it is still obligated in kriyah. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:3 rules like the Shach and writes that one who is [[mourning]] a relative other than a parent doesn't rip one's outer garment which one sometimes goes in the street with and sometimes not. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:4 writes that such a mourner should rip his shirt and not his coat. [http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/880233/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig/aveilut-shiur-20-keriya-on-the-seventh-day-after-changing-hilchot-keriya-tefillin-first-day/ Rabbi Mordechai Willig (Aveilut Shiur 20)] explained that since people don't always wears a jacket inside or even in the street, it is considered an outer garment that doesn't need to be ripped. </ref>
#One who is [[mourning]] a parent should tear one's outer garment as well as any undershirt that one is wearing until one reveals the skin covering one's heart. One does not need to tear an outer garment which one only wears sometimes such as a coat or jacket. <ref>Kitzur S”A 195:3 writes that one who is [[mourning]] a parent should rip one's outer garment and all inner garments until one reveals one's heart, but one doesn't need to rip a coat which sometimes wears. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur S”A 195:4 writes that such a mourner should rip his shirt and not his coat. </ref>
#If one only tore some of the garments which one was obligated to tear, one has not fulfilled his obligation. <ref>Kitzur S”A 195:3</ref>

===How far to tear===

#If one is [[mourning]] any relative other than a parent, one should tear the length of a [[Tefach]] and not more because of a concern of Baal Tashchit. <ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 340:3, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:3</ref>
#One who is [[mourning]] one's parents should tear until the skin covering one's heart is revealed. <ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 340:3, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:3</ref>
#If one is wearing a garment that has already been torn, then when one is tearing kriyah for a relative other than a parent, it is sufficient to rip a little bit. However, if he is still in the middle of [[shiva]] mourning for the relative for whom he tore the shirt the first time, he one has to rip a [[tefach]] for the other relative.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 340:3</ref>

==When to tear Keriyah==

#Ideally a person should tear kriyah immediately or as soon as possible after the person dies or he hears about it.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 339:3, Rama 340:1, Shach 340:3, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:1, [https://outorah.org/p/28658/ Rabbi Aiken on OU.org], Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 226)</ref> The Sephardic minhag, however, is to tear kriyah after the burial or before the seudat havrah. This minhag has what to rely upon.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 226) writes that the Sephardic minhag to tear kriyah after the burial has what to rely upon. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment on Kitzur S”A 195:2 confirms this minhag.</ref>
#If someone's relative died he doesn't tear keriya on Yom Tov, even on Yom Tov Shaini.<ref>Rambam (Aveilut 11:1), Shulchan Aruch YD 399:13</ref>
#On Chol Hamoed, it is permitted to tear kriyah for a relative for whom one has an obligation to tear kriyah.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 401:2</ref>

==Keriyah for Women==

#A woman who is [[mourning]] a parent should tear Keriyah on the inner garment first, turn that tear to the side, and then tear the outer garment so as not to reveal the skin covering her heart.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:3</ref>
#While the minhag of some Sephardi women is not to tear Keriyah at all out of concern for tziniut<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu comments on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 195:5</ref>, many poskim hold that this is in error.<ref>Moed Katan 22b explicitly states that women have to tear kriyah but for a parent she should tear her inner garment and then turn it and then tear the outer garment. This halacha is accepted in the Shulchan Aruch, in Yoreh Deah 340:11. Chazon Ovadia (Aveilut v. 1 p. 236) writes that any Rabbi who tells women that they don't need to tear kriyah is mistaken and need to be rebuked harshly.</ref>

==Who Tears Kriyah==

#If a child lost a relative, then other people should tear his garment for him.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 340:27. Perisha 340:11 quotes Rashi who says that the purpose of this is so that people should increase their weeping upon seeing that even a child has torn his garments. Tur echoes this by stating that the goal of tearing a child's garments is "to increase eulogy". Tur also cites Ritz Gai'ut who believes that there is a din of Chinuch when it comes to Keriyah, just as we have by other Mitzvot. </ref>

