Halachipedia - User contributions [en]

Tenayim

2018-07-05T19:30:36Z

Sbmb:

Before commencing with the wedding, the practice is to write a contract between the families of the bride and groom to agree to certain gifts that they will be giving each other's children in honor of the marriage, and to agree to paying a fine if the parties do not follow through.<ref>See Rama E.H. 50:5-6. Many poskim, including the Rama, refer to this contract as the קנסות; see She'elos U'Teshuvos Maharam Mintz no. 31</ref>

==When the Tenayim is done==
# In many communities, the practice of signing and reading the "Tenayim" was done to finalize the intent of the couple to marry each other, and so a meal is made in honor of the engagement.<ref>Minhageim d'K.K. Vermeiza (Machon Yerushalayim, 1988) no. 227 (see notes there), Taz O.C. 546:2, Magen Avraham O.C. 444:9, Aruch Hashulchan E.H. 50:26</ref> According to some, this meal is a "se'udas mitzvah" and obligatory,<ref>Chok Ya'akov O.C. 444:10 and Kaf HaChayim there</ref> but most Ashkenazim seem to pasken that this meal is optional.<ref>She'elot U'Teshuvot Chavos Yair no. 70 (end), Pri Megadim to Taz O.C. 444:8, Mishnah Berurah 444:9. One of the earliest references to such a meal is in Minhageim d'K.K. Vermeiza, where it is stated that the custom is to have lokshen but not necessarily bread. This is also implied by Mishnah Berurah 551:16</ref>
# Some have the practice to sign the "tenaim" immediately before the wedding ceremony, in addition to the one at the engagement<ref>See Nachalas Shiva no. 9-11. These two versions differed in text, particularly regarding the fine that would have to be paid if the engagement was broken off due to inappropriate behavior.</ref> but today many sign only a symbolic contract at the wedding itself.<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/827065/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Seder_Kiddushin_and_Nesuin Rav Schachter in "Seder Kiddushin and Nesuin" (min 1-2).], [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/891203/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig/hilchos-ishus-part-4/ Rabbi Mordechai Willig]. See She'elot UTeshuvot Maharsham 3:127, Nitei Gavriel Nisuin I 12:8</ref> If this is done, R. Moshe Feinstein recommends altering the text of the contract to reflect this timing (see below).
# Customs differ as to whether or not to write a "Tenaim" contract for a second marriage<ref>Nitei Gavriel Nisuin 49:2</ref>

==Procedure of Tenayim==
# Today, many have the custom not to detail any of the actual responsibilities to the couple or the fine imposed for backing out of the marriage, but merely to hint to them by writing the "chapter headings".<ref>Taz E.H. 50:12, Beis Shmuel E.H. 50:15, Aruch Hashulchan E.H. 50:26</ref>
# If the "Tenayim" is not signed or written until the time of the marriage, as is the custom in many communities today,<ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/827065/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Seder_Kiddushin_and_Nesuin Rav Schachter in "Seder Kiddushin and Nesuin" (min 1-2)]</ref> the text should reflect the contract's symbolic nature.<ref>The text according to Rav Moshe Feinstein (and that of other gedolim) can be found in[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=46545&pgnum=377 Nitei Gavriel Nesuin v. 1 p. 377].</ref>
# The contract is made between the two fathers or guardians of bride and groom, and so they lift a kerchief or any item in order to finalize their agreement with an action,<ref>As evidenced by the phrase וקנינא mentioned in even Rav Moshe's version of the contract.</ref> but if the contract is symbolic then no monetary obligation is affected by this transaction.<ref>See Rama E.H. 50:6 and poskim there. R. Moshe Feinstein wrote (Iggeros Moshe E.H. 1:91) regarding this practice, דמה שכותבין בשעת החופה אינו כלום</ref>
# The accepted custom is to have the contract (or at least its headings) read aloud in public when it is signed by the parties and witnesses, so that all of those signing know the content of the contract.<ref>Noda Bi'Yhudah Kama Y.D. 66, Aruch Hashulchan E.H. 50:26</ref>
# It is a nice practice for the groom (or someone else) to say some words of Torah at the signing of the Tenayim, whether immediately before the wedding or at the engagement.<ref>Magen Avraham O.C. 306:15</ref>
# After the reading of the Tenayim, the custom has developed for the mothers of the bride and groom to break a utensil (usually a plate).<ref>Eliyah Rabba O.C. 560:7 writes that this is to remember Jerusalem, but Pri Migeadim to Taz O.C. 560:4 and Aruch Hashulchan E.H. 50:26 offer other reasons.</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Lifecycles]]
[[Category:Marriage]]

Pat Akum

2016-10-07T03:37:19Z

Sbmb: /* Involvement of a Jew in the Baking */

==Background: The Gezairah==
# The Chachomim enacted a gezairah forbidding bread that was baked by a non-Jew<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. It's clear from the Gemara Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b that this prohibition is mi'derabanan. This prohibition is independent from that of bishul akum; see Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b "ve'hapas" regarding which gezairah was made first. Ramban ibid. also notes that there are more leniencies for pas akum than for bishul akum, because everyone needs bread to live. The Aruch Hashulchan 113:2 suggests that since bishul akum was also prohibited because of the possibility of the non-Jew mixing in non-kosher besides for the fear of intermarriage, we are more strict regarding bishul akum than pas akum.</ref> so as to avoid intermingling with them too much, which could lead to intermarriage<ref>cf. Rashi Avodah Zarah 35b "shelakos" and Rambam Peirush Hamishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. However, from the Gemara on daf 17b and 36b it seems like the real concern was actually idolatry, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim on page 4. Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b, Rabbeinu Yonah ad. loc., and Shach Y.D. 112:3 note that there is no reason to be concerned for other issues of kashrus. It should be pointed out though that today one still cannot buy bread without a hechsher, see Iggros Moshe Y.D. 2:33</ref>. However, the bread of a non-Jew is prohibited even if there's no possibility of intermarriage,<ref>Such as if the non-Jewish baker was a priest who wouldn't have any daughters. Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba.</ref> and doesn't depend on whether or not the non-Jew is an idolater<ref>Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4, Pri Tohar 112:3</ref>
# It is permitted to derive benefit from bread baked by a non-Jew without eating it.<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:3-6</ref>
# While the Bavli's conclusion is somewhat ambiguous, most Rishonim understand that the prohibition of eating pas akum was revoked to some degree.<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b quotes from R. Meir Halevi who believed that the prohibition was not revoked at all, but the Ritva himself, his teachers, Tosfos, Rash miShantz, Rabbeinu Yonah, Ramban, Ra"ah, Rashba, Ran, Nimukei Yosef, and the Rosh in their comments to the aforementioned Gemara all beleive that the decree was limited by later Chachamim. See below regarding the opinion of the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch.</ref> According to some<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b. Such a position is also implied by Tosafos 35b "michlal", as well as by the Rosh's opinion recorded in Tur 112 and the Mordechai according to Shach 112:8</ref>, the prohibition was revoked by the sages entirely. Another opinion, which is followed by Ashkenazim, is that the rabbis allowed bread baked only by a non-Jewish baker ("''pas paltar''", as opposed to "''pas baal habayis''"),<ref>Yerushalami Avodah Zarah 2:8, Rama YD 112:2 based on Tosafot Avoda Zara 35b "michlal", Mordechai, and Issur VeHeter Klal 44, Chochmat Adam 65:2. This also appears to be the position of Rashba and Ran. See below regarding the definition of a 'baker' for this halakha.</ref> whether or not there is bread baked by a Jew available.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Rama in Sefer Toras Chatas 75, Gra Y.D. 112:7-8, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1</ref> The third, and most stringent opinion, is that bread of a baker was permitted only in cases where bread baked by a Jew is not available.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Maachalos Asuros 17:12, Ramban, Ran and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b</ref> This appears to be the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch.<ref>Cf. Y.D. 112:2 and 112:8. Thus, it would appear that this should be the practice for Sefardim, though see Ben Ish Chai II Chukas 2 who follows the lenient opinion. According to the second opinion, which is that of the Rama, in a case where no Jewish-baked bread is available, even "pas baal habayis" is permitted (Rama Y.D. 112:8, see also Rashba Avodah Zarah 35b in his explanation of the Rif)</ref>
# Although Ashkenazi practice is to usually follow the Rama, several poskim indicate that it is still proper to be stringent in this manner and not eat pas paltar where pas yisroel is available.<ref>Shach 112:8, Aruch Hashulchan 112:9, 112:17, Chochmas Adam 65:2 and Chelkes Binyomin 112:23.</ref> Others are not concerned with this for most of the year.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1. The Orthodox Union, as do most Kashrus organizations, certify ''pas paltar'' foods as kosher.</ref> Someone whose practice was to be careful not to eat ''pas paltar'' and wants to change this practice must be ''mattir neder''.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 112:94</ref>
# The Tur writes that even those who are not careful about pas paltar during the year are careful to only eat pas yisrael during Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.<ref>Raavyah Rosh Hashana siman 529, Rosh to Rosh Hashanah 4:14, Tur Orach Chaim 603, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 603:1 and Mishnah Berurah there, Shach Y.D. 112:9. However, the Tashbetz quoted by the Beis Yosef there O.C. 603 doesn't approve of changing one's practice during the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.</ref> Several reasons are given for this custom.<ref>The Chayei Adam 143:1 and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 130:2 write that because God is more merciful than 'necessary' during this time period, we should respond by keeping stringencies which we wouldn't normally consider to be necessary. Levush O.C. 603:1 writes that extra stringencies will remind us to be in a state of teshuvah. Rabbi Netanel Wiederblank [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/838739/Rabbi_Netanel_Wiederblank/Pas_Akum_Part_1 suggested], based on Ramban, that being careful about pas yisrael was a custom of talmidei chachamim, and so we want to act like talmidei chachamim at this time. Rabbi Sobolofsky [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-3%20Pat%20Akum%202.htm offered] another possibility that because the decree was rescinded only because it would be impossible to keep all year long, it is not unreasonable to adhere to it for only ten days of the year.</ref> Some say that this is true of Shabbos and Yom Tov as well, as part of kavod shabbos.<ref>Magen Avraham O.C. 242:4. From the Rama it appears as though this only matters for the bread that one is actually using for the bracha to begin the meals, but the Shaar Tziyun 242:18 writes that even throughout the meal, because of the honor of Shabbos or Yom Tov, one should be careful about ''pas yisroel''</ref>

==Who Baked the Bread==
# A "non-Jewish baker" (''paltar'') in this context is anyone who baked bread with the intent to sell it, and not someone who happens to sell bread for a living.<ref>This is the opinion of the Rama 112:2 based on the Beis Yosef and Rashba (see Gra 112:9), although the Tur's language suggests that he might believe that it depends upon whether or not the non-Jew is baking the bread en masse or not. Shach 112:11 writes that even the bread that a professional commercial baker baked for himself would be included in the prohibition.</ref> Thus, if a baker invited a Jew to partake of his bread, it wouldn't be considered "pas paltar" and would be prohibited.<ref>Rama 112:3 quoting Ra"ah in Bedek HaBayis. However, the Shach 112:12 points out that the Rashba disagrees, and if the Shulchan Aruch is consistent in believing that the prohibition depends on the status of the bread when it was baked, and not when it is sold, then this case should be permitted. Nekudos HaKesef, however, points out that perhaps even if normally the prohibition depends on the time when the bread was baked, this case is too similar to the case of a non-Jew baking the bread for himself.</ref> Bread that was baked with the intention to give to guests is like bread that was meant to be sold, and has the status of "pas paltar".<ref>Kaf Hachayim 112:46</ref>
# As mentioned above, all non-Jews are included in this prohibition.<ref>Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba, Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Pri Tohar on Shulchan Aruch 112:3, Darchei Teshuva 112:4. See Rav Chaim Kanievsky's commentary to Maseches Geirim 1:5, that according to Rabbi Akiva, even a convert cannot eat his own bread that he baked before converting.</ref>
# It is a machlokes haposkim as to whether or not bread baked by an irreligious Jew would be prohibited.<ref>Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 112:1 quoting Tiferes LeMoshe is lenient because one would be allowed to marry his daughter as is Iggeros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, but the Pri Chodosh 112:2, Pri Megadim, and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 72:2 all write that a Jew who does not keep Shabbos is considered like a non-Jew in this regard. See Maharam Shik O.C. 281, Darchei Teshuva 112:5, Avnei Nezer Y.D. 92 (who suggests that it might be prohibited to marry someone not-religious), Shut Yehudah Yaaleh 12, Minchas Yitzchak 3:72, Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 112:11, Mishneh Halachos 11:111, Shut M’Bais Levi 8:page 23:footnote 2, Titz Eliezer 9:41, Yabia Omer Y.D. 5:10, and Chelkes Binyomin 112:4. Also refer to Bishul Yisroel pages 412-413. Rav Shternbach in Halachos Ve'Hanhagos 1:470 writes that even though one must be stringent, in a sha'as hadechak one can eat the bread of someone who is merely a ''tinok shenishbah'', which he applies to anyone who was raised in a non-religious environment. Rav Schachter in OU document A-133 and Rav Asher Weiss in Minchas Asher Devarim no. 5 write that the custom has always been to be lenient.</ref>
# Some poskim have thought that because one would never recognize who baked his bread that was baked industrially in a factory, all commercially sold factory-made bread would not be categorized as "pas akum".<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1 pg. 95 and Rivevos Ephraim 5:596 both quote such a position in the name of R. Moshe Feinstein z"l</ref> However, in practice few poskim would rely on this on its own.<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1, Rivevos Ephraim 5:596, Minchas Yitzchak 3:26:6 and 3:26:10, Yabea Omer Y.D. 5:9:5, and Shevet Halevi 6:108:6 quotes that the Chazon Ish refused to accept such a possibility at all. See also Chelkes Binyamin 113:4</ref>
# The Shulchan Aruch paskens that the prohibition depends on who baked the bread, and not on who sold the bread.<ref>This is a dispute between the Rashba and Ra'ah in Toras Habayis and Bedek Habayis 3:7, quoted by the Beis Yosef Y.D. 112, and the Shulchan Aruch 112:7 paskens like the Rashba, cf. Shach 112:12.</ref> Therefore, a ''baal habayis'' who sells bread baked by a baker has the status of ''pas paltar'', and vice versa.
# If a Jew owned the dough, then most poskim assume that in such a case the bread would fall under the category of [[Bishul Akum]] instead of ''pas paltar''.<ref>Tur 112, Perishah Yoreh De'ah 112:10, Shach Y.D. 112:7 quoting Issur Ve'Heter and Toras Chatas, Taz 112:7.</ref> However, some are lenient<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:10 and 112:29. However, the Aruch Hashulchan derives his opinion from Shach 112:1, which is very difficult considering what the Shach says in 112:7</ref> especially for a large factory that is owned by a Jew.<ref>See Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45. Rav Moshe explains that the Tur must mean that because the prohibiton of Bishul is not applicable for any bread that would otherwise be ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'', bread owned by a Jew falls into neither or these categories and is therefore [[Bishul Akum]]. Rav Moshe argues that this is only the case because making dough that is owned by a Jew into ''bishul Yisroel'' is very easy, but when doing so would involve significant difficulty, such as in a factory, this stringency does not apply. This may depend on the dispute between the Ramban (Avodah Zarah 35b) and Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayasher 392) as to which decree was made first. Rav Moshe does not clarify whether such bread should be considered ''pas paltar'' or ''pas yisrael''.</ref><ref>It would appear that even according to the Rambam and Rashba who don't believe that merely adding to the fire suffices to avoid [[Bishul Akum]], it would suffice for bread owned by a Jew, because doing so is a ''melachah chashuvah b'pas'', as indicated by the Rashba to Avodah Zarah 38b, Ran, Ritva ad loc., and Bedek Habayis 3:7, even if the Rashba argues in Mishmeres Habayis that raising the fire is sufficient for bread only because bread is more necessary for day-to-day sustenance. Thus, according to most of the Rishonim, raising the fire would suffice for bread owned by a Jew according to the Tur, but according to the Mishmeres Habayis, the bread would still be prohibited unless the Jew assisted in the actual baking.</ref>

==When Pas Yisroel is Unavailable==
# When there is no pas yisroel available, the Shulchan Aruch quotes two opinions<ref>Yoreh De'ah 112:2 and 112:8</ref> as to whether or not one would be allowed to eat only ''pas paltar'' or even ''pas ba'al habayis''.<ref>The second opinion is that of the Ra"ah. Because the Shulchan Aruch does not seem to hold like his opinion through the rest of the siman, and because of a general rule to follow the first opinion quoted by the Shulchan Aruch instead of an opinion which he prefaces by "there are those who say", those who follow the Shulchan Aruch should be stringent in this regard, unless there is a very serious need, such as in a case where a person hasn't had bread for three days. Kaf Hachayim 112:49-50 and Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 112:3-4.</ref> The Rama<ref>Y.D. 112:8, Shach 112:8 and Matteh Yonasan there. This is also clearly the opinion of the Rosh as quoted by the Tur, see above</ref> writes that the custom is to follow the lenient opinion. Thus, the following rules in determining "lack of availability" permits either ''pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch, but ''pas baal habayis'' according to the Rama.<ref>This is clear from Shu"t Rama 132:8, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 58</ref>
# ''Pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch and ''pas ba'al habayis'' according to the Rama is permitted only as long as there is no Jewish baker, and then becomes prohibited until the Jewish baker runs out of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:4</ref> If someone already bought the ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'' while it was permitted, and then a Jewish baker came to town, there's a machlokes as to whether the bread already bought becomes prohibited<ref>Between the Rashba Toras Ha-Bayis and Ra"ah in Bedek Habayis, page 185</ref>, but most poskim are lenient.<ref>Shach 112:13 and Chelkas Binhyamin 112:40, as long as the bread was bought while it was permitted</ref>
# Even if there is ''pas yisroel'' bread, but it is a different kind of bread or a lower quality than the ''pas paltar'', then one is allowed to consider it as if there is no ''pas yisroel'' available if he wants the other type of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:5 quoting the Rashba in Toras Habayis and Shach 112:9. Based on the language of the Bach and Shulchan Aruch, Chelkas Binyamin 112:51 and 112:18 says that if the ''pas yisroel'' is merely more expensive but is the same quality, it would not be permissible to buy the ''pas paltar''. Footnote 2 on the Meiri to Avodah Zarah 35b "mah she-hutar" leaves the question open.</ref> Some say that this is not true during ''Aseres Yemei Teshuvah''<ref>Sefer Bishul Yisroel, footnote on pg. 18</ref>
# The availability of ''pas yisroel'' depends on whether or not it is obtainable in one's own city, and so even if there's a place to get ''pas yisroel'' just outside the city, one is not required to do so.<ref>Meiri 35b "ve'hinei". Chelkas Binyamin 112:18 indicates that if one lives in a big city and would have to travel four [[mil]] or more to obtain ''pas yisrael'' he might not have to travel that far.</ref>
# Someone who is on the road without ''pas yisroel'' would have to travel a distance<ref>See Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 59 who discusses whether this is measured by distance or by travel time, and see Aruch Hashulchan 112:18, who writes ד' מילין הוא אם צריך לילך לשם אבל כשאין לו דרך לשם או שצריך לחזור לאחוריו אין כאן שיעור ד' מילין [פר"ח סקכ"ח] ומיהו שיעור מיל צריך להמתין [חכ"א] ואין חילוק בכל זה בין דרך טובה לדרך רעועה ובין נוסע בעגלה או רוכב על הסוס או הולך רגלי דחכמים השוו מדותיהם</ref> as far as four [[mil]] before he would be allowed to eat ''pas paltar'' (according to the Shulchan Aruch),<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:16 and Mishnah Berurah Orach Chayim 603:1</ref> and one does not have to travel in the opposite direction in order to get to ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Pri Chadash 112:28, Darchei Teshuva 112:95</ref>