==For whom does one tear Keriyah==

#For any relative for whom a person is supposed to mourn he must tear kriyah. These include: A mother, father, son, daughter, brother, sister, and wife.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 340:1, 374:4</ref>
#Additionally, if one of the seven relatives are in mourning, one should tear kriyah before those relatives to join them. The Ashkenazic minhag is not to tear for a relative's relative today.<ref>Shulchan Aruch and Rama YD 340:4</ref>

===A Good Person===

#If someone who has a good reputation, isn't suspected of any aveirah or omission of a mitzvah, passes away, even if he isn't great in Torah, then one should tear kriyah if he knew about it between the death and the burial.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 340:6</ref> The Ashkenazic minhag is not to tear kriyah on a good person unless one was present at the death.<ref>Rama YD 340:6</ref>

===Talmid Chacham===

#For a chacham or talmid chacham who could answer a question of halacha in any area of Torah, one should tear kriyah when one hears about his death. If one didn't do it at that point, then it should be done when they eulogize him. This kriyah is until one reveals one's heart. Ashkenazim hold that this only applies to a Talmid Chacham who one learned from.<ref>Shulchan Aruch and Rama YD 340:7</ref>
#The minhag is not to tear Keriyah upon hearing about the passing of a Talmid Chacham unless it is one's Rebbe Muvhak.<ref>Shach YD 340:17, Yalkut Yosef YD 9:15</ref>
#A rebbe muvhak is someone who whom you learned the majority of your learning, whether it is in tanach, mishna, or gemara. This kriyah is until one exposes one's heart and some say one tefach.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 340:8</ref>
#The minhag is not to tear kriyah for a chevrusa.<ref>Rama YD 340:8</ref>

===Patient at time of death===
see Nishmas Avraham vol 1 oc 223:6 and vol 2 Y.D 340:2 for lengthy discussion

#While the Talmud and the Shulchan Aruch clearly state that a person is obligated to rend one’s garments when present at the passing<ref>The Bet Yosef Y.D 340:6 notes that the Ramban and the Rosh cite the Raavad that this includes from the time of death to the time of burial (also Ritva Moed Katan 25a, see Prishah on the Tur note 10). However, the Rama Y.D 340:5 citing the Raavya limits it to the simple interpretation of being present at the time of death, and the practice is to be lenient (Rambam Avel 9:11 seems to hold this way as well).</ref> of another Jew<ref>The Gemara Moed Katan 25a praises one who mourns an “adam kasher” and states that this is in fact an obligation. Similarly, the Gemara says that if a person was standing by a Jew at the time of death, then again there is a requirement to mourn and tear keriya. Tur Y.D 340 cites R Yonah that so long as the person is not suspected of sinning, one rends his garment. He further cites the Maharam Rutenburg who maintains that the enactment includes Jews who at times violate commandments for pleasure or out of laziness, but not Jews who are apostates. The Shulchan Aruch Y.D 340:5 writes in accordance with R' Yonah, whereas the Rama writes in accordance with the Maharam Rutenburg. The Rambam (Avel 9:11) seems to understand that the gemara was not relating to the previous statement when it cited the law that one rend one’s garment over the passing of another Jew, and thus rules that this applies to all Jews. The Nishmas Avraham Vol 1 (O.C 223 note 6) write that for this enactment to apply, the deceased must be one who is not suspect on any transgressions. See there for further discussion. 