==What Breads and Foods are Included==
# Only bread made from "[[Wheat and Grain Products|The Five Grains]]" is included in the laws of ''pas akum''; anything else falls under the category of [[Bishul Akum]].<ref>As implied by Brachos 37a. Rosh (Teshuvos) 19:21, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 112:1</ref>
# When a food is a combination of bread and something else, such as egg, then we follow the ''ikkar''<ref>Tosafos and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b, Avnei Nezer 94:1-2, R' Belsky in OU Document A-65</ref>, but if the egg is still visible as a separate entity, such as in the case of French Toast, then the food as a whole will be subject to the rule of [[Bishul Akum]] as well.<ref>Rama 112:6 and Aruch Hashulchan 112:21, though see Pri Megadim there who implies that only if the egg is mixed in afterwords would there be a problem of [[Bishul Akum]], and not if they were cooked together. Regarding French toast in particular, Rav Belsky paskened in OU Document A-63 that the eggs are certainly separate enough to be considered "be'en", even though the OU is lenient regarding white bread, which has an egg-glaze, because the glaze is so thin that it is barely recognizable at all.</ref>
# Regarding a food that contains only a little bit of bread mixed into it, such as Babylonian "kutach" or borscht, the bit of bread is considered nullified.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7 and Tur 112 quoted in the Shulchan Aruch 112:14. The Rama there writes that this is is true even if there's solid being mixed into a liquid, and the Shach 112:23 adds that even if the bread would normally be considered a "davar chashuv". All this is as long as someone didn't mix the bread into a food specifically in order to permit it (Rama).</ref>
# Included in foods that are bread for the purpose of ''bishul akum'' is anything that would have the bracha of [[Hamotzi]] if eaten as a meal.<ref>Rabbi Yechiel of Paris as quoted in Tosfos Beitza 16b and Darkei Moshe Y.D. 112 (against the Shaarei Dura 69, who believes that as long as the food is cooked and not baked it shouldn't be considered bread), Pri Chadash and Beis Meir to Rama 112:6, Avnei Nezer 93:3. See [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> However, some say that this is true only if the dough used was thick like bread dough, instead of like cake batter, and the food looks like bread.<ref>Shach 112:18, though see Chelkas Binyamin 112:64 that most poskim seem to disagree. There appears to be a contradiction in the Toras Chatas regarding this issue between 69:4 and 75:12. See next halacha, however, that this is only true of baked products.</ref> Based on this, cakes, wafers, and crackers are subject to ''Pas Akum''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:8, see [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> The same would be true of foods such as pancakes and waffles.<ref>Assuming that pancakes are the ''terisin'' discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, then there is a machlokes between the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham 168:41 as to whether or not one would make [[Hamotzi]] on such foods if one were to eat them as a meal. There also appears to be contradiction in the Mishnah Berurah between 168:38 where he paskens like the Shulchan Aruch, and 168:90 where he says that we should be stringent and try to avoid eating too much of these foods at a time. Thus, based on Rama Y.D. 113:11 who says that we can follow the lenient opinion when it comes to disagreements, Rabbi Genack suggested in OU Document A-63 that we can consider these foods to be bread instead of [[Bishul Akum]]. However, very thin waffles as described by Shaar HaTziyun 168:36 are not bread at all, and would be subject to the rules of [[Bishul Akum]].</ref>
# A dough-food that was deep fried is, according to some poskim, included in ''pas akum'' instead of [[Bishul Akum]]<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:31 based upon Tashbetz 3:11 and Rivash 28, although they all say that 'sufganin', which are also kept thin and deep fried, are [[Shehakol]] and not ''pas''.</ref> but others reject this opinion.<ref>OU Document A-105 shows that the Aruch Hashulchan's sources rely on the rejected opinion of Rabbeinu Tam quoted in Tosafos Pesachim 37b who holds that fried dough is subject to [[Challah]], which is not how we pasken in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13 and Y.D. 329. Therefore, OU policy (OU Document A-105 and M-7) is to consider doughnuts as if they are not bread, and consider small doughnuts made of yeast to be "fit for a king's table" and require ''bishul yisrael'', though most doughnuts do not.</ref> The proper ''bracha'' on doughnuts is itself a matter of dispute.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13, Aruch Hashulchan 168:42, Mishnah Berurah 168:67-73 and 168:85, Sefer V'Zos HaBeracha pg. 496 footnote 3</ref>
# Bagels are included in ''pas akum'' and not in [[Bishul Akum]] because even though they are boiled before being baked, they are not made edible by the boiling.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:31, Iggerot Moshe YD 2:33 and see the letter from Rav Moshe Feinstein that was published in Sefer Yigal Yaakov.</ref>
# Breakfast cereals which are [[Mezonot|''Mezonos'']] would be subject to ''Pas Akum'' only if they have ''tzuras hapas'', because otherwise one would never make [[Hamotzi]] on them<ref>Rama O.C. 168:13, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, Mishnah Berurah 168:3</ref>. Some poskim think that cereals such as Cheerios should be considered to have ''tzuras hapas''<ref>Rav Scheinberg zt"l, as quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 192 </ref> while others disagree.<ref>R. Schachter, R. Belsky, and R. Genack in OU Document A-94 all assume that cereals such as Cheerios and Corn Flakes are permitted to be eaten when made by a non-Jew, because they lack ''tzuras hapas'' and are also not fit for a king's table, and this is the OU's policy.</ref>
# Pretzels should be considered ''pas'', because they are generally made from bread-dough and have the same general form of bread. However, thin, hard pretzels might lack ''tzuras hapas'' and therefore not be prohibited under ''pas akum''.<ref>This is the opinion of R. Schachter as quoted in OU Document M-7, footnote 97, where he also notes that there's no prohibition of [[Bishul Akum]] either because hard pretzels are not served to kings.</ref>
# Although there is a leniency applicable to [[Bishul Akum]], that if the food is "not fit for a king's table" it would be permissible, most poskim<ref>with the exception of Avnei Nezer YD 1:92</ref> believe that this is not applicable to bread, and so even low-quality breads are included in the prohibition. <ref>Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav 112:3 and see the sources quoted by Chelkas Binyamin 112:12 in the biurim</ref>

==Involvement of a Jew in the Baking==
# The Gemara states that as long as the Jew lit the fire or performed the actual baking, the bread is considered ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Avodah Zarah 38b. The opinion of the Ran and Rashba there, that all of these actions are required only if the Jew doesn't actually own the bread, is rejected by the Shulchan Aruch and Rama; see Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 and Shach 112:1. In fact, as noted above, the Shach in 112:7 is more stringent for bread owned by a Jew than for bread owned by a non-Jew, saying that the former has the status of [[Bishul Akum]] if baked by a non-Jew.</ref>
# The Geonim allowed bread baked by a non-Jew even if the Jew merely added to the fire by throwing in extra kindling<ref>Sefer Minhagim She-Bein Bavel V'Eretz Yisrael pg. 60, quoted by Tosfos Avodah Zarah 38b and Rosh Avodah Zarah 2:33. This can be explained based on the Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 who writes that really all one needs to do is some perfunctory act to show that ''pas akum'' is generally prohibited.</ref> and the custom is in accordance with this opinion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:9, Chochmas Adom 65:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:2, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:26. The Rama Y.D. 113:7, Taz 113:8, and Shach 113:10 say that the Jew doesn't need to have intent to raise the fire in order to have a Jew be involved in the baking, but the Kaf HaChayim Y.D. 112:52 disagrees.</ref>
# Poskim disagree about modern cooking appliances, such as glow plugs<ref>Rabbi Moshe Heinemann, and thus the Star-K, considers this device to add significant heat to the ovens, and therefore if a Jew were to turn on a glow plug that runs through the ovens, the food would be permitted (Star-K Kashrus Kurrents 36:2, Spring 2014). However, many poskim do not agree with this assessment, and the OU does not make use of glow plugs.</ref> and pilot lights or light bulbs.<ref>Refer to OU Document A-54</ref>
# Bread baked by a non-Jew can become Pas Yisrael if a Jew improves it by cooking.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 112:12</ref> Based upon this, many poskim allow one who does not eat Pas Akum to toast bread or bagels which were baked by a non-Jew, because toasting improves its taste.<ref>Rav Moshe Shternbach Teshuvos V’hanhagos I: 444, Rav Belsky as quoted in the OU Halacha Yomis, available at https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/ under "If I bought bread that is not Pas Yisroel, is there a way to make it Pas Yisroel?" However, it is noted there that warming up cold bread is not a sufficient form of an improvement as to permit bread that was Pas Akum.</ref>

==Links==
* [http://www.yutorah.org/search/?s=cohen+crc&category=0,234643 Shiur Series by Rabbi Dovid Cohen of the CRC]
* Article on [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-2%20Pat%20Akum%201.htm Pat Akum] by Rabbi Chaim Jachter
* [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/volume_5_Issue_15.pdf Halachically Speaking Volume 5 Issue 15] and [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/Volume_5_Issue_16.pdf Volume 5 Issue 16]: "Pas Akum, Pas Paltur, & Pas Yisroel" Parts I & II

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

Pat Akum

2016-10-07T03:16:23Z

Sbmb: /* Involvement of a Jew in the Baking */

==Background: The Gezairah==
# The Chachomim enacted a gezairah forbidding bread that was baked by a non-Jew<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. It's clear from the Gemara Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b that this prohibition is mi'derabanan. This prohibition is independent from that of bishul akum; see Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b "ve'hapas" regarding which gezairah was made first. Ramban ibid. also notes that there are more leniencies for pas akum than for bishul akum, because everyone needs bread to live. The Aruch Hashulchan 113:2 suggests that since bishul akum was also prohibited because of the possibility of the non-Jew mixing in non-kosher besides for the fear of intermarriage, we are more strict regarding bishul akum than pas akum.</ref> so as to avoid intermingling with them too much, which could lead to intermarriage<ref>cf. Rashi Avodah Zarah 35b "shelakos" and Rambam Peirush Hamishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. However, from the Gemara on daf 17b and 36b it seems like the real concern was actually idolatry, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim on page 4. Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b, Rabbeinu Yonah ad. loc., and Shach Y.D. 112:3 note that there is no reason to be concerned for other issues of kashrus. It should be pointed out though that today one still cannot buy bread without a hechsher, see Iggros Moshe Y.D. 2:33</ref>. However, the bread of a non-Jew is prohibited even if there's no possibility of intermarriage,<ref>Such as if the non-Jewish baker was a priest who wouldn't have any daughters. Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba.</ref> and doesn't depend on whether or not the non-Jew is an idolater<ref>Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4, Pri Tohar 112:3</ref>
# It is permitted to derive benefit from bread baked by a non-Jew without eating it.<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:3-6</ref>
# While the Bavli's conclusion is somewhat ambiguous, most Rishonim understand that the prohibition of eating pas akum was revoked to some degree.<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b quotes from R. Meir Halevi who believed that the prohibition was not revoked at all, but the Ritva himself, his teachers, Tosfos, Rash miShantz, Rabbeinu Yonah, Ramban, Ra"ah, Rashba, Ran, Nimukei Yosef, and the Rosh in their comments to the aforementioned Gemara all beleive that the decree was limited by later Chachamim. See below regarding the opinion of the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch.</ref> According to some<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b. Such a position is also implied by Tosafos 35b "michlal", as well as by the Rosh's opinion recorded in Tur 112 and the Mordechai according to Shach 112:8</ref>, the prohibition was revoked by the sages entirely. Another opinion, which is followed by Ashkenazim, is that the rabbis allowed bread baked only by a non-Jewish baker ("''pas paltar''", as opposed to "''pas baal habayis''"),<ref>Yerushalami Avodah Zarah 2:8, Rama YD 112:2 based on Tosafot Avoda Zara 35b "michlal", Mordechai, and Issur VeHeter Klal 44, Chochmat Adam 65:2. This also appears to be the position of Rashba and Ran. See below regarding the definition of a 'baker' for this halakha.</ref> whether or not there is bread baked by a Jew available.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Rama in Sefer Toras Chatas 75, Gra Y.D. 112:7-8, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1</ref> The third, and most stringent opinion, is that bread of a baker was permitted only in cases where bread baked by a Jew is not available.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Maachalos Asuros 17:12, Ramban, Ran and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b</ref> This appears to be the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch.<ref>Cf. Y.D. 112:2 and 112:8. Thus, it would appear that this should be the practice for Sefardim, though see Ben Ish Chai II Chukas 2 who follows the lenient opinion. According to the second opinion, which is that of the Rama, in a case where no Jewish-baked bread is available, even "pas baal habayis" is permitted (Rama Y.D. 112:8, see also Rashba Avodah Zarah 35b in his explanation of the Rif)</ref>
# Although Ashkenazi practice is to usually follow the Rama, several poskim indicate that it is still proper to be stringent in this manner and not eat pas paltar where pas yisroel is available.<ref>Shach 112:8, Aruch Hashulchan 112:9, 112:17, Chochmas Adam 65:2 and Chelkes Binyomin 112:23.</ref> Others are not concerned with this for most of the year.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1. The Orthodox Union, as do most Kashrus organizations, certify ''pas paltar'' foods as kosher.</ref> Someone whose practice was to be careful not to eat ''pas paltar'' and wants to change this practice must be ''mattir neder''.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 112:94</ref>
# The Tur writes that even those who are not careful about pas paltar during the year are careful to only eat pas yisrael during Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.<ref>Raavyah Rosh Hashana siman 529, Rosh to Rosh Hashanah 4:14, Tur Orach Chaim 603, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 603:1 and Mishnah Berurah there, Shach Y.D. 112:9. However, the Tashbetz quoted by the Beis Yosef there O.C. 603 doesn't approve of changing one's practice during the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.</ref> Several reasons are given for this custom.<ref>The Chayei Adam 143:1 and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 130:2 write that because God is more merciful than 'necessary' during this time period, we should respond by keeping stringencies which we wouldn't normally consider to be necessary. Levush O.C. 603:1 writes that extra stringencies will remind us to be in a state of teshuvah. Rabbi Netanel Wiederblank [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/838739/Rabbi_Netanel_Wiederblank/Pas_Akum_Part_1 suggested], based on Ramban, that being careful about pas yisrael was a custom of talmidei chachamim, and so we want to act like talmidei chachamim at this time. Rabbi Sobolofsky [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-3%20Pat%20Akum%202.htm offered] another possibility that because the decree was rescinded only because it would be impossible to keep all year long, it is not unreasonable to adhere to it for only ten days of the year.</ref> Some say that this is true of Shabbos and Yom Tov as well, as part of kavod shabbos.<ref>Magen Avraham O.C. 242:4. From the Rama it appears as though this only matters for the bread that one is actually using for the bracha to begin the meals, but the Shaar Tziyun 242:18 writes that even throughout the meal, because of the honor of Shabbos or Yom Tov, one should be careful about ''pas yisroel''</ref>

==Who Baked the Bread==
# A "non-Jewish baker" (''paltar'') in this context is anyone who baked bread with the intent to sell it, and not someone who happens to sell bread for a living.<ref>This is the opinion of the Rama 112:2 based on the Beis Yosef and Rashba (see Gra 112:9), although the Tur's language suggests that he might believe that it depends upon whether or not the non-Jew is baking the bread en masse or not. Shach 112:11 writes that even the bread that a professional commercial baker baked for himself would be included in the prohibition.</ref> Thus, if a baker invited a Jew to partake of his bread, it wouldn't be considered "pas paltar" and would be prohibited.<ref>Rama 112:3 quoting Ra"ah in Bedek HaBayis. However, the Shach 112:12 points out that the Rashba disagrees, and if the Shulchan Aruch is consistent in believing that the prohibition depends on the status of the bread when it was baked, and not when it is sold, then this case should be permitted. Nekudos HaKesef, however, points out that perhaps even if normally the prohibition depends on the time when the bread was baked, this case is too similar to the case of a non-Jew baking the bread for himself.</ref> Bread that was baked with the intention to give to guests is like bread that was meant to be sold, and has the status of "pas paltar".<ref>Kaf Hachayim 112:46</ref>
# As mentioned above, all non-Jews are included in this prohibition.<ref>Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba, Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Pri Tohar on Shulchan Aruch 112:3, Darchei Teshuva 112:4. See Rav Chaim Kanievsky's commentary to Maseches Geirim 1:5, that according to Rabbi Akiva, even a convert cannot eat his own bread that he baked before converting.</ref>
# It is a machlokes haposkim as to whether or not bread baked by an irreligious Jew would be prohibited.<ref>Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 112:1 quoting Tiferes LeMoshe is lenient because one would be allowed to marry his daughter as is Iggeros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, but the Pri Chodosh 112:2, Pri Megadim, and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 72:2 all write that a Jew who does not keep Shabbos is considered like a non-Jew in this regard. See Maharam Shik O.C. 281, Darchei Teshuva 112:5, Avnei Nezer Y.D. 92 (who suggests that it might be prohibited to marry someone not-religious), Shut Yehudah Yaaleh 12, Minchas Yitzchak 3:72, Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 112:11, Mishneh Halachos 11:111, Shut M’Bais Levi 8:page 23:footnote 2, Titz Eliezer 9:41, Yabia Omer Y.D. 5:10, and Chelkes Binyomin 112:4. Also refer to Bishul Yisroel pages 412-413. Rav Shternbach in Halachos Ve'Hanhagos 1:470 writes that even though one must be stringent, in a sha'as hadechak one can eat the bread of someone who is merely a ''tinok shenishbah'', which he applies to anyone who was raised in a non-religious environment. Rav Schachter in OU document A-133 and Rav Asher Weiss in Minchas Asher Devarim no. 5 write that the custom has always been to be lenient.</ref>
# Some poskim have thought that because one would never recognize who baked his bread that was baked industrially in a factory, all commercially sold factory-made bread would not be categorized as "pas akum".<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1 pg. 95 and Rivevos Ephraim 5:596 both quote such a position in the name of R. Moshe Feinstein z"l</ref> However, in practice few poskim would rely on this on its own.<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1, Rivevos Ephraim 5:596, Minchas Yitzchak 3:26:6 and 3:26:10, Yabea Omer Y.D. 5:9:5, and Shevet Halevi 6:108:6 quotes that the Chazon Ish refused to accept such a possibility at all. See also Chelkes Binyamin 113:4</ref>
# The Shulchan Aruch paskens that the prohibition depends on who baked the bread, and not on who sold the bread.<ref>This is a dispute between the Rashba and Ra'ah in Toras Habayis and Bedek Habayis 3:7, quoted by the Beis Yosef Y.D. 112, and the Shulchan Aruch 112:7 paskens like the Rashba, cf. Shach 112:12.</ref> Therefore, a ''baal habayis'' who sells bread baked by a baker has the status of ''pas paltar'', and vice versa.
# If a Jew owned the dough, then most poskim assume that in such a case the bread would fall under the category of [[Bishul Akum]] instead of ''pas paltar''.<ref>Tur 112, Perishah Yoreh De'ah 112:10, Shach Y.D. 112:7 quoting Issur Ve'Heter and Toras Chatas, Taz 112:7.</ref> However, some are lenient<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:10 and 112:29. However, the Aruch Hashulchan derives his opinion from Shach 112:1, which is very difficult considering what the Shach says in 112:7</ref> especially for a large factory that is owned by a Jew.<ref>See Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45. Rav Moshe explains that the Tur must mean that because the prohibiton of Bishul is not applicable for any bread that would otherwise be ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'', bread owned by a Jew falls into neither or these categories and is therefore [[Bishul Akum]]. Rav Moshe argues that this is only the case because making dough that is owned by a Jew into ''bishul Yisroel'' is very easy, but when doing so would involve significant difficulty, such as in a factory, this stringency does not apply. This may depend on the dispute between the Ramban (Avodah Zarah 35b) and Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayasher 392) as to which decree was made first. Rav Moshe does not clarify whether such bread should be considered ''pas paltar'' or ''pas yisrael''.</ref><ref>It would appear that even according to the Rambam and Rashba who don't believe that merely adding to the fire suffices to avoid [[Bishul Akum]], it would suffice for bread owned by a Jew, because doing so is a ''melachah chashuvah b'pas'', as indicated by the Rashba to Avodah Zarah 38b, Ran, Ritva ad loc., and Bedek Habayis 3:7, even if the Rashba argues in Mishmeres Habayis that raising the fire is sufficient for bread only because bread is more necessary for day-to-day sustenance. Thus, according to most of the Rishonim, raising the fire would suffice for bread owned by a Jew according to the Tur, but according to the Mishmeres Habayis, the bread would still be prohibited unless the Jew assisted in the actual baking.</ref>

==When Pas Yisroel is Unavailable==
# When there is no pas yisroel available, the Shulchan Aruch quotes two opinions<ref>Yoreh De'ah 112:2 and 112:8</ref> as to whether or not one would be allowed to eat only ''pas paltar'' or even ''pas ba'al habayis''.<ref>The second opinion is that of the Ra"ah. Because the Shulchan Aruch does not seem to hold like his opinion through the rest of the siman, and because of a general rule to follow the first opinion quoted by the Shulchan Aruch instead of an opinion which he prefaces by "there are those who say", those who follow the Shulchan Aruch should be stringent in this regard, unless there is a very serious need, such as in a case where a person hasn't had bread for three days. Kaf Hachayim 112:49-50 and Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 112:3-4.</ref> The Rama<ref>Y.D. 112:8, Shach 112:8 and Matteh Yonasan there. This is also clearly the opinion of the Rosh as quoted by the Tur, see above</ref> writes that the custom is to follow the lenient opinion. Thus, the following rules in determining "lack of availability" permits either ''pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch, but ''pas baal habayis'' according to the Rama.<ref>This is clear from Shu"t Rama 132:8, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 58</ref>
# ''Pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch and ''pas ba'al habayis'' according to the Rama is permitted only as long as there is no Jewish baker, and then becomes prohibited until the Jewish baker runs out of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:4</ref> If someone already bought the ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'' while it was permitted, and then a Jewish baker came to town, there's a machlokes as to whether the bread already bought becomes prohibited<ref>Between the Rashba Toras Ha-Bayis and Ra"ah in Bedek Habayis, page 185</ref>, but most poskim are lenient.<ref>Shach 112:13 and Chelkas Binhyamin 112:40, as long as the bread was bought while it was permitted</ref>
# Even if there is ''pas yisroel'' bread, but it is a different kind of bread or a lower quality than the ''pas paltar'', then one is allowed to consider it as if there is no ''pas yisroel'' available if he wants the other type of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:5 quoting the Rashba in Toras Habayis and Shach 112:9. Based on the language of the Bach and Shulchan Aruch, Chelkas Binyamin 112:51 and 112:18 says that if the ''pas yisroel'' is merely more expensive but is the same quality, it would not be permissible to buy the ''pas paltar''. Footnote 2 on the Meiri to Avodah Zarah 35b "mah she-hutar" leaves the question open.</ref> Some say that this is not true during ''Aseres Yemei Teshuvah''<ref>Sefer Bishul Yisroel, footnote on pg. 18</ref>
# The availability of ''pas yisroel'' depends on whether or not it is obtainable in one's own city, and so even if there's a place to get ''pas yisroel'' just outside the city, one is not required to do so.<ref>Meiri 35b "ve'hinei". Chelkas Binyamin 112:18 indicates that if one lives in a big city and would have to travel four [[mil]] or more to obtain ''pas yisrael'' he might not have to travel that far.</ref>
# Someone who is on the road without ''pas yisroel'' would have to travel a distance<ref>See Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 59 who discusses whether this is measured by distance or by travel time, and see Aruch Hashulchan 112:18, who writes ד' מילין הוא אם צריך לילך לשם אבל כשאין לו דרך לשם או שצריך לחזור לאחוריו אין כאן שיעור ד' מילין [פר"ח סקכ"ח] ומיהו שיעור מיל צריך להמתין [חכ"א] ואין חילוק בכל זה בין דרך טובה לדרך רעועה ובין נוסע בעגלה או רוכב על הסוס או הולך רגלי דחכמים השוו מדותיהם</ref> as far as four [[mil]] before he would be allowed to eat ''pas paltar'' (according to the Shulchan Aruch),<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:16 and Mishnah Berurah Orach Chayim 603:1</ref> and one does not have to travel in the opposite direction in order to get to ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Pri Chadash 112:28, Darchei Teshuva 112:95</ref>

==What Breads and Foods are Included==
# Only bread made from "[[Wheat and Grain Products|The Five Grains]]" is included in the laws of ''pas akum''; anything else falls under the category of [[Bishul Akum]].<ref>As implied by Brachos 37a. Rosh (Teshuvos) 19:21, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 112:1</ref>
# When a food is a combination of bread and something else, such as egg, then we follow the ''ikkar''<ref>Tosafos and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b, Avnei Nezer 94:1-2, R' Belsky in OU Document A-65</ref>, but if the egg is still visible as a separate entity, such as in the case of French Toast, then the food as a whole will be subject to the rule of [[Bishul Akum]] as well.<ref>Rama 112:6 and Aruch Hashulchan 112:21, though see Pri Megadim there who implies that only if the egg is mixed in afterwords would there be a problem of [[Bishul Akum]], and not if they were cooked together. Regarding French toast in particular, Rav Belsky paskened in OU Document A-63 that the eggs are certainly separate enough to be considered "be'en", even though the OU is lenient regarding white bread, which has an egg-glaze, because the glaze is so thin that it is barely recognizable at all.</ref>
# Regarding a food that contains only a little bit of bread mixed into it, such as Babylonian "kutach" or borscht, the bit of bread is considered nullified.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7 and Tur 112 quoted in the Shulchan Aruch 112:14. The Rama there writes that this is is true even if there's solid being mixed into a liquid, and the Shach 112:23 adds that even if the bread would normally be considered a "davar chashuv". All this is as long as someone didn't mix the bread into a food specifically in order to permit it (Rama).</ref>
# Included in foods that are bread for the purpose of ''bishul akum'' is anything that would have the bracha of [[Hamotzi]] if eaten as a meal.<ref>Rabbi Yechiel of Paris as quoted in Tosfos Beitza 16b and Darkei Moshe Y.D. 112 (against the Shaarei Dura 69, who believes that as long as the food is cooked and not baked it shouldn't be considered bread), Pri Chadash and Beis Meir to Rama 112:6, Avnei Nezer 93:3. See [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> However, some say that this is true only if the dough used was thick like bread dough, instead of like cake batter, and the food looks like bread.<ref>Shach 112:18, though see Chelkas Binyamin 112:64 that most poskim seem to disagree. There appears to be a contradiction in the Toras Chatas regarding this issue between 69:4 and 75:12. See next halacha, however, that this is only true of baked products.</ref> Based on this, cakes, wafers, and crackers are subject to ''Pas Akum''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:8, see [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> The same would be true of foods such as pancakes and waffles.<ref>Assuming that pancakes are the ''terisin'' discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, then there is a machlokes between the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham 168:41 as to whether or not one would make [[Hamotzi]] on such foods if one were to eat them as a meal. There also appears to be contradiction in the Mishnah Berurah between 168:38 where he paskens like the Shulchan Aruch, and 168:90 where he says that we should be stringent and try to avoid eating too much of these foods at a time. Thus, based on Rama Y.D. 113:11 who says that we can follow the lenient opinion when it comes to disagreements, Rabbi Genack suggested in OU Document A-63 that we can consider these foods to be bread instead of [[Bishul Akum]]. However, very thin waffles as described by Shaar HaTziyun 168:36 are not bread at all, and would be subject to the rules of [[Bishul Akum]].</ref>
# A dough-food that was deep fried is, according to some poskim, included in ''pas akum'' instead of [[Bishul Akum]]<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:31 based upon Tashbetz 3:11 and Rivash 28, although they all say that 'sufganin', which are also kept thin and deep fried, are [[Shehakol]] and not ''pas''.</ref> but others reject this opinion.<ref>OU Document A-105 shows that the Aruch Hashulchan's sources rely on the rejected opinion of Rabbeinu Tam quoted in Tosafos Pesachim 37b who holds that fried dough is subject to [[Challah]], which is not how we pasken in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13 and Y.D. 329. Therefore, OU policy (OU Document A-105 and M-7) is to consider doughnuts as if they are not bread, and consider small doughnuts made of yeast to be "fit for a king's table" and require ''bishul yisrael'', though most doughnuts do not.</ref> The proper ''bracha'' on doughnuts is itself a matter of dispute.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13, Aruch Hashulchan 168:42, Mishnah Berurah 168:67-73 and 168:85, Sefer V'Zos HaBeracha pg. 496 footnote 3</ref>
# Bagels are included in ''pas akum'' and not in [[Bishul Akum]] because even though they are boiled before being baked, they are not made edible by the boiling.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:31, Iggerot Moshe YD 2:33 and see the letter from Rav Moshe Feinstein that was published in Sefer Yigal Yaakov.</ref>
# Breakfast cereals which are [[Mezonot|''Mezonos'']] would be subject to ''Pas Akum'' only if they have ''tzuras hapas'', because otherwise one would never make [[Hamotzi]] on them<ref>Rama O.C. 168:13, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, Mishnah Berurah 168:3</ref>. Some poskim think that cereals such as Cheerios should be considered to have ''tzuras hapas''<ref>Rav Scheinberg zt"l, as quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 192 </ref> while others disagree.<ref>R. Schachter, R. Belsky, and R. Genack in OU Document A-94 all assume that cereals such as Cheerios and Corn Flakes are permitted to be eaten when made by a non-Jew, because they lack ''tzuras hapas'' and are also not fit for a king's table, and this is the OU's policy.</ref>
# Pretzels should be considered ''pas'', because they are generally made from bread-dough and have the same general form of bread. However, thin, hard pretzels might lack ''tzuras hapas'' and therefore not be prohibited under ''pas akum''.<ref>This is the opinion of R. Schachter as quoted in OU Document M-7, footnote 97, where he also notes that there's no prohibition of [[Bishul Akum]] either because hard pretzels are not served to kings.</ref>
# Although there is a leniency applicable to [[Bishul Akum]], that if the food is "not fit for a king's table" it would be permissible, most poskim<ref>with the exception of Avnei Nezer YD 1:92</ref> believe that this is not applicable to bread, and so even low-quality breads are included in the prohibition. <ref>Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav 112:3 and see the sources quoted by Chelkas Binyamin 112:12 in the biurim</ref>

==Involvement of a Jew in the Baking==
# The Gemara states that as long as the Jew lit the fire or performed the actual baking, the bread is considered ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Avodah Zarah 38b. The opinion of the Ran and Rashba there, that all of these actions are required only if the Jew doesn't actually own the bread, is rejected by the Shulchan Aruch and Rama; see Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 and Shach 112:1. In fact, as noted above, the Shach in 112:7 is more stringent for bread owned by a Jew than for bread owned by a non-Jew, saying that the former has the status of [[Bishul Akum]] if baked by a non-Jew.</ref>
# The Geonim allowed bread baked by a non-Jew even if the Jew merely added to the fire by throwing in extra kindling<ref>Sefer Minhagim She-Bein Bavel V'Eretz Yisrael pg. 60, quoted by Tosfos Avodah Zarah 38b and Rosh Avodah Zarah 2:33. This can be explained based on the Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 who writes that really all one needs to do is some perfunctory act to show that ''pas akum'' is generally prohibited.</ref> and the custom is in accordance with this opinion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:9, Chochmas Adom 65:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:2, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:26. The Rama Y.D. 113:7, Taz 113:8, and Shach 113:10 say that the Jew doesn't need to have intent to raise the fire in order to have a Jew be involved in the baking, but the Kaf HaChayim Y.D. 112:52 disagrees.</ref>
# Poskim disagree about modern cooking appliances, such as glow plugs<ref>Rabbi Moshe Heinemann, and thus the Star-K, considers this device to add significant heat to the ovens, and therefore if a Jew were to turn on a glow plug that runs through the ovens, the food would be permitted (Star-K Kashrus Kurrents 36:2, Spring 2014). However, many poskim do not agree with this assessment, and the OU does not make use of glow plugs.</ref> and pilot lights or light bulbs.<ref>Refer to OU Document A-54</ref>
# Bread baked by a non-Jew can become Pas Yisrael if a Jew improves it by cooking.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 112:12</ref> Based upon this, many poskim one allow who does not eat Pas Akum to toast bread or bagels which were baked by a non-Jew, because toasting improves its taste.<ref>Rav Moshe Shternbach Teshuvos V’hanhagos I: 444, Rav Belsky as quoted in the OU Halacha Yomis, available at https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/ under "If I bought bread that is not Pas Yisroel, is there a way to make it Pas Yisroel?" However, it is noted there that warming up cold bread is not a sufficient form of an improvement as to permit bread that was Pas Akum.</ref>

==Links==
* [http://www.yutorah.org/search/?s=cohen+crc&category=0,234643 Shiur Series by Rabbi Dovid Cohen of the CRC]
* Article on [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-2%20Pat%20Akum%201.htm Pat Akum] by Rabbi Chaim Jachter
* [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/volume_5_Issue_15.pdf Halachically Speaking Volume 5 Issue 15] and [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/Volume_5_Issue_16.pdf Volume 5 Issue 16]: "Pas Akum, Pas Paltur, & Pas Yisroel" Parts I & II

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

Shiva

2016-08-31T19:33:46Z

Sbmb: /* When Aveilus Begins and Ends */

{{Lacking}}
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>Rama 391:1, against the opinion of the Mordechai in Maseches Semachos</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, some believe 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 committed suicide,<ref>Maseches Semachos 2:1, Shluchan Aruch Y.D. 345:1, against the opinion of Ramban in Toras HaAdam pg. 83</ref> although 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>

==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>
# 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>
# 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 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>

==Prohibitions for the Avel==
# The avel is prohibited from working or leaving the house
# washing/bathing/anoiting
# wearing shoes
# tashmish hamitah
# learning Torah
# greeting others
# Today, the custom is not to turn over the beds or wrap one's head.
# laundering clothing and wearing freshly laundered clothing
# haircutting and shaving
# other practices
==Tefillin for a Mourner==
# On the first day of Shiva, if the burial is was on the same day as the passing, an Avel may not wear Tefillin, as the first day is most bitter.<ref>
'''The Basics''' 
The Gemara (Berachot 11a and 16b, Succah 25a, Moed Kattan 15a, and Ketubot 6b) learns from the fact that Hashem told Yechezkel to put on his Tefillin while mourning for his wife that a regular Avel may not do so. 

Elsewhere (Moed Kattan 21a), the Gemara presents two Machalokets between R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua. In the first, R' Eliezer holds an Avel is prohibited from wearing Tefillin (Hanacha) until the third day, and R' Yehoshua holds until the second day. Additionally, R' Yehoshua holds that, if the Avel put on Tefillin on the days he's permitted to, if Panim Chadashot (people who have not yet been Menachem him) come to visit, he must take them off (Choletz). R' Eliezer, on the hand, holds that he does not need to (Eino Choletz). The Amoraim debate the final Halacha and conclude that the Halacha follows R' Yehoshua regarding Hanacha and R' Eliezer with respect to Chalitzah, once the Avel puts them on on the second day. 
'''Miktzat HaYom KeKulo and the Rishonim''' 
Seemingly, the Gemara is employing the Halachic mechanism of Miktzat HaYom KeKulo in allowing him to put on Tefillin only from some point on the second day. See the exact text of the Gemara and Rashi for a clearer picture. 
In codifying this Halacha, the Rif and Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:9) only write that an Avel may not wear Tefillin on the first day and seem to make no mention of the second day. In fact, the Rambam's use of the words "ביום הראשון בלבד" seem to clearly indicate that he understood the Gemara in its most minimal sense. 
The Rosh (Moed Kattan 3:23) begins unsure if the Rif implies the Miktzat HaYom is implemented from Netz or from after davening. He concludes that the Miktzat HaYom is fulfilled from Netz. 
The Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Shaar HaAvel, Inyan HaAvelut 67) quotes the Raavad who holds that the Miktzat HaYom is only completed from after Shacharit. He also picks up on the lack of a second day in the Rif and explains that it must be the Rif held the Mikzat HaYom was fulfilled with the preceding night, making the entire second day appropriate for putting on Tefillin. He also quotes the Yerushalmi, which makes no indication that there should be a Miktzat HaYom in the first place. See also Rosh ibid 3:3. 
Regarding the need for a Miktzat HaYom in the first place, Tosafot (ibid) says it's a din MiDeRabbanan, and the Ramban (ibid) quotes the Raavad that it's lehashlim the Aveilut. 
The Tur (OC 38:5) quotes just the language of the Rif. The Beit Yosef extrapolates from the Rosh that, even though Laylah is Zeman Tefillin, since it's Assur to wear them at night, one needs a Miktzat HaYom during the day itself to be able to wear them. The Ran (Succah, on the Rif 11b), who quotes the Ramban above, on the other hand, must hold that even though Laylah is not Zeman Tefillin, it still counts for Miktzat HaYom, since the Avel is still prohibited from wearing them. See Rambam Hilchot Tefillin 4:10. 
In Yoreh Deah (388), the Tur paskens the Gemara as explained above and then says how Yesh Omrim the Miktzat HaYom is from after davening, and the Rif and Rosh paskened from Netz (see Bach). Here, the Beit Yosef is very terse and seems to even equate the Rosh with the Rambam (see Ohr Letzion vol. 1 OC Siman 6, as this could be an additional proof to his thesis). 
The Shulchan Aruch in Yoreh Deah paskens like the Rosh that the Miktzat HaYom is from Netz, as does the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12).
</ref>
# If the burial is not on the day of passing, as is very common nowadays, many Poskim hold that the Avel is, in fact, obligated to put on Tefillin, while others firmly believe that he is still forbidden from doing so. According to those who hold one should wear them, one should do so in a closed room without a Beracha.<ref>
The Maharitatz (Chiddushim on Eizehu Neshech, quoted by Be'er Heitev (38:5) and Pitchei Teshuvah (YD 388) famously holds that the reason why the Avel is not allowed to wear Tefillin on the first day is because it's Min HaTorah, which is only when the burial and passing are on the same day. Therefore, when the burial takes place the next day and Avelut is subsequently MiDeRabbanan, the Avel is in fact Chayav in Tefillin. The Taz (OC 38:3), and Dagul Mervava, Birkei Yosef, and Mishnah Brurahh disagree. 
The Acharonim have have a field day taking sides for or against the Maharitatz in this Machaloket, the true scope of which is most suited for a Teshuva in Yabia Omer (vol. 2 YD Siman 27). 
Among recent Acharonim, the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12; Od Yosef Chai, Vayera 11, 12, 45), Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:16), and Ohr Letzion (vol. 1, OC Siman 6) pasken against the Maharitatz. At the same time, due to the great number of Acharonim who do pasken like the Maharitatz (including R' Yitzchak Elchanan and the Chazon Ish, see Yabia Omer ibid for the full list), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo: Tefillah, Perek 18, 5), Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer ibid), and the Piskei Teshuvot (38, Seif Kattan 6) pasken that one should wear them privately without a Beracha. See Magen Avot (Lebhar, Yoreh Deah volume, Siman 388) where he brings the Moroccan Minhag not like the Maharitatz and claims the rest of the world holds that way, as well.
</ref>
# The Minhag is to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin during Avelut.<ref>The Chidah (Birkei Yosef) paskened that one shouldn't wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, as it's a Machaloket HaMekubalim and Shev ve'al Ta'aseh Adif. The Ben Ish Chai (ibid and Od Yosef Chai Vayera 11, 12, 45) claims that the Minhag in Yerushalayim and Baghdad was like the Rashash to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, so he disagrees with the Chidah. This is also the opinion of the Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:21), who says that, among other considerations, based on the Siddur HaChidah and the fact that we wear them beTorat Chiyuv, the Avel should wear them. HaRav David Yosef (Halacha Brurahh 38:5:13) also paskens this way.</ref>

==Aveilus on Shabbos and Yom Tov==
# One is prohibited to display signs of mourning on Shabbos and Yom Tov.

==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>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:2</ref> Some require the avel to 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.</ref>

==At the Beis Ha'Avel (or "Shiva House")==
# The Sages instituted certain additions to [[Bentching]] said at the beis ha'avel, although customs differ as to the details.<ref>Brachos 46b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 379:1</ref>
# The minhag is to say Tehillim chapter 49 after [[Shacharit]] and [[Mincha]]. It is good also to learn mishnayot there for the Iylui Nishama. <ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:5 </ref>
# Some have the practice not to bring food out of the shiva house<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 376:11</ref> if the person died at home<ref>Tzitz Eliezer (Even Yakov no. 44:4)</ref>. However, many are lenient about this.<ref>Yosef Ometz p. 192</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Shiva

2016-08-31T19:26:45Z

Sbmb: /* For Whom Does One "Sit Shiva" */

{{Lacking}}
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>Rama 391:1, against the opinion of the Mordechai in Maseches Semachos</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, some believe 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 committed suicide,<ref>Maseches Semachos 2:1, Shluchan Aruch Y.D. 345:1, against the opinion of Ramban in Toras HaAdam pg. 83</ref> although 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>

==When Aveilus Begins and Ends==
# 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>
# 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>
# 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>

==Prohibitions for the Avel==
# The avel is prohibited from working or leaving the house
# washing/bathing/anoiting
# wearing shoes
# tashmish hamitah
# learning Torah
# greeting others
# Today, the custom is not to turn over the beds or wrap one's head.
# laundering clothing and wearing freshly laundered clothing
# haircutting and shaving
# other practices
==Tefillin for a Mourner==
# On the first day of Shiva, if the burial is was on the same day as the passing, an Avel may not wear Tefillin, as the first day is most bitter.<ref>
'''The Basics''' 
The Gemara (Berachot 11a and 16b, Succah 25a, Moed Kattan 15a, and Ketubot 6b) learns from the fact that Hashem told Yechezkel to put on his Tefillin while mourning for his wife that a regular Avel may not do so. 