The gemara explains that the reason for this enactment is because when a Jew dies it is like a sefer Torah was burned. There is a version of Rashi which elaborates that this line means that the person could have learned more Torah. Some explain that according to Rashi this enactment does not apply to women (Ramban, Ritva, Tur). However, others explain that even Rashi would agree that this enactment applies to women (Rashba, Beit Yosef).</ref>, the common practice is to be lenient<ref>There are three reasons brought down for the leniency today: 1) the takanah (decree) is waived so that people will stand there at the time of death (Shulchan Gavoha YD 339:4, Gesher Hachayim 14:9); 2) the sick person waives the takanah so that people will be there at the time of death (Shut Torat Chesed OC 17:6); 3) practically we cannot allow so much garment rending; otherwise people will run out of clothing and die of cold (Shulchan Gavohah YD 339:4 based on Rama YD 340:7; also Kaf Hachayim OC 547:25). The Nishmas Avraham (vol 2 YD 340:2) holds that there should be a chiyuv as these reasons are weak and the Rabbis never worried about such things. However, based on what he writes in OC 223:6, it's clear that he does not believe that one who does not rend one’s garments is mistaken, nor is it clear that he would advise one to rend, based on the common practice not to do so. Rav Schachter ([http://www.halachipedia.com/documents/5776/Halachos_for_Professionals.pdf oral communication cited in Halachos for Professionals]) said regarding similar laws of kriya on non-relatives, like a rebbe muvhak, that one should only observe these laws nowadays if his actions will not seem out of place or disproportionate to his relationship with the person or otherwise inappropriate; however if it would not seem out of place or cause stress to the mourners then such expressions would be appropriate.</ref>, especially for doctors and nurses.<ref>The Nishmas Avraham discusses poskim who are lenient not to tear since the coat that they wear on top is not their own (Tzitz Eliezer vol 13 35:4). He himself holds on principle that one would be required to rend the garment underneath for two reasons: first, because some say that if one rends the lower garment one still fulfills his obligation, and second as the white doctors’ coat does not count as an upper garment, rather the lower garment (the doctor’s personal shirt) would count as the upper garment (Rabbi Neuwirth, Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach). It would seem that today even the Nishmas Avraham would agree not to rend for doctors and nurses who wear scrubs and their lower garments are also not their own. (See Shulchan Aruch YD 340:34) </ref>
#One who does rend his garments when present at the time of death need not tear a full tefach for each passing, rather one tefach for the first and then add on a little bit (kol shehu) for each subsequent passing.<ref>Igros Moshe CM vol 2 73:10</ref>