Elsewhere (Moed Kattan 21a), the Gemara presents two Machalokets between R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua. In the first, R' Eliezer holds an Avel is prohibited from wearing Tefillin (Hanacha) until the third day, and R' Yehoshua holds until the second day. Additionally, R' Yehoshua holds that, if the Avel put on Tefillin on the days he's permitted to, if Panim Chadashot (people who have not yet been Menachem him) come to visit, he must take them off (Choletz). R' Eliezer, on the hand, holds that he does not need to (Eino Choletz). The Amoraim debate the final Halacha and conclude that the Halacha follows R' Yehoshua regarding Hanacha and R' Eliezer with respect to Chalitzah, once the Avel puts them on on the second day. 
'''Miktzat HaYom KeKulo and the Rishonim''' 
Seemingly, the Gemara is employing the Halachic mechanism of Miktzat HaYom KeKulo in allowing him to put on Tefillin only from some point on the second day. See the exact text of the Gemara and Rashi for a clearer picture. 
In codifying this Halacha, the Rif and Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:9) only write that an Avel may not wear Tefillin on the first day and seem to make no mention of the second day. In fact, the Rambam's use of the words "ביום הראשון בלבד" seem to clearly indicate that he understood the Gemara in its most minimal sense. 
The Rosh (Moed Kattan 3:23) begins unsure if the Rif implies the Miktzat HaYom is implemented from Netz or from after davening. He concludes that the Miktzat HaYom is fulfilled from Netz. 
The Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Shaar HaAvel, Inyan HaAvelut 67) quotes the Raavad who holds that the Miktzat HaYom is only completed from after Shacharit. He also picks up on the lack of a second day in the Rif and explains that it must be the Rif held the Mikzat HaYom was fulfilled with the preceding night, making the entire second day appropriate for putting on Tefillin. He also quotes the Yerushalmi, which makes no indication that there should be a Miktzat HaYom in the first place. See also Rosh ibid 3:3. 
Regarding the need for a Miktzat HaYom in the first place, Tosafot (ibid) says it's a din MiDeRabbanan, and the Ramban (ibid) quotes the Raavad that it's lehashlim the Aveilut. 
The Tur (OC 38:5) quotes just the language of the Rif. The Beit Yosef extrapolates from the Rosh that, even though Laylah is Zeman Tefillin, since it's Assur to wear them at night, one needs a Miktzat HaYom during the day itself to be able to wear them. The Ran (Succah, on the Rif 11b), who quotes the Ramban above, on the other hand, must hold that even though Laylah is not Zeman Tefillin, it still counts for Miktzat HaYom, since the Avel is still prohibited from wearing them. See Rambam Hilchot Tefillin 4:10. 
In Yoreh Deah (388), the Tur paskens the Gemara as explained above and then says how Yesh Omrim the Miktzat HaYom is from after davening, and the Rif and Rosh paskened from Netz (see Bach). Here, the Beit Yosef is very terse and seems to even equate the Rosh with the Rambam (see Ohr Letzion vol. 1 OC Siman 6, as this could be an additional proof to his thesis). 
The Shulchan Aruch in Yoreh Deah paskens like the Rosh that the Miktzat HaYom is from Netz, as does the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12).
</ref>
# If the burial is not on the day of passing, as is very common nowadays, many Poskim hold that the Avel is, in fact, obligated to put on Tefillin, while others firmly believe that he is still forbidden from doing so. According to those who hold one should wear them, one should do so in a closed room without a Beracha.<ref>
The Maharitatz (Chiddushim on Eizehu Neshech, quoted by Be'er Heitev (38:5) and Pitchei Teshuvah (YD 388) famously holds that the reason why the Avel is not allowed to wear Tefillin on the first day is because it's Min HaTorah, which is only when the burial and passing are on the same day. Therefore, when the burial takes place the next day and Avelut is subsequently MiDeRabbanan, the Avel is in fact Chayav in Tefillin. The Taz (OC 38:3), and Dagul Mervava, Birkei Yosef, and Mishnah Brurahh disagree. 
The Acharonim have have a field day taking sides for or against the Maharitatz in this Machaloket, the true scope of which is most suited for a Teshuva in Yabia Omer (vol. 2 YD Siman 27). 
Among recent Acharonim, the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12; Od Yosef Chai, Vayera 11, 12, 45), Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:16), and Ohr Letzion (vol. 1, OC Siman 6) pasken against the Maharitatz. At the same time, due to the great number of Acharonim who do pasken like the Maharitatz (including R' Yitzchak Elchanan and the Chazon Ish, see Yabia Omer ibid for the full list), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo: Tefillah, Perek 18, 5), Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer ibid), and the Piskei Teshuvot (38, Seif Kattan 6) pasken that one should wear them privately without a Beracha. See Magen Avot (Lebhar, Yoreh Deah volume, Siman 388) where he brings the Moroccan Minhag not like the Maharitatz and claims the rest of the world holds that way, as well.
</ref>
# The Minhag is to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin during Avelut.<ref>The Chidah (Birkei Yosef) paskened that one shouldn't wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, as it's a Machaloket HaMekubalim and Shev ve'al Ta'aseh Adif. The Ben Ish Chai (ibid and Od Yosef Chai Vayera 11, 12, 45) claims that the Minhag in Yerushalayim and Baghdad was like the Rashash to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, so he disagrees with the Chidah. This is also the opinion of the Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:21), who says that, among other considerations, based on the Siddur HaChidah and the fact that we wear them beTorat Chiyuv, the Avel should wear them. HaRav David Yosef (Halacha Brurahh 38:5:13) also paskens this way.</ref>

==Aveilus on Shabbos and Yom Tov==
# One is prohibited to display signs of mourning on Shabbos and Yom Tov.

==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>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:2</ref> Some require the avel to 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.</ref>

==At the Beis Ha'Avel (or "Shiva House")==
# The Sages instituted certain additions to [[Bentching]] said at the beis ha'avel, although customs differ as to the details.<ref>Brachos 46b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 379:1</ref>
# The minhag is to say Tehillim chapter 49 after [[Shacharit]] and [[Mincha]]. It is good also to learn mishnayot there for the Iylui Nishama. <ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:5 </ref>
# Some have the practice not to bring food out of the shiva house<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 376:11</ref> if the person died at home<ref>Tzitz Eliezer (Even Yakov no. 44:4)</ref>. However, many are lenient about this.<ref>Yosef Ometz p. 192</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Shiva

2016-08-26T11:52:36Z

Sbmb: /* For Whom Does One Sit "Shiva" */

{{Lacking}}
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.

==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>Rama 391:1, against the opinion of the Mordechai in Maseches Semachos</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, some believe 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 committed suicide,<ref>Maseches Semachos 2:1, Shluchan Aruch Y.D. 345:1, against the opinion of Ramban in Toras HaAdam pg. 83</ref> although 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>

==When Aveilus Begins and Ends==
# 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>
# 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>
# 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>

==Prohibitions for the Avel==
# The avel is prohibited from working or leaving the house
# washing/bathing/anoiting
# wearing shoes
# tashmish hamitah
# learning Torah
# greeting others
# Today, the custom is not to turn over the beds or wrap one's head.
# laundering clothing and wearing freshly laundered clothing
# haircutting and shaving
# other practices
==Tefillin for a Mourner==
# On the first day of Shiva, if the burial is was on the same day as the passing, an Avel may not wear Tefillin, as the first day is most bitter.<ref>
'''The Basics''' 
The Gemara (Berachot 11a and 16b, Succah 25a, Moed Kattan 15a, and Ketubot 6b) learns from the fact that Hashem told Yechezkel to put on his Tefillin while mourning for his wife that a regular Avel may not do so. 

Elsewhere (Moed Kattan 21a), the Gemara presents two Machalokets between R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua. In the first, R' Eliezer holds an Avel is prohibited from wearing Tefillin (Hanacha) until the third day, and R' Yehoshua holds until the second day. Additionally, R' Yehoshua holds that, if the Avel put on Tefillin on the days he's permitted to, if Panim Chadashot (people who have not yet been Menachem him) come to visit, he must take them off (Choletz). R' Eliezer, on the hand, holds that he does not need to (Eino Choletz). The Amoraim debate the final Halacha and conclude that the Halacha follows R' Yehoshua regarding Hanacha and R' Eliezer with respect to Chalitzah, once the Avel puts them on on the second day. 
'''Miktzat HaYom KeKulo and the Rishonim''' 
Seemingly, the Gemara is employing the Halachic mechanism of Miktzat HaYom KeKulo in allowing him to put on Tefillin only from some point on the second day. See the exact text of the Gemara and Rashi for a clearer picture. 
In codifying this Halacha, the Rif and Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:9) only write that an Avel may not wear Tefillin on the first day and seem to make no mention of the second day. In fact, the Rambam's use of the words "ביום הראשון בלבד" seem to clearly indicate that he understood the Gemara in its most minimal sense. 
The Rosh (Moed Kattan 3:23) begins unsure if the Rif implies the Miktzat HaYom is implemented from Netz or from after davening. He concludes that the Miktzat HaYom is fulfilled from Netz. 
The Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Shaar HaAvel, Inyan HaAvelut 67) quotes the Raavad who holds that the Miktzat HaYom is only completed from after Shacharit. He also picks up on the lack of a second day in the Rif and explains that it must be the Rif held the Mikzat HaYom was fulfilled with the preceding night, making the entire second day appropriate for putting on Tefillin. He also quotes the Yerushalmi, which makes no indication that there should be a Miktzat HaYom in the first place. See also Rosh ibid 3:3. 
Regarding the need for a Miktzat HaYom in the first place, Tosafot (ibid) says it's a din MiDeRabbanan, and the Ramban (ibid) quotes the Raavad that it's lehashlim the Aveilut. 
The Tur (OC 38:5) quotes just the language of the Rif. The Beit Yosef extrapolates from the Rosh that, even though Laylah is Zeman Tefillin, since it's Assur to wear them at night, one needs a Miktzat HaYom during the day itself to be able to wear them. The Ran (Succah, on the Rif 11b), who quotes the Ramban above, on the other hand, must hold that even though Laylah is not Zeman Tefillin, it still counts for Miktzat HaYom, since the Avel is still prohibited from wearing them. See Rambam Hilchot Tefillin 4:10. 
In Yoreh Deah (388), the Tur paskens the Gemara as explained above and then says how Yesh Omrim the Miktzat HaYom is from after davening, and the Rif and Rosh paskened from Netz (see Bach). Here, the Beit Yosef is very terse and seems to even equate the Rosh with the Rambam (see Ohr Letzion vol. 1 OC Siman 6, as this could be an additional proof to his thesis). 
The Shulchan Aruch in Yoreh Deah paskens like the Rosh that the Miktzat HaYom is from Netz, as does the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12).
</ref>
# If the burial is not on the day of passing, as is very common nowadays, many Poskim hold that the Avel is, in fact, obligated to put on Tefillin, while others firmly believe that he is still forbidden from doing so. According to those who hold one should wear them, one should do so in a closed room without a Beracha.<ref>
The Maharitatz (Chiddushim on Eizehu Neshech, quoted by Be'er Heitev (38:5) and Pitchei Teshuvah (YD 388) famously holds that the reason why the Avel is not allowed to wear Tefillin on the first day is because it's Min HaTorah, which is only when the burial and passing are on the same day. Therefore, when the burial takes place the next day and Avelut is subsequently MiDeRabbanan, the Avel is in fact Chayav in Tefillin. The Taz (OC 38:3), and Dagul Mervava, Birkei Yosef, and Mishnah Brurahh disagree. 
The Acharonim have have a field day taking sides for or against the Maharitatz in this Machaloket, the true scope of which is most suited for a Teshuva in Yabia Omer (vol. 2 YD Siman 27). 
Among recent Acharonim, the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12; Od Yosef Chai, Vayera 11, 12, 45), Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:16), and Ohr Letzion (vol. 1, OC Siman 6) pasken against the Maharitatz. At the same time, due to the great number of Acharonim who do pasken like the Maharitatz (including R' Yitzchak Elchanan and the Chazon Ish, see Yabia Omer ibid for the full list), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo: Tefillah, Perek 18, 5), Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer ibid), and the Piskei Teshuvot (38, Seif Kattan 6) pasken that one should wear them privately without a Beracha. See Magen Avot (Lebhar, Yoreh Deah volume, Siman 388) where he brings the Moroccan Minhag not like the Maharitatz and claims the rest of the world holds that way, as well.
</ref>
# The Minhag is to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin during Avelut.<ref>The Chidah (Birkei Yosef) paskened that one shouldn't wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, as it's a Machaloket HaMekubalim and Shev ve'al Ta'aseh Adif. The Ben Ish Chai (ibid and Od Yosef Chai Vayera 11, 12, 45) claims that the Minhag in Yerushalayim and Baghdad was like the Rashash to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, so he disagrees with the Chidah. This is also the opinion of the Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:21), who says that, among other considerations, based on the Siddur HaChidah and the fact that we wear them beTorat Chiyuv, the Avel should wear them. HaRav David Yosef (Halacha Brurahh 38:5:13) also paskens this way.</ref>

==Aveilus on Shabbos and Yom Tov==
# One is prohibited to display signs of mourning on Shabbos and Yom Tov.

==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>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:2</ref> Some require the avel to 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.</ref>

==At the Beis Ha'Avel (or "Shiva House")==
# The Sages instituted certain additions to [[Bentching]] said at the beis ha'avel, although customs differ as to the details.<ref>Brachos 46b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 379:1</ref>
# The minhag is to say Tehillim chapter 49 after [[Shacharit]] and [[Mincha]]. It is good also to learn mishnayot there for the Iylui Nishama. <ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:5 </ref>
# Some have the practice not to bring food out of the shiva house<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 376:11</ref> if the person died at home<ref>Tzitz Eliezer (Even Yakov no. 44:4)</ref>. However, many are lenient about this.<ref>Yosef Ometz p. 192</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Shiva

2016-08-26T11:51:51Z

Sbmb: /* When Aveilus Begins */

{{Lacking}}
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.

==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>Rama 391:1, against the opinion of the Mordechai in Maseches Semachos</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, some believe 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 committed suicide,<ref>Maseches Semachos 2:1, Shluchan Aruch Y.D. 345:1, against the opinion of Ramban in Toras HaAdam pg. 83</ref> although 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>

==When Aveilus Begins and Ends==
# 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>
# 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>
# 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>

==Prohibitions for the Avel==
# The avel is prohibited from working or leaving the house
# washing/bathing/anoiting
# wearing shoes
# tashmish hamitah
# learning Torah
# greeting others
# Today, the custom is not to turn over the beds or wrap one's head.
# laundering clothing and wearing freshly laundered clothing
# haircutting and shaving
# other practices
==Tefillin for a Mourner==
# On the first day of Shiva, if the burial is was on the same day as the passing, an Avel may not wear Tefillin, as the first day is most bitter.<ref>
'''The Basics''' 
The Gemara (Berachot 11a and 16b, Succah 25a, Moed Kattan 15a, and Ketubot 6b) learns from the fact that Hashem told Yechezkel to put on his Tefillin while mourning for his wife that a regular Avel may not do so. 

Elsewhere (Moed Kattan 21a), the Gemara presents two Machalokets between R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua. In the first, R' Eliezer holds an Avel is prohibited from wearing Tefillin (Hanacha) until the third day, and R' Yehoshua holds until the second day. Additionally, R' Yehoshua holds that, if the Avel put on Tefillin on the days he's permitted to, if Panim Chadashot (people who have not yet been Menachem him) come to visit, he must take them off (Choletz). R' Eliezer, on the hand, holds that he does not need to (Eino Choletz). The Amoraim debate the final Halacha and conclude that the Halacha follows R' Yehoshua regarding Hanacha and R' Eliezer with respect to Chalitzah, once the Avel puts them on on the second day. 
'''Miktzat HaYom KeKulo and the Rishonim''' 
Seemingly, the Gemara is employing the Halachic mechanism of Miktzat HaYom KeKulo in allowing him to put on Tefillin only from some point on the second day. See the exact text of the Gemara and Rashi for a clearer picture. 
In codifying this Halacha, the Rif and Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:9) only write that an Avel may not wear Tefillin on the first day and seem to make no mention of the second day. In fact, the Rambam's use of the words "ביום הראשון בלבד" seem to clearly indicate that he understood the Gemara in its most minimal sense. 
The Rosh (Moed Kattan 3:23) begins unsure if the Rif implies the Miktzat HaYom is implemented from Netz or from after davening. He concludes that the Miktzat HaYom is fulfilled from Netz. 
The Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Shaar HaAvel, Inyan HaAvelut 67) quotes the Raavad who holds that the Miktzat HaYom is only completed from after Shacharit. He also picks up on the lack of a second day in the Rif and explains that it must be the Rif held the Mikzat HaYom was fulfilled with the preceding night, making the entire second day appropriate for putting on Tefillin. He also quotes the Yerushalmi, which makes no indication that there should be a Miktzat HaYom in the first place. See also Rosh ibid 3:3. 
Regarding the need for a Miktzat HaYom in the first place, Tosafot (ibid) says it's a din MiDeRabbanan, and the Ramban (ibid) quotes the Raavad that it's lehashlim the Aveilut. 
The Tur (OC 38:5) quotes just the language of the Rif. The Beit Yosef extrapolates from the Rosh that, even though Laylah is Zeman Tefillin, since it's Assur to wear them at night, one needs a Miktzat HaYom during the day itself to be able to wear them. The Ran (Succah, on the Rif 11b), who quotes the Ramban above, on the other hand, must hold that even though Laylah is not Zeman Tefillin, it still counts for Miktzat HaYom, since the Avel is still prohibited from wearing them. See Rambam Hilchot Tefillin 4:10. 
In Yoreh Deah (388), the Tur paskens the Gemara as explained above and then says how Yesh Omrim the Miktzat HaYom is from after davening, and the Rif and Rosh paskened from Netz (see Bach). Here, the Beit Yosef is very terse and seems to even equate the Rosh with the Rambam (see Ohr Letzion vol. 1 OC Siman 6, as this could be an additional proof to his thesis). 
The Shulchan Aruch in Yoreh Deah paskens like the Rosh that the Miktzat HaYom is from Netz, as does the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12).
</ref>
# If the burial is not on the day of passing, as is very common nowadays, many Poskim hold that the Avel is, in fact, obligated to put on Tefillin, while others firmly believe that he is still forbidden from doing so. According to those who hold one should wear them, one should do so in a closed room without a Beracha.<ref>
The Maharitatz (Chiddushim on Eizehu Neshech, quoted by Be'er Heitev (38:5) and Pitchei Teshuvah (YD 388) famously holds that the reason why the Avel is not allowed to wear Tefillin on the first day is because it's Min HaTorah, which is only when the burial and passing are on the same day. Therefore, when the burial takes place the next day and Avelut is subsequently MiDeRabbanan, the Avel is in fact Chayav in Tefillin. The Taz (OC 38:3), and Dagul Mervava, Birkei Yosef, and Mishnah Brurahh disagree. 
The Acharonim have have a field day taking sides for or against the Maharitatz in this Machaloket, the true scope of which is most suited for a Teshuva in Yabia Omer (vol. 2 YD Siman 27). 
Among recent Acharonim, the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12; Od Yosef Chai, Vayera 11, 12, 45), Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:16), and Ohr Letzion (vol. 1, OC Siman 6) pasken against the Maharitatz. At the same time, due to the great number of Acharonim who do pasken like the Maharitatz (including R' Yitzchak Elchanan and the Chazon Ish, see Yabia Omer ibid for the full list), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo: Tefillah, Perek 18, 5), Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer ibid), and the Piskei Teshuvot (38, Seif Kattan 6) pasken that one should wear them privately without a Beracha. See Magen Avot (Lebhar, Yoreh Deah volume, Siman 388) where he brings the Moroccan Minhag not like the Maharitatz and claims the rest of the world holds that way, as well.
</ref>
# The Minhag is to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin during Avelut.<ref>The Chidah (Birkei Yosef) paskened that one shouldn't wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, as it's a Machaloket HaMekubalim and Shev ve'al Ta'aseh Adif. The Ben Ish Chai (ibid and Od Yosef Chai Vayera 11, 12, 45) claims that the Minhag in Yerushalayim and Baghdad was like the Rashash to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, so he disagrees with the Chidah. This is also the opinion of the Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:21), who says that, among other considerations, based on the Siddur HaChidah and the fact that we wear them beTorat Chiyuv, the Avel should wear them. HaRav David Yosef (Halacha Brurahh 38:5:13) also paskens this way.</ref>

==Aveilus on Shabbos and Yom Tov==
# One is prohibited to display signs of mourning on Shabbos and Yom Tov.