==Sources==
<references />
[[Category:Mourning]]

Having Children

2024-08-18T16:00:59Z

Bchernigoff:

There is a positive mitzvah to bring children into the world and raise them to be proper Jews.<ref>Rambam (Asin), Sefer HaChinuch (no. 1)</ref> A possible reason behind this mitzvah is that Hashem didn't want the world to be empty.<ref>Yishayahu 45:18, Sefer HaChinuch (no. 1)</ref> Additionally, it is also the doorway to all mitzvot because only living people can fulfill mitzvot and the Torah was given to man and not the angels.<Ref>Sefer HaChinuch (no. 1)</ref>

==General==
# The mitzvah is to endeavor to have children according to one's ability.<ref>The Gemara Shabbat 31a states that in Heaven a person will be asked whether or not he "involved" himself in Pru Urevu, and not whether he actually fulfilled the mitzvah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe EH 2:18) writes that the actual mitzvah is for a man to have relations with his wife in order to have children. When his wife actually gives birth, that isn't a fulfillment of Pru Urevu, but rather an exemption from the mitzvah to have relations in order to have kids. The Minchat Chinuch (no. 1, s.v. VeIm Adam) assumes that having the children is the actual fulfillment of the mitzvah. Rav Soloveitchik quoted by Rav Schachter in a [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/768367/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Shiur_#47_-_Yevamos_-_מי_שחציו_עבד_וחציו_בן_חורין,_עשה_דוחה_לא_תעשה shiur (Yevamot 47, min 54-9) on yutorah.org] had a compromise opinion, in which a person fulfills the action of the mitzvah (maaseh ha'mitzvah) with relations and fulfills the completion of the mitzvah (kiyum ha'mitzvah) when his wife actually gives birth to children.</ref>
# Only men are obligated in this mitzvah.<ref>Yevamot 65b, Sefer HaChinuch (no. 1), Rambam (Ishut 15:2), Shulchan Aruch EH 1:1. The Mishna (Yevamot 65b) states that women are exempt from this mitzvah because the end of the pasuk states that people should conquer the world and that isn't the tendency of women. Meshech Chachma (Beresheet 9:7) suggests that the reason the Torah exempted women is because having children is dangerous and the Torah wouldn't obligate them to put themselves in danger, as the "ways of the Torah are pleasant, and all of its paths are peaceful" (Mishlei 3:17). Alternatively, Meshech Chochma posits that since women naturally want to have children, there's no need for a Mitzvah to command them, as it'd be superfluous to command them in something which they naturally desire. </ref> Nonetheless, a woman who does have children fulfills a mitzvah by aiding her husband in fulfilling his mitzvah of having children.<ref>Ran (Kiddushin 16b)</ref> Additionally, some say that women are obligated to have children in order to ensure that the world is populated (this is referred to as the Mitzvah of ''Shevet'').<ref>Tosfot Bava Batra 13a s.v. Sheneemar implies that women are obligated in the mitzvah of "לא תהו בראה לשבת יצרה". Levush YD 249:15 codifies this. See this [http://98.131.138.124/articles/tora/subject1.asp article by the Schlesinger Institute] for more sources.</ref>
# A person fulfills his obligation once he has two children, one son and one daughter.<ref>Yevamot 61b, Rambam (Ishut 15:4), Shulchan Aruch EH 1:5</ref>
# Even once one has fulfilled his obligation, there is a Mitzvah to continue to have children.<ref>Rabbi Yehoshua (Yevamot 62b) states that if one had children when he is younger, he should continue to try to have children when he is older, because one never knows the outcome of his children. The Gemara says that this is rooted in the passuk of "sow your seed in the morning, and don't hold back your hand in the evening, since you don't know which one is going to succeed" (Kohelet 11:6). The Rambam (Ishut 15:16) writes that even though one has already fulfilled his mitzvah of having children, he has a mitzvah m'derabanan to have more children, and if he does so, then it's as if he built an entire world. [http://www.yeshiva.org.il/midrash/7845 Rabbi Melamed] adds that there is a mitzvah of VeHalachta Bedrachav to have more children. Tosfot Bava Batra 60b s.v. din writes that if everyone would only have one son and one daughter, the Jewish nation would cease to exist. </ref> Nonetheless, it is important to take into account other values and concerns.<ref>[http://www.yeshiva.org.il/midrash/7845 Rabbi Melamed] explains that it is important to weigh one's decision carefully. For example, he says, if a person knows that if he has more than eight children they will have a lot of stress, frustration, and difficulty, then it is likely advisable not to continue to fulfill this mitzvah, as it will negatively impact the [[Chinuch]] of the other children. For more on this subject, reference shiurim by Rabbi Mordechai Willig https://www.torahweb.org/audio/rwil_032209_video.html, and Rabbi Herschel Schachter http://torahweb.org/audio/rsch_032209_video.html . </ref>

==Pregnancy==
# Some say that it is a segula for a woman to have an easy labor if her husband opens the aron kodesh during her 9th month.<ref> The Chida Avodas HaKodesh; Moreh B'etzba 3:4 </ref>