==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>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:2</ref> Some require the avel to 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.</ref>

==At the Beis Ha'Avel (or "Shiva House")==
# The Sages instituted certain additions to [[Bentching]] said at the beis ha'avel, although customs differ as to the details.<ref>Brachos 46b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 379:1</ref>
# The minhag is to say Tehillim chapter 49 after [[Shacharit]] and [[Mincha]]. It is good also to learn mishnayot there for the Iylui Nishama. <ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:5 </ref>
# Some have the practice not to bring food out of the shiva house<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 376:11</ref> if the person died at home<ref>Tzitz Eliezer (Even Yakov no. 44:4)</ref>. However, many are lenient about this.<ref>Yosef Ometz p. 192</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Shiva

2016-06-10T13:59:01Z

Sbmb:

{{Lacking}}
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.

==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>Rama 391:1, against the opinion of the Mordechai in Maseches Semachos</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, some believe 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 committed suicide,<ref>Maseches Semachos 2:1, Shluchan Aruch Y.D. 345:1, against the opinion of Ramban in Toras HaAdam pg. 83</ref> although 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>

==When Aveilus Begins==
# 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>
# 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>

==Prohibitions for the Avel==
# The avel is prohibited from working or leaving the house
# washing/bathing/anoiting
# wearing shoes
# tashmish hamitah
# learning Torah
# greeting others
# Today, the custom is not to turn over the beds or wrap one's head.
# laundering clothing and wearing freshly laundered clothing
# haircutting and shaving
# other practices
==Tefillin for a Mourner==
# On the first day of Shiva, if the burial is was on the same day as the passing, an Avel may not wear Tefillin, as the first day is most bitter.<ref>
'''The Basics''' 
The Gemara (Berachot 11a and 16b, Succah 25a, Moed Kattan 15a, and Ketubot 6b) learns from the fact that Hashem told Yechezkel to put on his Tefillin while mourning for his wife that a regular Avel may not do so. 

Elsewhere (Moed Kattan 21a), the Gemara presents two Machalokets between R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua. In the first, R' Eliezer holds an Avel is prohibited from wearing Tefillin (Hanacha) until the third day, and R' Yehoshua holds until the second day. Additionally, R' Yehoshua holds that, if the Avel put on Tefillin on the days he's permitted to, if Panim Chadashot (people who have not yet been Menachem him) come to visit, he must take them off (Choletz). R' Eliezer, on the hand, holds that he does not need to (Eino Choletz). The Amoraim debate the final Halacha and conclude that the Halacha follows R' Yehoshua regarding Hanacha and R' Eliezer with respect to Chalitzah, once the Avel puts them on on the second day. 
'''Miktzat HaYom KeKulo and the Rishonim''' 
Seemingly, the Gemara is employing the Halachic mechanism of Miktzat HaYom KeKulo in allowing him to put on Tefillin only from some point on the second day. See the exact text of the Gemara and Rashi for a clearer picture. 
In codifying this Halacha, the Rif and Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:9) only write that an Avel may not wear Tefillin on the first day and seem to make no mention of the second day. In fact, the Rambam's use of the words "ביום הראשון בלבד" seem to clearly indicate that he understood the Gemara in its most minimal sense. 
The Rosh (Moed Kattan 3:23) begins unsure if the Rif implies the Miktzat HaYom is implemented from Netz or from after davening. He concludes that the Miktzat HaYom is fulfilled from Netz. 
The Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Shaar HaAvel, Inyan HaAvelut 67) quotes the Raavad who holds that the Miktzat HaYom is only completed from after Shacharit. He also picks up on the lack of a second day in the Rif and explains that it must be the Rif held the Mikzat HaYom was fulfilled with the preceding night, making the entire second day appropriate for putting on Tefillin. He also quotes the Yerushalmi, which makes no indication that there should be a Miktzat HaYom in the first place. See also Rosh ibid 3:3. 
Regarding the need for a Miktzat HaYom in the first place, Tosafot (ibid) says it's a din MiDeRabbanan, and the Ramban (ibid) quotes the Raavad that it's lehashlim the Aveilut. 
The Tur (OC 38:5) quotes just the language of the Rif. The Beit Yosef extrapolates from the Rosh that, even though Laylah is Zeman Tefillin, since it's Assur to wear them at night, one needs a Miktzat HaYom during the day itself to be able to wear them. The Ran (Succah, on the Rif 11b), who quotes the Ramban above, on the other hand, must hold that even though Laylah is not Zeman Tefillin, it still counts for Miktzat HaYom, since the Avel is still prohibited from wearing them. See Rambam Hilchot Tefillin 4:10. 
In Yoreh Deah (388), the Tur paskens the Gemara as explained above and then says how Yesh Omrim the Miktzat HaYom is from after davening, and the Rif and Rosh paskened from Netz (see Bach). Here, the Beit Yosef is very terse and seems to even equate the Rosh with the Rambam (see Ohr Letzion vol. 1 OC Siman 6, as this could be an additional proof to his thesis). 
The Shulchan Aruch in Yoreh Deah paskens like the Rosh that the Miktzat HaYom is from Netz, as does the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12).
</ref>
# If the burial is not on the day of passing, as is very common nowadays, many Poskim hold that the Avel is, in fact, obligated to put on Tefillin, while others firmly believe that he is still forbidden from doing so. According to those who hold one should wear them, one should do so in a closed room without a Beracha.<ref>
The Maharitatz (Chiddushim on Eizehu Neshech, quoted by Be'er Heitev (38:5) and Pitchei Teshuvah (YD 388) famously holds that the reason why the Avel is not allowed to wear Tefillin on the first day is because it's Min HaTorah, which is only when the burial and passing are on the same day. Therefore, when the burial takes place the next day and Avelut is subsequently MiDeRabbanan, the Avel is in fact Chayav in Tefillin. The Taz (OC 38:3), and Dagul Mervava, Birkei Yosef, and Mishnah Brurahh disagree. 
The Acharonim have have a field day taking sides for or against the Maharitatz in this Machaloket, the true scope of which is most suited for a Teshuva in Yabia Omer (vol. 2 YD Siman 27). 
Among recent Acharonim, the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12; Od Yosef Chai, Vayera 11, 12, 45), Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:16), and Ohr Letzion (vol. 1, OC Siman 6) pasken against the Maharitatz. At the same time, due to the great number of Acharonim who do pasken like the Maharitatz (including R' Yitzchak Elchanan and the Chazon Ish, see Yabia Omer ibid for the full list), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo: Tefillah, Perek 18, 5), Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer ibid), and the Piskei Teshuvot (38, Seif Kattan 6) pasken that one should wear them privately without a Beracha. See Magen Avot (Lebhar, Yoreh Deah volume, Siman 388) where he brings the Moroccan Minhag not like the Maharitatz and claims the rest of the world holds that way, as well.
</ref>
# The Minhag is to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin during Avelut.<ref>The Chidah (Birkei Yosef) paskened that one shouldn't wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, as it's a Machaloket HaMekubalim and Shev ve'al Ta'aseh Adif. The Ben Ish Chai (ibid and Od Yosef Chai Vayera 11, 12, 45) claims that the Minhag in Yerushalayim and Baghdad was like the Rashash to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, so he disagrees with the Chidah. This is also the opinion of the Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:21), who says that, among other considerations, based on the Siddur HaChidah and the fact that we wear them beTorat Chiyuv, the Avel should wear them. HaRav David Yosef (Halacha Brurahh 38:5:13) also paskens this way.</ref>

==Aveilus on Shabbos and Yom Tov==
# One is prohibited to display signs of mourning on Shabbos and Yom Tov.

==Comforting the Mourner==
# It is a great Mitzvah for others to comfort a mourner (or "avel," person in mourning). <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:1. As it says in Koheles 7:2, it is better to attend a mourner's house than a party. According to the Rambam in Hilchos Avel 14:1, this mitzvah is derabanan, although Rabbeinu Yonah to the beginning of the third chapter of Brachos indicates that one fulfills a mitzvah deoraisa by comforting a mourner</ref> It is crucial to remember that the reason for one's visit to the house of mourning is to comfort the mourner(s), and so one must be considerate to their wishes.<ref>Cf. Sefer Ahavas Chessed 3:6 and Sh"T Teshuvos V'Hanhagos 3:378</ref>
# Those coming to comfort the avel should not initiate conversation but should respond when the mourner begins to speak. <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:1 </ref>
# 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>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:2</ref> Some require the avel to 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.</ref>
# One should not say “What could you have done? You can’t change what Hashem decreed.” since this implies that if one were able to change what Hashem decreed, one would have, which is blasphemous. Rather one should accept Hashem’s decrees.<ref>Gemara Bava Kama 38a, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:4</ref>

==At the Beis Ha'Avel (or "Shiva House")==
# The Sages instituted certain additions to [[Bentching]] siad at the beis ha'avel, although customs differ as to the details.<ref>Brachos 46b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 379:1</ref>
# The minhag is to say Tefillim chapter 49 after [[Shacharit]] and [[Mincha]]. It is good also to learn mishnayot there for the Iylui Nishama. <ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:5 </ref>
# Some have the practice not to bring food out of the shiva house<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 376:11</ref> if the person died at home<ref>Tzitz Eliezer (Even Yakov no. 44:4)</ref>, however, there many are lenient about this.<ref>Yosef Ometz p. 192</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Shiva

2016-06-08T16:13:25Z

Sbmb:

{{Lacking}}
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.

==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>Rama 391:1, against the opinion of the Mordechai in Maseches Semachos</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, some believe 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 committed suicide,<ref>Maseches Semachos 2:1, Shluchan Aruch Y.D. 345:1, against the opinion of Ramban in Toras HaAdam pg. 83</ref> although 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>

==When Aveilus Begins==
# 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>
# 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.</ref> 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.<ref>Tosfos Moed Kattan 22a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2</ref>

==Prohibitions for the Avel==
# The avel is prohibited from working or leaving the house
# washing/bathing/anoiting
# wearing shoes
# tashmish hamitah
# learning Torah
# greeting others
# Today, the custom is not to turn over the beds or wrap one's head.
# laundering clothing and wearing freshly laundered clothing
# haircutting and shaving
# other practices
==Tefillin for a Mourner==
# On the first day of Shiva, if the burial is was on the same day as the passing, an Avel may not wear Tefillin, as the first day is most bitter.<ref>
'''The Basics''' 
The Gemara (Berachot 11a and 16b, Succah 25a, Moed Kattan 15a, and Ketubot 6b) learns from the fact that Hashem told Yechezkel to put on his Tefillin while mourning for his wife that a regular Avel may not do so. 

Elsewhere (Moed Kattan 21a), the Gemara presents two Machalokets between R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua. In the first, R' Eliezer holds an Avel is prohibited from wearing Tefillin (Hanacha) until the third day, and R' Yehoshua holds until the second day. Additionally, R' Yehoshua holds that, if the Avel put on Tefillin on the days he's permitted to, if Panim Chadashot (people who have not yet been Menachem him) come to visit, he must take them off (Choletz). R' Eliezer, on the hand, holds that he does not need to (Eino Choletz). The Amoraim debate the final Halacha and conclude that the Halacha follows R' Yehoshua regarding Hanacha and R' Eliezer with respect to Chalitzah, once the Avel puts them on on the second day. 
'''Miktzat HaYom KeKulo and the Rishonim''' 
Seemingly, the Gemara is employing the Halachic mechanism of Miktzat HaYom KeKulo in allowing him to put on Tefillin only from some point on the second day. See the exact text of the Gemara and Rashi for a clearer picture. 
In codifying this Halacha, the Rif and Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:9) only write that an Avel may not wear Tefillin on the first day and seem to make no mention of the second day. In fact, the Rambam's use of the words "ביום הראשון בלבד" seem to clearly indicate that he understood the Gemara in its most minimal sense. 
The Rosh (Moed Kattan 3:23) begins unsure if the Rif implies the Miktzat HaYom is implemented from Netz or from after davening. He concludes that the Miktzat HaYom is fulfilled from Netz. 
The Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Shaar HaAvel, Inyan HaAvelut 67) quotes the Raavad who holds that the Miktzat HaYom is only completed from after Shacharit. He also picks up on the lack of a second day in the Rif and explains that it must be the Rif held the Mikzat HaYom was fulfilled with the preceding night, making the entire second day appropriate for putting on Tefillin. He also quotes the Yerushalmi, which makes no indication that there should be a Miktzat HaYom in the first place. See also Rosh ibid 3:3. 
Regarding the need for a Miktzat HaYom in the first place, Tosafot (ibid) says it's a din MiDeRabbanan, and the Ramban (ibid) quotes the Raavad that it's lehashlim the Aveilut. 
The Tur (OC 38:5) quotes just the language of the Rif. The Beit Yosef extrapolates from the Rosh that, even though Laylah is Zeman Tefillin, since it's Assur to wear them at night, one needs a Miktzat HaYom during the day itself to be able to wear them. The Ran (Succah, on the Rif 11b), who quotes the Ramban above, on the other hand, must hold that even though Laylah is not Zeman Tefillin, it still counts for Miktzat HaYom, since the Avel is still prohibited from wearing them. See Rambam Hilchot Tefillin 4:10. 
In Yoreh Deah (388), the Tur paskens the Gemara as explained above and then says how Yesh Omrim the Miktzat HaYom is from after davening, and the Rif and Rosh paskened from Netz (see Bach). Here, the Beit Yosef is very terse and seems to even equate the Rosh with the Rambam (see Ohr Letzion vol. 1 OC Siman 6, as this could be an additional proof to his thesis). 
The Shulchan Aruch in Yoreh Deah paskens like the Rosh that the Miktzat HaYom is from Netz, as does the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12).
</ref>
# If the burial is not on the day of passing, as is very common nowadays, many Poskim hold that the Avel is, in fact, obligated to put on Tefillin, while others firmly believe that he is still forbidden from doing so. According to those who hold one should wear them, one should do so in a closed room without a Beracha.<ref>
The Maharitatz (Chiddushim on Eizehu Neshech, quoted by Be'er Heitev (38:5) and Pitchei Teshuvah (YD 388) famously holds that the reason why the Avel is not allowed to wear Tefillin on the first day is because it's Min HaTorah, which is only when the burial and passing are on the same day. Therefore, when the burial takes place the next day and Avelut is subsequently MiDeRabbanan, the Avel is in fact Chayav in Tefillin. The Taz (OC 38:3), and Dagul Mervava, Birkei Yosef, and Mishnah Brurahh disagree. 
The Acharonim have have a field day taking sides for or against the Maharitatz in this Machaloket, the true scope of which is most suited for a Teshuva in Yabia Omer (vol. 2 YD Siman 27). 
Among recent Acharonim, the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12; Od Yosef Chai, Vayera 11, 12, 45), Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:16), and Ohr Letzion (vol. 1, OC Siman 6) pasken against the Maharitatz. At the same time, due to the great number of Acharonim who do pasken like the Maharitatz (including R' Yitzchak Elchanan and the Chazon Ish, see Yabia Omer ibid for the full list), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo: Tefillah, Perek 18, 5), Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer ibid), and the Piskei Teshuvot (38, Seif Kattan 6) pasken that one should wear them privately without a Beracha. See Magen Avot (Lebhar, Yoreh Deah volume, Siman 388) where he brings the Moroccan Minhag not like the Maharitatz and claims the rest of the world holds that way, as well.
</ref>
# The Minhag is to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin during Avelut.<ref>The Chidah (Birkei Yosef) paskened that one shouldn't wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, as it's a Machaloket HaMekubalim and Shev ve'al Ta'aseh Adif. The Ben Ish Chai (ibid and Od Yosef Chai Vayera 11, 12, 45) claims that the Minhag in Yerushalayim and Baghdad was like the Rashash to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, so he disagrees with the Chidah. This is also the opinion of the Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:21), who says that, among other considerations, based on the Siddur HaChidah and the fact that we wear them beTorat Chiyuv, the Avel should wear them. HaRav David Yosef (Halacha Brurahh 38:5:13) also paskens this way.</ref>

==Aveilus on Shabbos and Yom Tov==
# One is prohibited to display signs of mourning on Shabbos and Yom Tov.

==Comforting the Mourner==
# It is a great Mitzvah for others to comfort a mourner (or "avel," person in mourning). <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:1. As it says in Koheles 7:2, it is better to attend a mourner's house than a party. According to the Rambam in Hilchos Avel 14:1, this mitzvah is derabanan, although Rabbeinu Yonah to the beginning of the third chapter of Brachos indicates that one fulfills a mitzvah deoraisa by comforting a mourner</ref> It is crucial to remember that the reason for one's visit to the house of mourning is to comfort the mourner(s), and so one must be considerate to their wishes.<ref>Cf. Sefer Ahavas Chessed 3:6 and Sh"T Teshuvos V'Hanhagos 3:378</ref>
# Those coming to comfort the avel should not initiate conversation but should respond when the mourner begins to speak. <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:1 </ref>
# 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>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:2</ref> Some require the avel to 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.</ref>
# One should not say “What could you have done? You can’t change what Hashem decreed.” since this implies that if one were able to change what Hashem decreed, one would have, which is blasphemous. Rather one should accept Hashem’s decrees.<ref>Gemara Bava Kama 38a, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:4</ref>

==At the Beis Ha'Avel (or "Shiva House")==
# The Sages instituted certain additions to [[Bentching]] siad at the beis ha'avel, although customs differ as to the details.<ref>Brachos 46b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 379:1</ref>
# The minhag is to say Tefillim chapter 49 after [[Shacharit]] and [[Mincha]]. It is good also to learn mishnayot there for the Iylui Nishama. <ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:5 </ref>
# Some have the practice not to bring food out of the shiva house<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 376:11</ref> if the person died at home<ref>Tzitz Eliezer (Even Yakov no. 44:4)</ref>, however, there many are lenient about this.<ref>Yosef Ometz p. 192</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Onen

2016-06-08T14:27:51Z

Sbmb: /* Upon Whom and When Does Aninus Apply */

An "onen"<ref>This term is used several times in Chazal, and is derived from the pasuk in Devarim 26:14. Brachos 18b refers to a person "dead is lying before him," and this appears to be the same category as one who would be described as an "onen," although the equivalence of these two phrases is not necessarily absolute. M'Deoraisa, an onen is prohibited from eating kodshim or maaser sheni, as evident from Vayikra 10:19 and Devarim 26:14 respectively.</ref> is a person whose immediate relative has died and is yet to be buried.<ref>Yerushalmi Pesachim 8:8 records a dispute as to whether or not aninus Deoraisa, the day of death, continues until nightfall even if the burial already took place. Ramban (Toras HaAdam "Aninus") believes that it does, but Rashi to Zevachim 15b and 90b writes that it does not. In practice, one does not observe aninus after the burial at all even if it is still the day of death (Bach and Shach Y.D. 341:2).</ref> The state of being an onen is called "aninus".