==Mitzvah of Onah==
# There is a mitzvah of oneh (Heb. עונה; lit. time) for a husband to fulfill his wife's needs in terms of tashmish. There are certain guidelines of how often he is obligated to attend to those needs.<ref>Ketubot 47b, Rambam Ishut 12:2, Shulchan Aruch E.H. 69:2</ref> Beyond that, anytime when she is interested, he is obligated to gladden his wife.<ref>Gemara Pesachim 72b introduces that beyond the mitzvah of oneh, there is a mitzvah to gladden his wife. Rashi s.v. lismoch who explains that this mitzvah applies when his wife is interested. Nishmat Adam (Shabbat 147:1) codifies this mitzvah in another context. Birkat Eliyahu (on Gra last volume Kuntres Toeh Bdvar Mitzvah p. 7) wonders why the poskim didn't codify this mitzvah. See Mesivta Pesachim 72b which cites the Rivan who thinks that this is only rabbinic, while the Raavad (Shaar Hakedusha s.v. vhashlishit) thinks that it's Biblical. Rav Chaim Ozer in Achiezer 3:83 cites this dispute.</ref>
==Intrauterine Insemination (IUI) and In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)==
===For a Couple===
#Most poskim hold that it's permitted for a couple to use IUI or IVF,<ref>*Is it permitted? Bitul Zera (wasting seed): [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=963&st=&pgnum=150 Yaskil Avdi EH 5:10:1:4] writes that it is forbidden to do IUI or IVF because of bitul zera. Even if the child is considered their child and you fulfill pru urevu, it is still forbidden. He thinks that bitul zera is not related to her becoming pregnant. It is only permitted to emit zera in the act of tashmish with his wife in the place where Hashem allowed it.
*Minchat Yitzchak 1:50 is willing to rely on Maharsham who holds that something isn't bitul zera if through the process they can have a child and fulfill pru urevu. A proof for this is Tosfot Sanhedrin 59b s.v. v'ha, who compares the halachic parameters of pru urevu and hashchatat zera.
*Har Tzvi EH 4 writes that a person fulfills pru urevu with artificial insemination based on the following argument. According to the Bet Shmuel (Even HaEzer 1:10), even if a man's zera caused his wife to become pregnant through a bath (nitaber b'ambati) he fulfills his mitzvah. Even according to the Taz (Even HaEzer 1:8), who disagrees with the Bet Shmuel and thinks that one doesn't fulfill his mitzvah when his wife becomes pregnant in a bathhouse, would agree that one fulfills the mitzvah with IVF, as the man intends to do procreate in this case, as opposed to the case of the bathtub. Additionally, if the doctor is Jewish, then he could serve as the husband's agent (''shaliach adam kmoto''). Also, it isn't prohibited because of bitul zera since the goal is to procreate and not to simply waste seed.
*Igrot Moshe EH 1:71 and 2:18 writes that it is permitted to do IUI or IVF for a couple that can’t have children naturally. It isn’t considered bitul zera levatala since there is a purpose in emitting zera (similar to Maharsham). Minchat Shlomo 2:124:2 agrees. However, Rav Moshe writes that they should have zera come out into a condom or into a cup during tashmish. If his wife is a niddah or he's single, he should have zera come out by following the suggestions of Chazal in Yevamot 76a.</ref> the child is considered their child,<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 1:10 rules like the Bet Shmuel (Even HaEzer 1:10).</ref> and the father fulfills Pru Urevu.<ref>The Chelkat Mechokek (Even HaEzer 1:8) ponders whether the child born from a man whose zera came out into a bath and impregnated his wife (nitabra b'ambati) is considered the man's child, and if the man fulfills pru urevu. Rabbenu Peretz (cited by Bach Yoreh Deah 195:5) writes that if a woman who is a Niddah slept on sheets with her husband's zera and became pregnant from that zera, that the child would be kosher, and would not be considered a ben haniddah, since there was no prohibited act of intimacy (maaseh biah) that was performed. However, a woman should be careful not to sleep on the sheets that contain another man's zera, because it could lead a brother to marry a sister unknowingly (reference Yevamot 37b). R' Peretz implies that if a child is born without a maaseh biah, then he's considered the man's son, just that he isn't considered a ben haniddah. His proof is from Ben Sira who was a child of Yirmiyahu's zera that impregnated his wife while she was in the bath. Bet Shmuel 1:10 adopts this position. Tashbetz 3:263 is also of this opinion. </ref> However, many poskim only allowed it after ten years of being married.<ref>Maharsham 3:268, Minchat Yitzchak 1:50, Yabia Omer EH 2:1:10</ref>
##Some poskim hold that if a person uses IVF, then he doesn't fulfill pru urevu, but does fulfill the rabbinic mitzvah of ''shevet''.<ref>Minchat Shlomo 2:124:4</ref>
===Receiving Non-Jewish Sperm Donation===
#In extenuating circumstances, some poskim allow a married woman to get a sperm donation from a non-Jew.<ref>Minchat Shlomo 2:124:4, Igrot Moshe EH 1:10</ref> Other poskim hold that it is forbidden.<ref>Shevet Halevi 3:175 writes that it is forbidden from the Torah, based on Sanhedrin 58a, but it's not an isur karet like the Satmer Rav held. The Satmer Rav in [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20339&st=&pgnum=10 Divrei Yoel EH 2:107:1] forbids it because there is an issue of not being able to identify the child as having come from zera of kedusha (see Yevamot 42a).</ref>
# A child born from a non-Jewish sperm that was inserted into a Jewish woman is completely Jewish. If the first born is a boy, then he should have a pidyon haben without a bracha.<Ref>Shevet Halevi 3:176</ref>
===Receiving Jewish Sperm Donation===
#The poskim forbid a woman from receiving a sperm donation from Jewish sperm.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=963&st=&pgnum=151 Yaskil Avdi 5:10:1:6] writes that it is terrible to allow any IVF because they might come to allow a sperm donation from someone other than her husband.
Igrot Moshe EH 1:71 writes that they should not do sperm donation from a Jew because of the issue that since the father is unknown it could lead to siblings marrying one another. Yabia Omer EH 2:1:9 quotes the Maarchei Lev 73 who writes that it is Biblically forbidden under the prohibition of adultery. While Yabia Omer disagrees that it isn't Biblically forbidden, he nonetheless believes it to be forbidden. Shevet Halevi 3:175, Igrot Moshe EH 1:71, Minchat Shlomo 2:124, and Shevet Halevi 3:176 also forbid it.</ref>
#After the fact, a sperm donation from another man into a married woman does not make the woman forbidden to her husband. Some poskim hold that the child is not a mamzer and if it's a girl then she can even marry a kohen,<ref>If there was IUI of sperm from someone other than her husband, Igrot Moshe EH 1:10 wrote that the child is not a mamzer because there was no cohabitation that was forbidden. Also, the child if it is a girl could even marry a kohen if the sperm is from a non-Jew since there was no prohibited cohabitation. Also, the Rif holds that even a child of a non-Jewish father and Jewish mother can marry a kohen. Even though we don’t usually follow the Rif here we could because of the first reason.</ref> while others hold that the child is a mamzer.<ref>Minchat Shlomo 2:124:1. His reasoning is that mamzerut doesn't depend on a forbidden cohabitation. It depends on the mixture of the genetic material of a forbidden relationship. He admits that Rabbenu Peretz is a clear proof that the child is not a mamzer but perhaps halacha doesn't follow Rabbenu Peretz. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20339&st=&pgnum=10 Divrei Yoel EH 2:107:4-5] agrees and even suggests that it is considered giyluy ervah. He considers the opinion of Igrot Moshe who understood from Rabbenu Peretz that the child is not a mamzer a mistake.</ref> Some hold that her and her husband need to separate from her while she's pregnant and for another 24 months.<reF>Yabia Omer EH 2:1:9</ref>
===While She Is a Niddah===
# There is a major question if doing IUI or IVF is permitted when a woman is still a niddah.<ref>Maharsham 3:268 forbids doing IUI while she's a niddah. Even though Rabbenu Peretz (cited by Bach 195:5) it seems like there would be no impact on the child, he is unwilling to be lenient. Also, see Shiltei Giborim Shevuot 2a who quotes Maharam who disagrees. Yabia Omer 2:1:10 also quotes Birkei Yosef in name of Rav Shlomo of London who was also strict. Shevet Halevi 4:97 and 6:203 agrees with the Maharsham and forbids IUI while she's pregnant.
*Minchat Yitzchak 1:50 suggests that she go to mikveh before the procedure even if it is only 7 days after she became a niddah and is not permitted to her husband until after she goes to mikveh after shiva nekiyim.
*Igrot Moshe EH 2:18 allows a woman to do IUI while she's a niddah and does not allow her to go to mikveh early since it could lead to mistakes in the future. He also writes that the child is not considered tainted as a ben haniddah since there was no prohibited cohabitation. Similarly, Yabia Omer EH 2:1:10 is lenient to do IUI or IVF while she's a niddah in extenuating circumstances. See Minchat Shlomo 2:124 who seems to favor the approach of Rabbenu Peretz over Rav Shlomo of London for this question.</ref>

==Related Topics==
*[[Adoption]]

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Lifecycles]]