==Upon Whom and When Does Aninus Apply==
# A person is an "onen" from the time that he hears of the death of any one of his seven relatives, until the time of burial. Generally, anyone obligated in [[mourning]] after the burial is obligated to observe aninus before the burial.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:1. The Badei Hashulchan (341:4, Biurim page 75-76) writes, against Sh"t Bnyan Tziyon 113, that it is best to be stringent regarding meat, wine, and tashmish even for a child who has died before living out thirty days, despite the fact that there is no aveilus for such a child, but such a person is still obligated in mitzvos.</ref>
# The common practice is that even someone whose relative that has passed away is in a different city, or another relative is taking care of the burial needs, is still considered an "onen".<ref>Rabbeinu Tam, as quoted in Tosfos Brachos 18b and Rosh Brachos 3:3, did not consider himself to be an onen when his married sister died, either because his sister's husband would take care of the burial, or, as explained by the Bach Yoreh Deah 341:4 (and Shach Y.D. 341:5) explains, because he was in a different city. Either way, the Rosh there and Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 341:1) writes that this opinion was not accepted.</ref> However, not all agree with this view.<ref>See Shach Y.D. 341:4</ref>
# Nowadays most communities have specific people who deal with the meis and the burial, such as a "Chevra Kadisha," and so the immediate relatives of the deceased do not take care of the burial directly.<ref>This is the generally understood meaning of 'כתפים' in Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, cf. Moed Katan 22a</ref> Although some have stated that this custom frees the relatives from their status as onenim,<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:3 based on Tosfos Brachos 18b, Tur Y.D. 375 quoting Behag, Toras HaAdam (Chavel ed.) p. 70, Chochmas Adam Klal 153:3</ref> others believe that a relative is only free from being an onen if he does not accompany the meis to the burial.<ref>Noda Biyhudah Tinyana Y.D 211 cited in Pischei Teshuvah 341:1, cf. Hagahos Maimoni Hil. Eivel 3:6.</ref> While some communities follow the first view, most believe that a person is still an onen nowadays when a Chevra Kadisha takes care of the meis.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 341:20-23 writes that this must be the case, considering that the Shulchan Aruch paskens (341:1) that even a relative who is in a faraway city and will not be involved in the burial is still an onen. Rather, the Gemara is referring to those who have followed the meis until a certain point, and then return home while the meis is sent to be buried.</ref>
# One who only accompanies the meis only until a certain point, but not all the way to the burial, is no longer an onen once they leave the meis.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2, Hashulchan Y.D. 341:21-22. Although the Aruch Hashulchan in 324:23 indicates that this is only true if the meis will be traveling for at least a two-day's journey, see Minchas Shelomo 91:25. See there also regarding a relative who will not be with the meis at all the entire time</ref>
# The relatives of someone who died in captivity do not practice aninus at all, and not aveilus until the burial (or until the relatives give up hope of having a burial).<ref>Tosfos Brachos 18a, Rambam Hilchos Avel 1:3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:4, Shach 341:15</ref> However, many believe that this was only the case if the captors wouldn't release the body until ransom negotiations were made, but today, if the meis is being held for medical or legal reasons, aninus does apply right away, because one can be sure that the meis will be returned to the family eventually.<ref>Noda BiYhudah Tinyanana Y.D. 211, Aruch Hashulchan 341:18</ref>

==Practices of the Onen==
# There is a dispute regarding whether or not the onen also has the restrictions of an [[Avel]], namely, if the onen may sit on a chair, wash, greet people, etc.<ref>cf. Tur who quotes this dispute between Rambam, Ritz Gayes, and Baalei HaTosafos against the Ramban and Rabbeinu Peretz, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:5, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 341:23-28 insists that the opinion of the Rama is actually to permit these behaviors, cf. Sh"T Chasam Sofer II Y.D. 324</ref>
# The onen is not permitted to eat in the same room as the meis, but if it is impossible to move to another room, he should at least put up a partition, or at the very least turn away, so as not to eat in front of the meis.<ref>Brachos 18a, Rashi there explains that doing so would be לועג לרש. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1, Aruch Hashulchan 341:7 notes that this is the halacha even on Shabbos. The Gemara there also writes that the onen should not recline while eating.</ref>
# An onen is prohibited from eating meat or drinking wine.<ref>ibid. Aruch Hashulchan 341:9 writes that other drinks, and a food cooked with meat, are both permitted to the onen- however, the onen should not eat unnecessary snacks and the like.</ref>
# Most say that tashimish hamitah is prohibited for an onen, and that is the custom.<ref>Although Tur Y.D. 341 quotes the Ritz Gayes as permitting, the Gemara indicates that it is prohibited, and that is how Ramban and the Baalei HaTosafos quote, and is implied to be the psak of the Rama in Y.D. 341:5</ref>
==Exemption from Mitzvot==
# An onen is exempt from doing any mitzvah,<ref>Gemara Brachos 17b and Moed Katan 23b, Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:6), Mishna Brurah 71:4. Rabbeinu Yonah to Rif Brachos 10b mentions the possibility that an onen is only expempt from mitzvos requiring special intent, such as [[Shema]] and [[Tefillah]], but this opinion has not been accepted.</ref> either because he is considered preoccupied with the mitzvah of burying his relative<ref>Cf. Rashi to Brachos 17b s.v. "mi shemeiso" and Toras HaOlah "Inyan Aninus." Levush Y.D. 341 writes that even a relative who is not actively involved in taking care of the burial is still mentally preoccupied enough to apply the principle of עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה</ref> or out of respect for the deceased.<ref>Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, Tosfos Brachos 17b. This is the explanation preferred by Chachmas Adam 157:5</ref>
# Most poskim believe that an onen would not count towards a [[Minyan]].<ref>Gilyon Maharsha to Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341, Beer Heitev Shulchan Aruch O.C. 55, Shevus Yaakov 25. The Peri Chadash to O.C. 55 indicated that an onen who is not actively involved in the burial would count towards the minyan</ref>
# An onen may not decide on his own to perform mitvzos even if (s)he wants to do so<ref>This is the opinion of the Yerushalmi, as quoted by Tosfos Brachos 18a, against the implication of Rashi there, both of which are quoted in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1. However, Mishnah Berurah O.C. 78:7 understands the Shulchan Aruch's actual opinion to be like the Yerushalmi. If aninus is derabanan (which is almost certainly the case after nightfall of the day of death), then perhaps one would still be obligated in mitzvos that would be actively violated, see Kovetz HeAros Yevamos #69 and Pri Megadim's Pesicha Koleles 2:28. The Noda BiYhudah believes that the onen is allowed to count [[Sefirat HaOmer]] in order so as not to lose out on counting the whole sefirah, and R. Shlomo Kluger (Sefer HaChayim no. 71) uses similar reasoning to say that an onen is permitted to recite Kiddush Levanah if others are taking care of the burial.</ref>
# An onen is exempt from all [[brachot]], and can therefore eat without making any [[Birchot]] HaNehenin. <ref>The Rash MeShantz (Mishna Damai 1:4 s.v. UMazminin Alav) implies that an onen is obligated to say [[brachot]] for himself but may not exempt others, although his position is against that of Rashi and Tosfos to Brachos 18a. The Mishna Brurah 71:4 paskens that an onen is exempt from all [[brachot]].</ref>
# An onen is permitted to wear his tallit kattan as usual, but should not make a bracha on it.<ref>Minchas Shelomo 1:91:25</ref>
# Some say that a person who became an onen after the time for [[Shacharit]] or [[Mincha]] began and didn’t yet pray is obligated to pray a [[Tashlumin]]<ref> Mishna Brurah 71, Magen Giborim and Derech HaChaim</ref> although some argue.<ref>Yad Efrayim (Aninut 29), Birkei Yosef 341:17, Chachmat Shlomo 71, and Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 6:11 hold that one is exempt from [[Tashlumin]].</ref>
==Aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov==
# The generally accepted pesak is that there is no aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov,<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1 based upon the Rosh</ref> and so an onen still performs all the usual mitzvos and brachos, including going to shul, on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Against what is written in the Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1. The Shulchan Aruch paskens that this is true if the onen is not doing anything at all to get ready for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov. If the onen is preparing for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov in a manner that is permitted, then the Shulchan Aruch writes that such a person would be a full onen even on Shabbos. Regarding Yom Tov Sheni of the diaspora, see Igros Moshe O.C. 3:76 who insists that today burials should not be performed on Yom Tov Sheni even by non-Jews.</ref>
# On Shabbos, therefore, the onen is permitted (but not necessarily obligated)<ref>Rama Y.D. 341:1 and Shach 341:7 indicate that there is no obligation to eat meat or drink wine on Shabbos for anyone. However, based upon the Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:1 and 250:2, the Badei Hashulchan 341:41 believes that someone who can afford to eat meat on Shabbos must do so, and this includes an onen. [Perhaps, because an onen is in a state of mental distress and might be uncomfortable eating meat, he can be described as השעה דחוקה לו as discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:2, which would permit him to forgo eating meat on Shabbos]</ref> to eat meat and drink wine.<ref>On Yom Tov, it would appear that all agree that an onen is obligated to do so; cf. Shaarei Teshuvah 241:13. See Orach Chaim 696:7 regarding one whose relative died on Purim.</ref>
# However, tashmish hamittah is prohibited for the onen even on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Moed Kattan 18a. Rabbeinu Yonah (on Rif Brachos 10b) writes that this is because it shows an excessive sense of frivolity, and Ramban (Torah HaAdam pg. 73 in Chavel edition) writes that the reason is because of כבוד המת, one must still show deference to the deceased.</ref>
# Poskim dispute whether an onen is permitted to study Torah on Shabbos<ref>Dagul Mervavah to Magen Avraham O.C. 548:8 believes that it is permitted, but Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 341:1 writes that it is prohibited. Badei Hashulchan 399:15 writes that it is permitted for an onen to study Torah on Yom Tov but not on Shabbos, like an avel.</ref> can be called to the Torah<ref>Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 241:1 writes that because the Shulchan Aruch paskens in Y.D. 400:1 that an avel is prohibited from learning Torah on Shabbos, an avel and onen should therefore not be given an aliyah. </ref> or, if he is a kohen, perform [[Birkat Cohanim]].<ref>Mishnah Berurah O.C. 128:148 writes that ideally he should not perform birkat Kohanim, but if he was called up to do so, there is a dispute whether or not he should.</ref>
# On Motzei Shabbat, the onen does not make [[Havdalah]].<ref>Rosh Brachos 3:1, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:2</ref> However, he should make havdalah once the aninus period is over (until Tuesday),<ref>ibid. This is not true regarding havdalah after yom tov, see Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 196.</ref> (unless someone else made havdalah for him/her already).<ref>Yabia Omer vol. 5 O.C. 10, Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah Aninus 7:22, Shevet Halevi 3:167</ref>
==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Shiva

2016-06-07T21:51:38Z

Sbmb:

Aninut

2016-06-07T11:26:36Z

Sbmb: Redirected page to Onen

#REDIRECT [[Onen]]

Onen

2016-06-07T11:14:35Z

Sbmb:

An "onen"<ref>This term is used several times in Chazal, and is derived from the pasuk in Devarim 26:14. Brachos 18b refers to a person "dead is lying before him," and this appears to be the same category as one who would be described as an "onen," although the equivalence of these two phrases is not necessarily absolute. M'Deoraisa, an onen is prohibited from eating kodshim or maaser sheni, as evident from Vayikra 10:19 and Devarim 26:14 respectively.</ref> is a person whose immediate relative has died and is yet to be buried.<ref>Yerushalmi Pesachim 8:8 records a dispute as to whether or not aninus Deoraisa, the day of death, continues until nightfall even if the burial already took place. Ramban (Toras HaAdam "Aninus") believes that it does, but Rashi to Zevachim 15b and 90b writes that it does not. In practice, one does not observe aninus after the burial at all even if it is still the day of death (Bach and Shach Y.D. 341:2).</ref> The state of being an onen is called "aninus".

==Upon Whom and When Does Aninus Apply==
# A person is an "onen" from the time that he hears of the death of any one of his seven relatives, until the time of burial. Generally, anyone obligated in [[mourning]] after the burial is obligated to observe aninus before the burial.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:1. The Badei Hashulchan (341:4, Biurim page 75-76) writes, against Sh"t Bnyan Tziyon 113, that it is best to be stringent regarding meat, wine, and tashmish even for a child who has died before living out thirty days, despite the fact that there is no aveilus for such a child, but such a person is still obligated in mitzvos.</ref>
# The common practice is that even someone whose relative that has passed away is in a different city, or another relative is taking care of the burial needs, is still considered an "onen".<ref>Rabbeinu Tam, as quoted in Tosfos Brachos 18b and Rosh Brachos 3:3, did not consider himself to be an onen when his married sister died, either because his sister's husband would take care of the burial, or, as explained by the Bach Yoreh Deah 341:4 (and Shach Y.D. 341:5) explains, because he was in a different city. Either way, the Rosh there and Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 341:1) writes that this opinion was not accepted.</ref> However, not all agree with this view.<ref>See Shach Y.D. 341:4</ref>
# Nowadays most communities have specific people who deal with the meis and the burial, such as a "Chevra Kadisha," and so the immediate relatives of the deceased do not take care of the burial directly.<ref>This is the generally understood meaning of 'כתפים' in Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, cf. Moed Katan 22a</ref> Although some have stated that this custom frees the relatives from their status as onenim,<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:3 based on Tosfos Brachos 18b, Tur Y.D. 375 quoting Behag, Toras HaAdam (Chavel ed.) p. 70, Chochmas Adam Klal 153:3</ref> others believe that a relative is only free from being an onen if he does not accompany the meis to the burial.<ref>Noda Biyhudah Tinyana Y.D 211 cited in Pischei Teshuvah 341:1, cf. Hagahos Maimoni Hil. Eivel 3:6.</ref> While some communities follow the first view, most believe that a person is still an onen nowadays when a Chevra Kadisha takes care of the meis.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 341:20-23 writes that this must be the case, considering that the Shulchan Aruch paskens (341:1) that even a relative who is in a faraway city and will not be involved in the burial is still an onen. Rather, the Gemara is referring to those who have followed the meis until a certain point, and then return home while the meis is sent to be buried.</ref>
# One who only accompanies the meis only until a certain point, but not all the way to the burial, is no longer an onen once they leave the meis.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2, Hashulchan Y.D. 341:21-22. Although the Aruch Hashulchan in 324:23 indicates that this is only true if the meis will be traveling for at least a two-day's journey, see Minchas Shelomo 91:25. See there also regarding a relative who will not be with the meis at all the entire time</ref>
# The relatives of someone who died in captivity do not practice aninus at all, and not aveilus until the burial.<ref>Tosfos Brachos 18a, Rambam Hilchos Avel 1:3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:4, Shach 341:15</ref> However, many believe that this was only the case if the captors wouldn't release the body until ransom negotiations were made, but today, if the meis is being held for medical or legal reasons, aninus does apply right away, because one can be sure that the meis will be returned to the family eventually.<ref>Noda BiYhudah Tinyanana Y.D. 211, Aruch Hashulchan 341:18</ref>
==Practices of the Onen==
# There is a dispute regarding whether or not the onen also has the restrictions of an [[Avel]], namely, if the onen may sit on a chair, wash, greet people, etc.<ref>cf. Tur who quotes this dispute between Rambam, Ritz Gayes, and Baalei HaTosafos against the Ramban and Rabbeinu Peretz, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:5, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 341:23-28 insists that the opinion of the Rama is actually to permit these behaviors, cf. Sh"T Chasam Sofer II Y.D. 324</ref>
# The onen is not permitted to eat in the same room as the meis, but if it is impossible to move to another room, he should at least put up a partition, or at the very least turn away, so as not to eat in front of the meis.<ref>Brachos 18a, Rashi there explains that doing so would be לועג לרש. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1, Aruch Hashulchan 341:7 notes that this is the halacha even on Shabbos. The Gemara there also writes that the onen should not recline while eating.</ref>
# An onen is prohibited from eating meat or drinking wine.<ref>ibid. Aruch Hashulchan 341:9 writes that other drinks, and a food cooked with meat, are both permitted to the onen- however, the onen should not eat unnecessary snacks and the like.</ref>
# Most say that tashimish hamitah is prohibited for an onen, and that is the custom.<ref>Although Tur Y.D. 341 quotes the Ritz Gayes as permitting, the Gemara indicates that it is prohibited, and that is how Ramban and the Baalei HaTosafos quote, and is implied to be the psak of the Rama in Y.D. 341:5</ref>
==Exemption from Mitzvot==
# An onen is exempt from doing any mitzvah,<ref>Gemara Brachos 17b and Moed Katan 23b, Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:6), Mishna Brurah 71:4. Rabbeinu Yonah to Rif Brachos 10b mentions the possibility that an onen is only expempt from mitzvos requiring special intent, such as [[Shema]] and [[Tefillah]], but this opinion has not been accepted.</ref> either because he is considered preoccupied with the mitzvah of burying his relative<ref>Cf. Rashi to Brachos 17b s.v. "mi shemeiso" and Toras HaOlah "Inyan Aninus." Levush Y.D. 341 writes that even a relative who is not actively involved in taking care of the burial is still mentally preoccupied enough to apply the principle of עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה</ref> or out of respect for the deceased.<ref>Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, Tosfos Brachos 17b. This is the explanation preferred by Chachmas Adam 157:5</ref>
# Most poskim believe that an onen would not count towards a [[Minyan]].<ref>Gilyon Maharsha to Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341, Beer Heitev Shulchan Aruch O.C. 55, Shevus Yaakov 25. The Peri Chadash to O.C. 55 indicated that an onen who is not actively involved in the burial would count towards the minyan</ref>
# An onen may not decide on his own to perform mitvzos even if (s)he wants to do so<ref>This is the opinion of the Yerushalmi, as quoted by Tosfos Brachos 18a, against the implication of Rashi there, both of which are quoted in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1. However, Mishnah Berurah O.C. 78:7 understands the Shulchan Aruch's actual opinion to be like the Yerushalmi. If aninus is derabanan (which is almost certainly the case after nightfall of the day of death), then perhaps one would still be obligated in mitzvos that would be actively violated, see Kovetz HeAros Yevamos #69 and Pri Megadim's Pesicha Koleles 2:28. The Noda BiYhudah believes that the onen is allowed to count [[Sefirat HaOmer]] in order so as not to lose out on counting the whole sefirah, and R. Shlomo Kluger (Sefer HaChayim no. 71) uses similar reasoning to say that an onen is permitted to recite Kiddush Levanah if others are taking care of the burial.</ref>
# An onen is exempt from all [[brachot]], and can therefore eat without making any [[Birchot]] HaNehenin. <ref>The Rash MeShantz (Mishna Damai 1:4 s.v. UMazminin Alav) implies that an onen is obligated to say [[brachot]] for himself but may not exempt others, although his position is against that of Rashi and Tosfos to Brachos 18a. The Mishna Brurah 71:4 paskens that an onen is exempt from all [[brachot]].</ref>
# An onen is permitted to wear his tallit kattan as usual, but should not make a bracha on it.<ref>Minchas Shelomo 1:91:25</ref>
# Some say that a person who became an onen after the time for [[Shacharit]] or [[Mincha]] began and didn’t yet pray is obligated to pray a [[Tashlumin]]<ref> Mishna Brurah 71, Magen Giborim and Derech HaChaim</ref> although some argue.<ref>Yad Efrayim (Aninut 29), Birkei Yosef 341:17, Chachmat Shlomo 71, and Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 6:11 hold that one is exempt from [[Tashlumin]].</ref>
==Aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov==
# The generally accepted pesak is that there is no aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov,<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1 based upon the Rosh</ref> and so an onen still performs all the usual mitzvos and brachos, including going to shul, on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Against what is written in the Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1. The Shulchan Aruch paskens that this is true if the onen is not doing anything at all to get ready for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov. If the onen is preparing for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov in a manner that is permitted, then the Shulchan Aruch writes that such a person would be a full onen even on Shabbos. Regarding Yom Tov Sheni of the diaspora, see Igros Moshe O.C. 3:76 who insists that today burials should not be performed on Yom Tov Sheni even by non-Jews.</ref>
# On Shabbos, therefore, the onen is permitted (but not necessarily obligated)<ref>Rama Y.D. 341:1 and Shach 341:7 indicate that there is no obligation to eat meat or drink wine on Shabbos for anyone. However, based upon the Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:1 and 250:2, the Badei Hashulchan 341:41 believes that someone who can afford to eat meat on Shabbos must do so, and this includes an onen. [Perhaps, because an onen is in a state of mental distress and might be uncomfortable eating meat, he can be described as השעה דחוקה לו as discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:2, which would permit him to forgo eating meat on Shabbos]</ref> to eat meat and drink wine.<ref>On Yom Tov, it would appear that all agree that an onen is obligated to do so; cf. Shaarei Teshuvah 241:13. See Orach Chaim 696:7 regarding one whose relative died on Purim.</ref>
# However, tashmish hamittah is prohibited for the onen even on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Moed Kattan 18a. Rabbeinu Yonah (on Rif Brachos 10b) writes that this is because it shows an excessive sense of frivolity, and Ramban (Torah HaAdam pg. 73 in Chavel edition) writes that the reason is because of כבוד המת, one must still show deference to the deceased.</ref>
# Poskim dispute whether an onen is permitted to study Torah on Shabbos<ref>Dagul Mervavah to Magen Avraham O.C. 548:8 believes that it is permitted, but Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 341:1 writes that it is prohibited. Badei Hashulchan 399:15 writes that it is permitted for an onen to study Torah on Yom Tov but not on Shabbos, like an avel.</ref> can be called to the Torah<ref>Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 241:1 writes that because the Shulchan Aruch paskens in Y.D. 400:1 that an avel is prohibited from learning Torah on Shabbos, an avel and onen should therefore not be given an aliyah. </ref> or, if he is a kohen, perform [[Birkat Cohanim]].<ref>Mishnah Berurah O.C. 128:148 writes that ideally he should not perform birkat Kohanim, but if he was called up to do so, there is a dispute whether or not he should.</ref>
# On Motzei Shabbat, the onen does not make [[Havdalah]].<ref>Rosh Brachos 3:1, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:2</ref> However, he should make havdalah once the aninus period is over (until Tuesday),<ref>ibid. This is not true regarding havdalah after yom tov, see Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 196.</ref> (unless someone else made havdalah for him/her already).<ref>Yabia Omer vol. 5 O.C. 10, Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah Aninus 7:22, Shevet Halevi 3:167</ref>
==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Onen

2016-06-07T10:44:46Z

Sbmb: /* Aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov */

An "onen"<ref>This term is used several times in Chazal, and is derived from the pasuk in Devarim 26:14. Brachos 18b refers to a person "dead is lying before him," and this appears to be the same category as one who would be described as an "onen," although the equivalence of these two phrases is not necessarily absolute. M'Deoraisa, an onen is prohibited from eating kodshim or maaser sheni, as evident from Vayikra 10:19 and Devarim 26:14 respectively.</ref> is a person whose immediate relative has died and is yet to be buried.<ref>Yerushalmi Pesachim 8:8 records a dispute as to whether or not aninus Deoraisa, the day of death, continues until nightfall even if the burial already took place. Ramban (Toras HaAdam "Aninus") believes that it does, but Rashi to Zevachim 15b and 90b writes that it does not. In practice, one does not observe aninus after the burial at all even if it is still the day of death (Bach and Shach Y.D. 341:2).</ref> The state of being an onen is called "aninus".

==Upon Whom and When Does Aninus Apply==
# A person is an "onen" from the time that he hears of the death of any one of his seven relatives, until the time of burial. Generally, anyone obligated in [[mourning]] after the burial is obligated to observe aninus before the burial.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:1. The Badei Hashulchan (341:4, Biurim page 75-76) writes, against Sh"t Bnyan Tziyon 113, that it is best to be stringent regarding meat, wine, and tashmish even for a child who has died before living out thirty days, despite the fact that there is no aveilus for such a child, but such a person is still obligated in mitzvos.</ref>
# The common practice is that even someone whose relative that has passed away is in a different city, or another relative is taking care of the burial needs, is still considered an "onen".<ref>Rabbeinu Tam, as quoted in Tosfos Brachos 18b and Rosh Brachos 3:3, did not consider himself to be an onen when his married sister died, either because his sister's husband would take care of the burial, or, as explained by the Bach Yoreh Deah 341:4 (and Shach Y.D. 341:5) explains, because he was in a different city. Either way, the Rosh there and Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 341:1) writes that this opinion was not accepted.</ref> However, not all agree with this view.<ref>See Shach Y.D. 341:4</ref>
# Nowadays most communities have specific people who deal with the meis and the burial, such as a "Chevra Kadisha," and so the immediate relatives of the deceased do not take care of the burial directly.<ref>This is the generally understood meaning of 'כתפים' in Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, cf. Moed Katan 22a</ref> Although some have stated that this custom frees the relatives from their status as onenim,<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:3 based on Tosfos Brachos 18b, Tur Y.D. 375 quoting Behag, Toras HaAdam (Chavel ed.) p. 70, Chochmas Adam Klal 153:3</ref> others believe that a relative is only free from being an onen if he does not accompany the meis to the burial.<ref>Noda Biyhudah Tinyana Y.D 211 cited in Pischei Teshuvah 341:1, cf. Hagahos Maimoni Hil. Eivel 3:6.</ref> While some communities follow the first view, most believe that a person is still an onen nowadays when a Chevra Kadisha takes care of the meis.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 341:20-23 writes that this must be the case, considering that the Shulchan Aruch paskens (341:1) that even a relative who is in a faraway city and will not be involved in the burial is still an onen. Rather, the Gemara is referring to those who have followed the meis until a certain point, and then return home while the meis is sent to be buried.</ref>
# One who only accompanies the meis only until a certain point, but not all the way to the burial, is no longer an onen once they leave the meis.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2, Hashulchan Y.D. 341:21-22. Although the Aruch Hashulchan in 324:23 indicates that this is only true if the meis will be traveling for at least a two-day's journey, see Minchas Shelomo 91:25. See there also regarding a relative who will not be with the meis at all the entire time</ref>
# The relatives of someone who died in captivity do not practice aninus at all, and not aveilus until the burial.<ref>Tosfos Brachos 18a, Rambam Hilchos Avel 1:3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:4, Shach 341:15</ref> However, many believe that this was only the case if the captors wouldn't release the body until ransom negotiations were made, but today, if the meis is being held for medical or legal reasons, aninus does apply right away, because one can be sure that the meis will be returned to the family eventually.<ref>Noda BiYhudah Tinyanana Y.D. 211, Aruch Hashulchan 341:18</ref>

==Aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov==
# The generally accepted pesak is that there is no aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov,<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1 based upon the Rosh</ref> and so an onen still performs all the usual mitzvos and brachos, including going to shul, on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Against what is written in the Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1. The Shulchan Aruch paskens that this is true if the onen is not doing anything at all to get ready for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov. If the onen is preparing for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov in a manner that is permitted, then the Shulchan Aruch writes that such a person would be a full onen even on Shabbos. Regarding Yom Tov Sheni of the diaspora, see Igros Moshe O.C. 3:76 who insists that today burials should not be performed on Yom Tov Sheni even by non-Jews.</ref>
# On Shabbos, therefore, the onen is permitted (but not necessarily obligated)<ref>Rama Y.D. 341:1 and Shach 341:7 indicate that there is no obligation to eat meat or drink wine on Shabbos for anyone. However, based upon the Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:1 and 250:2, the Badei Hashulchan 341:41 believes that someone who can afford to eat meat on Shabbos must do so, and this includes an onen. [Perhaps, because an onen is in a state of mental distress and might be uncomfortable eating meat, he can be described as השעה דחוקה לו as discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:2, which would permit him to forgo eating meat on Shabbos]</ref> to eat meat and drink wine.<ref>On Yom Tov, it would appear that all agree that an onen is obligated to do so; cf. Shaarei Teshuvah 241:13. See Orach Chaim 696:7 regarding one whose relative died on Purim.</ref>
# However, tashmish hamittah is prohibited for the onen even on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Moed Kattan 18a. Rabbeinu Yonah (on Rif Brachos 10b) writes that this is because it shows an excessive sense of frivolity, and Ramban (Torah HaAdam pg. 73 in Chavel edition) writes that the reason is because of כבוד המת, one must still show deference to the deceased.</ref>
# Poskim dispute whether an onen is permitted to study Torah on Shabbos<ref>Dagul Mervavah to Magen Avraham O.C. 548:8 believes that it is permitted, but Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 341:1 writes that it is prohibited. Badei Hashulchan 399:15 writes that it is permitted for an onen to study Torah on Yom Tov but not on Shabbos, like an avel.</ref> can be called to the Torah<ref>Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 241:1 writes that because the Shulchan Aruch paskens in Y.D. 400:1 that an avel is prohibited from learning Torah on Shabbos, an avel and onen should therefore not be given an aliyah. </ref> or, if he is a kohen, perform [[Birkat Cohanim]].<ref>Mishnah Berurah O.C. 128:148 writes that ideally he should not perform birkat Kohanim, but if he was called up to do so, there is a dispute whether or not he should.</ref>
# On Motzei Shabbat, the onen does not make [[Havdalah]].<ref>Rosh Brachos 3:1, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:2</ref> However, he should make havdalah once the aninus period is over (until Tuesday),<ref>ibid. This is not true regarding havdalah after yom tov, see Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 196.</ref> (unless someone else made havdalah for him/her already).<ref>Yabia Omer vol. 5 O.C. 10, Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah Aninus 7:22, Shevet Halevi 3:167</ref>

==Exemption from Mitzvot==
# An onen is exempt from doing any mitzvah,<ref>Gemara Brachos 17b and Moed Katan 23b, Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:6), Mishna Brurah 71:4. Rabbeinu Yonah to Rif Brachos 10b mentions the possibility that an onen is only expempt from mitzvos requiring special intent, such as [[Shema]] and [[Tefillah]], but this opinion has not been accepted.</ref> either because he is considered preoccupied with the mitzvah of burying his relative<ref>Cf. Rashi to Brachos 17b s.v. "mi shemeiso" and Toras HaOlah "Inyan Aninus." Levush Y.D. 341 writes that even a relative who is not actively involved in taking care of the burial is still mentally preoccupied enough to apply the principle of עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה</ref> or out of respect for the deceased.<ref>Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, Tosfos Brachos 17b. This is the explanation preferred by Chachmas Adam 157:5</ref>
# Most poskim believe that an onen would not count towards a [[Minyan]].<ref>Gilyon Maharsha to Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341, Beer Heitev Shulchan Aruch O.C. 55, Shevus Yaakov 25. The Peri Chadash to O.C. 55 indicated that an onen who is not actively involved in the burial would count towards the minyan</ref>
# An onen may not decide on his own to perform mitvzos even if (s)he wants to do so<ref>This is the opinion of the Yerushalmi, as quoted by Tosfos Brachos 18a, against the implication of Rashi there, both of which are quoted in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1. However, Mishnah Berurah O.C. 78:7 understands the Shulchan Aruch's actual opinion to be like the Yerushalmi. If aninus is derabanan (which is almost certainly the case after nightfall of the day of death), then perhaps one would still be obligated in mitzvos that would be actively violated, see Kovetz HeAros Yevamos #69 and Pri Megadim's Pesicha Koleles 2:28. The Noda BiYhudah believes that the onen is allowed to count [[Sefirat HaOmer]] in order so as not to lose out on counting the whole sefirah, and R. Shlomo Kluger (Sefer HaChayim no. 71) uses similar reasoning to say that an onen is permitted to recite Kiddush Levanah if others are taking care of the burial.</ref>
# An onen is exempt from all [[brachot]], and can therefore eat without making any [[Birchot]] HaNehenin. <ref>The Rash MeShantz (Mishna Damai 1:4 s.v. UMazminin Alav) implies that an onen is obligated to say [[brachot]] for himself but may not exempt others, although his position is against that of Rashi and Tosfos to Brachos 18a. The Mishna Brurah 71:4 paskens that an onen is exempt from all [[brachot]].</ref>
# An onen is permitted to wear his tallit kattan as usual, but should not make a bracha on it.<ref>Minchas Shelomo 1:91:25</ref>
# Some say that a person who became an onen after the time for [[Shacharit]] or [[Mincha]] began and didn’t yet pray is obligated to pray a [[Tashlumin]]<ref> Mishna Brurah 71, Magen Giborim and Derech HaChaim</ref> although some argue.<ref>Yad Efrayim (Aninut 29), Birkei Yosef 341:17, Chachmat Shlomo 71, and Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 6:11 hold that one is exempt from [[Tashlumin]].</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Onen

2016-06-05T16:35:37Z

Sbmb: /* Exemption from Mitzvot */

An "onen"<ref>This term is used several times in Chazal, and is derived from the pasuk in Devarim 26:14. Brachos 18b refers to a person "dead is lying before him," and this appears to be the same category as one who would be described as an "onen," although the equivalence of these two phrases is not necessarily absolute. M'Deoraisa, an onen is prohibited from eating kodshim or maaser sheni, as evident from Vayikra 10:19 and Devarim 26:14 respectively.</ref> is a person whose immediate relative has died and is yet to be buried.<ref>Yerushalmi Pesachim 8:8 records a dispute as to whether or not aninus Deoraisa, the day of death, continues until nightfall even if the burial already took place. Ramban (Toras HaAdam "Aninus") believes that it does, but Rashi to Zevachim 15b and 90b writes that it does not. In practice, one does not observe aninus after the burial at all even if it is still the day of death (Bach and Shach Y.D. 341:2).</ref> The state of being an onen is called "aninus".

==Upon Whom and When Does Aninus Apply==
# A person is an "onen" from the time that he hears of the death of any one of his seven relatives, until the time of burial. Generally, anyone obligated in [[mourning]] after the burial is obligated to observe aninus before the burial.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:1. The Badei Hashulchan (341:4, Biurim page 75-76) writes, against Sh"t Bnyan Tziyon 113, that it is best to be stringent regarding meat, wine, and tashmish even for a child who has died before living out thirty days, despite the fact that there is no aveilus for such a child, but such a person is still obligated in mitzvos.</ref>
# The common practice is that even someone whose relative that has passed away is in a different city, or another relative is taking care of the burial needs, is still considered an "onen".<ref>Rabbeinu Tam, as quoted in Tosfos Brachos 18b and Rosh Brachos 3:3, did not consider himself to be an onen when his married sister died, either because his sister's husband would take care of the burial, or, as explained by the Bach Yoreh Deah 341:4 (and Shach Y.D. 341:5) explains, because he was in a different city. Either way, the Rosh there and Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 341:1) writes that this opinion was not accepted.</ref> However, not all agree with this view.<ref>See Shach Y.D. 341:4</ref>
# Nowadays most communities have specific people who deal with the meis and the burial, such as a "Chevra Kadisha," and so the immediate relatives of the deceased do not take care of the burial directly.<ref>This is the generally understood meaning of 'כתפים' in Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, cf. Moed Katan 22a</ref> Although some have stated that this custom frees the relatives from their status as onenim,<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:3 based on Tosfos Brachos 18b, Tur Y.D. 375 quoting Behag, Toras HaAdam (Chavel ed.) p. 70, Chochmas Adam Klal 153:3</ref> others believe that a relative is only free from being an onen if he does not accompany the meis to the burial.<ref>Noda Biyhudah Tinyana Y.D 211 cited in Pischei Teshuvah 341:1, cf. Hagahos Maimoni Hil. Eivel 3:6.</ref> While some communities follow the first view, most believe that a person is still an onen nowadays when a Chevra Kadisha takes care of the meis.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 341:20-23 writes that this must be the case, considering that the Shulchan Aruch paskens (341:1) that even a relative who is in a faraway city and will not be involved in the burial is still an onen. Rather, the Gemara is referring to those who have followed the meis until a certain point, and then return home while the meis is sent to be buried.</ref>
# One who only accompanies the meis only until a certain point, but not all the way to the burial, is no longer an onen once they leave the meis.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2, Hashulchan Y.D. 341:21-22. Although the Aruch Hashulchan in 324:23 indicates that this is only true if the meis will be traveling for at least a two-day's journey, see Minchas Shelomo 91:25. See there also regarding a relative who will not be with the meis at all the entire time</ref>
# The relatives of someone who died in captivity do not practice aninus at all, and not aveilus until the burial.<ref>Tosfos Brachos 18a, Rambam Hilchos Avel 1:3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:4, Shach 341:15</ref> However, many believe that this was only the case if the captors wouldn't release the body until ransom negotiations were made, but today, if the meis is being held for medical or legal reasons, aninus does apply right away, because one can be sure that the meis will be returned to the family eventually.<ref>Noda BiYhudah Tinyanana Y.D. 211, Aruch Hashulchan 341:18</ref>

==Aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov==
# The generally accepted pesak is that there is no aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov,<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1 based upon the Rosh</ref> and so an onen still performs all the usual mitzvos and brachos, including going to shul, on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Against what is written in the Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1. The Shulchan Aruch paskens that this is true if the onen is not doing anything at all to get ready for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov. If the onen is preparing for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov in a manner that is permitted, then the Shulchan Aruch writes that such a person would be a full onen even on Shabbos. Regarding Yom Tov Sheni of the diaspora, see Igros Moshe O.C. 3:76 who insists that today burials should not be performed on Yom Tov Sheni even by non-Jews.</ref>
# On Shabbos, therefore, the onen is permitted (but not necessarily obligated)<ref>Rama Y.D. 341:1 and Shach 341:7 indicate that there is no obligation to eat meat or drink wine on Shabbos for anyone. However, based upon the Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:1 and 250:2, the Badei Hashulchan 341:41 believes that someone who can afford to eat meat on Shabbos must do so, and this includes an onen. [Perhaps, because an onen is in a state of mental distress and might be uncomfortable eating meat, he can be described as השעה דחוקה לו as discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:2, which would permit him to forgo eating meat on Shabbos]</ref> to eat meat and drink wine.<ref>On Yom Tov, it would appear that all agree that an onen is obligated to do so; cf. Shaarei Teshuvah 241:13. See Orach Chaim 696:7 regarding one whose relative died on Purim.</ref>
# However, tashmish hamittah is prohibited for the onen even on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Moed Kattan 18a. Rabbeinu Yonah (on Rif Brachos 10b) writes that this is because it shows an excessive sense of frivolity, and Ramban (Torah HaAdam pg. 73 in Chavel edition) writes that the reason is because of כבוד המת, one must still show deference to the deceased.</ref>
# Poskim dispute whether an onen is permitted to study Torah on Shabbos<ref>Dagul Mervavah to Magen Avraham O.C. 548:8 believes that it is permitted, but Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 341:1 writes that it is prohibited. Badei Hashulchan 399:15 writes that it is permitted for an onen to study Torah on Yom Tov but not on Shabbos, like an avel.</ref> can be called to the Torah<ref>Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 241:1 writes that because the Shulchan Aruch paskens in Y.D. 400:1 that an avel is prohibited from learning Torah on Shabbos, an avel and onen should therefore not be given an aliyah. </ref> or, if he is a kohen, perform [[Birkat Cohanim]].<ref>Mishnah Berurah O.C. 128:148 writes that ideally he should not perform birkat Kohanim, but if he was called up to do so, there is a dispute whether or not he should.</ref>

==Exemption from Mitzvot==
# An onen is exempt from doing any mitzvah,<ref>Gemara Brachos 17b and Moed Katan 23b, Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:6), Mishna Brurah 71:4. Rabbeinu Yonah to Rif Brachos 10b mentions the possibility that an onen is only expempt from mitzvos requiring special intent, such as [[Shema]] and [[Tefillah]], but this opinion has not been accepted.</ref> either because he is considered preoccupied with the mitzvah of burying his relative<ref>Cf. Rashi to Brachos 17b s.v. "mi shemeiso" and Toras HaOlah "Inyan Aninus." Levush Y.D. 341 writes that even a relative who is not actively involved in taking care of the burial is still mentally preoccupied enough to apply the principle of עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה</ref> or out of respect for the deceased.<ref>Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, Tosfos Brachos 17b. This is the explanation preferred by Chachmas Adam 157:5</ref>
# Most poskim believe that an onen would not count towards a [[Minyan]].<ref>Gilyon Maharsha to Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341, Beer Heitev Shulchan Aruch O.C. 55, Shevus Yaakov 25. The Peri Chadash to O.C. 55 indicated that an onen who is not actively involved in the burial would count towards the minyan</ref>
# An onen may not decide on his own to perform mitvzos even if (s)he wants to do so<ref>This is the opinion of the Yerushalmi, as quoted by Tosfos Brachos 18a, against the implication of Rashi there, both of which are quoted in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1. However, Mishnah Berurah O.C. 78:7 understands the Shulchan Aruch's actual opinion to be like the Yerushalmi. If aninus is derabanan (which is almost certainly the case after nightfall of the day of death), then perhaps one would still be obligated in mitzvos that would be actively violated, see Kovetz HeAros Yevamos #69 and Pri Megadim's Pesicha Koleles 2:28. The Noda BiYhudah believes that the onen is allowed to count [[Sefirat HaOmer]] in order so as not to lose out on counting the whole sefirah, and R. Shlomo Kluger (Sefer HaChayim no. 71) uses similar reasoning to say that an onen is permitted to recite Kiddush Levanah if others are taking care of the burial.</ref>
# An onen is exempt from all [[brachot]], and can therefore eat without making any [[Birchot]] HaNehenin. <ref>The Rash MeShantz (Mishna Damai 1:4 s.v. UMazminin Alav) implies that an onen is obligated to say [[brachot]] for himself but may not exempt others, although his position is against that of Rashi and Tosfos to Brachos 18a. The Mishna Brurah 71:4 paskens that an onen is exempt from all [[brachot]].</ref>
# An onen is permitted to wear his tallit kattan as usual, but should not make a bracha on it.<ref>Minchas Shelomo 1:91:25</ref>
# Some say that a person who became an onen after the time for [[Shacharit]] or [[Mincha]] began and didn’t yet pray is obligated to pray a [[Tashlumin]]<ref> Mishna Brurah 71, Magen Giborim and Derech HaChaim</ref> although some argue.<ref>Yad Efrayim (Aninut 29), Birkei Yosef 341:17, Chachmat Shlomo 71, and Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 6:11 hold that one is exempt from [[Tashlumin]].</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Onen

2016-06-05T14:20:18Z

Sbmb:

An "onen"<ref>This term is used several times in Chazal, and is derived from the pasuk in Devarim 26:14. Brachos 18b refers to a person "dead is lying before him," and this appears to be the same category as one who would be described as an "onen," although the equivalence of these two phrases is not necessarily absolute. M'Deoraisa, an onen is prohibited from eating kodshim or maaser sheni, as evident from Vayikra 10:19 and Devarim 26:14 respectively.</ref> is a person whose immediate relative has died and is yet to be buried.<ref>Yerushalmi Pesachim 8:8 records a dispute as to whether or not aninus Deoraisa, the day of death, continues until nightfall even if the burial already took place. Ramban (Toras HaAdam "Aninus") believes that it does, but Rashi to Zevachim 15b and 90b writes that it does not. In practice, one does not observe aninus after the burial at all even if it is still the day of death (Bach and Shach Y.D. 341:2).</ref> The state of being an onen is called "aninus".

==Upon Whom and When Does Aninus Apply==
# A person is an "onen" from the time that he hears of the death of any one of his seven relatives, until the time of burial. Generally, anyone obligated in [[mourning]] after the burial is obligated to observe aninus before the burial.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:1. The Badei Hashulchan (341:4, Biurim page 75-76) writes, against Sh"t Bnyan Tziyon 113, that it is best to be stringent regarding meat, wine, and tashmish even for a child who has died before living out thirty days, despite the fact that there is no aveilus for such a child, but such a person is still obligated in mitzvos.</ref>
# The common practice is that even someone whose relative that has passed away is in a different city, or another relative is taking care of the burial needs, is still considered an "onen".<ref>Rabbeinu Tam, as quoted in Tosfos Brachos 18b and Rosh Brachos 3:3, did not consider himself to be an onen when his married sister died, either because his sister's husband would take care of the burial, or, as explained by the Bach Yoreh Deah 341:4 (and Shach Y.D. 341:5) explains, because he was in a different city. Either way, the Rosh there and Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 341:1) writes that this opinion was not accepted.</ref> However, not all agree with this view.<ref>See Shach Y.D. 341:4</ref>
# Nowadays most communities have specific people who deal with the meis and the burial, such as a "Chevra Kadisha," and so the immediate relatives of the deceased do not take care of the burial directly.<ref>This is the generally understood meaning of 'כתפים' in Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, cf. Moed Katan 22a</ref> Although some have stated that this custom frees the relatives from their status as onenim,<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:3 based on Tosfos Brachos 18b, Tur Y.D. 375 quoting Behag, Toras HaAdam (Chavel ed.) p. 70, Chochmas Adam Klal 153:3</ref> others believe that a relative is only free from being an onen if he does not accompany the meis to the burial.<ref>Noda Biyhudah Tinyana Y.D 211 cited in Pischei Teshuvah 341:1, cf. Hagahos Maimoni Hil. Eivel 3:6.</ref> While some communities follow the first view, most believe that a person is still an onen nowadays when a Chevra Kadisha takes care of the meis.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 341:20-23 writes that this must be the case, considering that the Shulchan Aruch paskens (341:1) that even a relative who is in a faraway city and will not be involved in the burial is still an onen. Rather, the Gemara is referring to those who have followed the meis until a certain point, and then return home while the meis is sent to be buried.</ref>
# One who only accompanies the meis only until a certain point, but not all the way to the burial, is no longer an onen once they leave the meis.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2, Hashulchan Y.D. 341:21-22. Although the Aruch Hashulchan in 324:23 indicates that this is only true if the meis will be traveling for at least a two-day's journey, see Minchas Shelomo 91:25. See there also regarding a relative who will not be with the meis at all the entire time</ref>
# The relatives of someone who died in captivity do not practice aninus at all, and not aveilus until the burial.<ref>Tosfos Brachos 18a, Rambam Hilchos Avel 1:3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:4, Shach 341:15</ref> However, many believe that this was only the case if the captors wouldn't release the body until ransom negotiations were made, but today, if the meis is being held for medical or legal reasons, aninus does apply right away, because one can be sure that the meis will be returned to the family eventually.<ref>Noda BiYhudah Tinyanana Y.D. 211, Aruch Hashulchan 341:18</ref>

==Aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov==
# The generally accepted pesak is that there is no aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov,<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1 based upon the Rosh</ref> and so an onen still performs all the usual mitzvos and brachos, including going to shul, on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Against what is written in the Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1. The Shulchan Aruch paskens that this is true if the onen is not doing anything at all to get ready for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov. If the onen is preparing for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov in a manner that is permitted, then the Shulchan Aruch writes that such a person would be a full onen even on Shabbos. Regarding Yom Tov Sheni of the diaspora, see Igros Moshe O.C. 3:76 who insists that today burials should not be performed on Yom Tov Sheni even by non-Jews.</ref>
# On Shabbos, therefore, the onen is permitted (but not necessarily obligated)<ref>Rama Y.D. 341:1 and Shach 341:7 indicate that there is no obligation to eat meat or drink wine on Shabbos for anyone. However, based upon the Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:1 and 250:2, the Badei Hashulchan 341:41 believes that someone who can afford to eat meat on Shabbos must do so, and this includes an onen. [Perhaps, because an onen is in a state of mental distress and might be uncomfortable eating meat, he can be described as השעה דחוקה לו as discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:2, which would permit him to forgo eating meat on Shabbos]</ref> to eat meat and drink wine.<ref>On Yom Tov, it would appear that all agree that an onen is obligated to do so; cf. Shaarei Teshuvah 241:13. See Orach Chaim 696:7 regarding one whose relative died on Purim.</ref>
# However, tashmish hamittah is prohibited for the onen even on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Moed Kattan 18a. Rabbeinu Yonah (on Rif Brachos 10b) writes that this is because it shows an excessive sense of frivolity, and Ramban (Torah HaAdam pg. 73 in Chavel edition) writes that the reason is because of כבוד המת, one must still show deference to the deceased.</ref>
# Poskim dispute whether an onen is permitted to study Torah on Shabbos<ref>Dagul Mervavah to Magen Avraham O.C. 548:8 believes that it is permitted, but Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 341:1 writes that it is prohibited. Badei Hashulchan 399:15 writes that it is permitted for an onen to study Torah on Yom Tov but not on Shabbos, like an avel.</ref> can be called to the Torah<ref>Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 241:1 writes that because the Shulchan Aruch paskens in Y.D. 400:1 that an avel is prohibited from learning Torah on Shabbos, an avel and onen should therefore not be given an aliyah. </ref> or, if he is a kohen, perform [[Birkat Cohanim]].<ref>Mishnah Berurah O.C. 128:148 writes that ideally he should not perform birkat Kohanim, but if he was called up to do so, there is a dispute whether or not he should.</ref>

==Exemption from Mitzvot==
# An onen is exempt from doing any mitzvah,<ref>Gemara Brachos 17b and Moed Katan 23b, Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:6), Mishna Brurah 71:4. Rabbeinu Yonah to Rif Brachos 10b mentions the possibility that an onen is only expempt from mitzvos requiring special intent, such as [[Shema]] and [[Tefillah]], but this opinion has not been accepted.</ref> either because he is considered preoccupied with the mitzvah of burying his relative<ref>Cf. Rashi to Brachos 17b s.v. "mi shemeiso" and Toras HaOlah "Inyan Aninus." Levush Y.D. 341 writes that even a relative who is not actively involved in taking care of the burial is still mentally preoccupied enough to apply the principle of עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה</ref> or out of respect for the deceased.<ref>Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, Tosfos Brachos 17b. This is the explanation preferred by Chachmas Adam 157:5</ref>
# An onen may not decide on his own to perform mitvzos even if (s)he wants to do so<ref>As quoted in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1, Mishnah Berurah O.C. 78:7 understands this to be the Shulchan Aruch's actual opinion. If aninus is derabanan (which is almost certainly the case after nightfall of the day of death), then perhaps one would still be obligated in mitzvos that would be actively violated, see Kovetz HeAros Yevamos #69. The Noda BiYhudah believes that the onen is allowed to count [[Sefirat HaOmer]] in order so as not to lose out on counting the whole sefirah, and R. Shlomo Kluger (Sefer HaChayim no. 71) uses similar reasoning to say that an onen is permitted to recite Kiddush Levanah if others are taking care of the burial.</ref>
# An onen is exempt from all [[brachot]], and can therefore eat without making any [[Birchot]] HaNehenin. <ref>The Rash MeShantz (Mishna Damai 1:4 s.v. UMazminin Alav) implies that an onen is obligated to say [[brachot]] for himself but may not exempt others, although his position is against that of Rashi (SOURCE) explains the mishna. The Mishna Brurah 71:4 writes that an onen is exempt from all [[brachot]].</ref>
# An onen is permitted to wear his tallit kattan as usual, but should not make a bracha on it.<ref>Minchas Shelomo 1:91:25</ref>
# Even one who is an onen for more than one day should not wear [[Tefillin]].
# A person who became a mourner after the time for [[Shacharit]] or [[Mincha]] began and didn’t yet pray, some say he’s obligated to make [[Tashlumin]] and some argue <ref> Mishna Brurah 71, Magen Giborim and Derech HaChaim hold that a person is chayav, while the Yad Efrayim (Aninut 29), Birkei Yosef 341:17, Chachmat Shlomo 71, and Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 6:11 hold that one is exempt from [[Tashlumin]]. </ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Shiva

2016-06-05T14:14:42Z

Sbmb:

Onen

2016-06-03T21:16:12Z

Sbmb:

{{Lacking}}
An "onen" is a person whose immediate relative has died<ref>This term is used several times in Chazal, and is derived from the pasuk in Devarim 26:14. Brachos 18b refers to a person "dead is lying before him," and this appears to be the same category as one who would be described as an "onen," although the equivalence of these two phrases is not necessarily absolute.</ref> and is yet to be buried.<ref>Yerushalmi Pesachim 8:8 records a dispute as to whether or not aninus Deoraisa, the day of death, continues until nightfall even if the burial already took place. Ramban (Toras HaAdam "Aninus") believes that it does, but Rashi to Zevachim 15b and 90b writes that it does not. In practice, one does not observe aninus after the burial at all even if it is still the day of death (Bach and Shach Y.D. 341:2).</ref> The state of being an onen is called "aninus".<ref>M'Deoraisa, an onen is prohibited from eating kodshim or maaser sheni, as evident from Vayikra 10:19 and Devarim 26:14 respectively.</ref>

==Upon Whom and When Does Aninus Apply==
# A person is an "onen" from the time that he hears of the death of any one of his seven relatives, until the time of burial. These seven relatives are: 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> Generally, anyone obligated in [[mourning]] after the burial is obligated to observe aninus before the burial.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:1. The Badei Hashulchan (341:4, Biurim page 75-76) writes, against Sh"t Bnyan Tziyon 113, that it is best to be stringent regarding meat, wine, and tashmish even for a child who has died before living out thirty days, despite the fact that there is no aveilus for such a child, but such a person is still obligated in mitzvos.</ref>
# The common practice is that even someone whose relative that has passed away is in a different city, or another relative is taking care of the burial needs, is still considered an "onen".<ref>Rabbeinu Tam, as quoted in Tosfos Brachos 18b and Rosh Brachos 3:3, did not consider himself to be an onen when his married sister died, either because his sister's husband would take care of the burial, or, as explained by the Bach Yoreh Deah 341:4 (and Shach Y.D. 341:5) explains, because he was in a different city. Either way, the Rosh there and Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 341:1) writes that this opinion was not accepted.</ref> However, not all agree with this view.<ref>See Shach Y.D. 341:4</ref>
# Nowadays most communities have specific people who deal with the meis and the burial, such as a "Chevra Kadisha," and so the immediate relatives of the deceased do not take care of the burial directly.<ref>This is the generally understood meaning of 'כתפים' in Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, cf. Moed Katan 22a</ref> Although some have stated that this custom frees the relatives from their status as onenim,<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:3 based on Tosfos Brachos 18b, Tur Y.D. 375 quoting Behag, Toras HaAdam (Chavel ed.) p. 70, Chochmas Adam Klal 153:3</ref> others believe that a relative is only free from being an onen if he does not accompany the meis to the burial.<ref>Noda Biyhudah Tinyana Y.D 211 cited in Pischei Teshuvah 341:1, cf. Hagahos Maimoni Hil. Eivel 3:6.</ref> While some communities follow the first view, most believe that a person is still an onen nowadays when a Chevra Kadisha takes care of the meis.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 341:20-23 writes that this must be the case, considering that the Shulchan Aruch paskens (341:1) that even a relative who is in a faraway city and will not be involved in the burial is still an onen. Rather, the Gemara is referring to those who have followed the meis until a certain point, and then return home while the meis is sent to be buried.</ref>
# One who only accompanies the meis only until a certain point, but not all the way to the burial, is no longer an onen once they leave the meis.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2, Hashulchan Y.D. 341:21-22. Although the Aruch Hashulchan in 324:23 indicates that this is only true if the meis will be traveling for at least a two-day's journey, see Minchas Shelomo 91:25. See there also regarding a relative who will not be with the meis at all the entire time</ref>
# The relatives of someone who died in captivity do not practice aninus at all, and not aveilus until the burial.<ref>Tosfos Brachos 18a, Rambam Hilchos Avel 1:3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:4, Shach 341:15</ref> However, many believe that this was only the case if the captors wouldn't release the body until ransom negotiations were made, but today, if the meis is being held for medical or legal reasons, aninus does apply right away, because one can be sure that the meis will be returned to the family eventually.<ref>Noda BiYhudah Tinyanana Y.D. 211, Aruch Hashulchan 341:18</ref>
==Aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov==
# The generally accepted pesak is that there is no aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov,<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1 based upon the Rosh</ref> and so an onen still performs all the usual mitzvos and brachos, including going to shul, on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Against what is written in the Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1. The Shulchan Aruch paskens that this is true if the onen is not doing anything at all to get ready for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov. If the onen is preparing for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov in a manner that is permitted, then the Shulchan Aruch writes that such a person would be a full onen even on Shabbos. Regarding Yom Tov Sheni of the diaspora, see Igros Moshe O.C. 3:76 who insists that today burials should not be performed on Yom Tov Sheni even by non-Jews.</ref>
# On Shabbos, therefore, the onen is permitted (but not necessarily obligated)<ref>Rama Y.D. 341:1 and Shach 341:7 indicate that there is no obligation to eat meat or drink wine on Shabbos for anyone. However, based upon the Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:1 and 250:2, the Badei Hashulchan 341:41 believes that someone who can afford to eat meat on Shabbos must do so, and this includes an onen. [Perhaps, because an onen is in a state of mental distress and might be uncomfortable eating meat, he can be described as השעה דחוקה לו as discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:2, which would permit him to forgo eating meat on Shabbos]</ref> to eat meat and drink wine.<ref>On Yom Tov, it would appear that all agree that an onen is obligated to do so; cf. Shaarei Teshuvah 241:13. See Orach Chaim 696:7 regarding one whose relative died on Purim.</ref>
# However, tashmish hamittah is prohibited for the onen even on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Moed Kattan 18a. Rabbeinu Yonah (on Rif Brachos 10b) writes that this is because it shows an excessive sense of frivolity, and Ramban (Torah HaAdam pg. 73 in Chavel edition) writes that the reason is because of כבוד המת, one must still show deference to the deceased.</ref>
# Poskim dispute whether an onen is permitted to study Torah on Shabbos<ref>Dagul Mervavah to Magen Avraham O.C. 548:8 believes that it is permitted, but Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 341:1 writes that it is prohibited. Badei Hashulchan 399:15 writes that it is permitted for an onen to study Torah on Yom Tov but not on Shabbos, like an avel.</ref> can be called to the Torah<ref>Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 241:1 writes that because the Shulchan Aruch paskens in Y.D. 400:1 that an avel is prohibited from learning Torah on Shabbos, an avel and onen should therefore not be given an aliyah. </ref> or, if he is a kohen, perform [[Birkat Cohanim]].<ref>Mishnah Berurah O.C. 128:148 writes that ideally he should not perform birkat Kohanim, but if he was called up to do so, there is a dispute whether or not he should.</ref>

==Exemption from Mitzvot==
# An onen is exempt from doing any mitzvah,<ref>Gemara Brachos 17b and Moed Katan 23b, Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:6), Mishna Brurah 71:4. Rabbeinu Yonah to Rif Brachos 10b mentions the possibility that an onen is only expempt from mitzvos requiring special intent, such as [[Shema]] and [[Tefillah]], but this opinion has not been accepted.</ref> either because he is considered preoccupied with the mitzvah of burying his relative<ref>Cf. Rashi to Brachos 17b s.v. "mi shemeiso" and Toras HaOlah "Inyan Aninus." Levush Y.D. 341 writes that even a relative who is not actively involved in taking care of the burial is still mentally preoccupied enough to apply the principle of עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה</ref> or out of respect for the deceased.<ref>Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, Tosfos Brachos 17b. This is the explanation preferred by Chachmas Adam 157:5</ref>
# An onen may not decide on his own to perform mitvzos even if (s)he wants to do so<ref>As quoted in Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1, Mishnah Berurah O.C. 78:7 understands this to be the Shulchan Aruch's actual opinion. If aninus is derabanan (which is almost certainly the case after nightfall of the day of death), then perhaps one would still be obligated in mitzvos that would be actively violated, see Kovetz HeAros Yevamos #69. The Noda BiYhudah believes that the onen is allowed to count [[Sefirat HaOmer]] in order so as not to lose out on counting the whole sefirah, and R. Shlomo Kluger (Sefer HaChayim no. 71) uses similar reasoning to say that an onen is permitted to recite Kiddush Levanah if others are taking care of the burial.</ref>
# An onen is exempt from all [[brachot]], and can therefore eat without making any [[Birchot]] HaNehenin. <ref>The Rash MeShantz (Mishna Damai 1:4 s.v. UMazminin Alav) implies that an onen is obligated to say [[brachot]] for himself but may not exempt others, although his position is against that of Rashi (SOURCE) explains the mishna. The Mishna Brurah 71:4 writes that an onen is exempt from all [[brachot]].</ref>
# An onen is permitted to wear his tallit kattan as usual, but should not make a bracha on it.<ref>Minchas Shelomo 1:91:25</ref>
# A person who became a mourner after the time for [[Shacharit]] or [[Mincha]] began and didn’t yet pray, some say he’s obligated to make [[Tashlumin]] and some argue <ref> Mishna Brurah 71, Magen Giborim and Derech HaChaim hold that a person is chayav, while the Yad Efrayim (Aninut 29), Birkei Yosef 341:17, Chachmat Shlomo 71, and Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 6:11 hold that one is exempt from [[Tashlumin]]. </ref>

==A Mourner Wearing Tefillin==
# A mourner is exempt from Tefillin the first day of Aveilut<ref>
* The Gemara (Ketubot 6b, Sukkah 25b, Moed Katan 15a) states that a mourner is exempt from wearing Tefillin since Hashem commanded Yechezkel to abstain from wearing Tefillin when he was mourning his wife and by implication we learn that a regular mourner doesn't wear Tefillin. For how long does this apply? The Gemara (Moed Katan 21a) cites a dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua whether it applies for 2 or 3 days. The Rif (Moed Katan 13a), Rambam (Avel 4:9), Rosh (Moed Katan 3:37), and Tur and Shulchan Aruch OC 38:5 hold like Rabbi Yehoshua who says that the mourner is exempt the first two days.
* Regarding the second day according to Rabbi Yehoshua and the third day according to Rabbi Eliezer, Rashi explains that only a mourner is only exempt for a fraction of the day based on the concept of Miksat HaYom KeKulo (part of the day is like a complete day). Tosfot 21a, Rosh (Moed Katan 3:37), Raavad (cited by Ramban Torat HaAdam Inyan HaAveilut n. 67), and Ran (Sukkah 11a s.v. Aval) agree that a portion of the day needs to be observed in mourning without tefillin, before the mourner may wear tefillin. The Rosh holds that one only needs to wait until a bit after Netz HaChama and the Raavad says one needs to wait until the minyan with those comforting the mourner. However, Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Inyan HaAveilut n. 67) writes that according to the Rif (Moed Katan 13a) and Rambam (Avel 4:9) one can wear the Tefillin on the second day without waiting at all. Bach (YD 388) holds like the Ramban. However, Shulchan Aruch YD 388:1 explicitly rules like the Rosh that one must wait until after Netz.
* Rosh (Moed Katan 3:3) discusses whether this exemption is Biblical or rabbinic and seems to favor the approach of the exempt being rabbinic.</ref> even if the first day of aveilut is the day of the burial and not the day of the death. <ref>Taz 38:3, Mishna Brurah 38:16. See Pitchei Teshuva YD 388 who cites a dispute between the Maharitaz and the Dagul Mirvavah whether one is obligated or exempt. The Maharitaz believes that one is obligated since the first day of aveilut is only biblical if it is both the day of death and the day of burial and one is only exempt from Tefillin when mourning is biblical. The Dagul Mirvavah and others disagree. See Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Inyan HaAveilut n. 81) who seems to hold like the Maharitaz. </ref> In such a case, where the first day of aveilut isn't the same day as the death, according to Sephardim, one may rely on the practice not to wear Tefillin, however, it is proper to wear Tefillin without a bracha after the burial in private.<ref>Yabia Omer YD 2:27</ref>
# A mourner must have a proper concentration when wearing Tefillin even if one is in mourning and therefore one should not wear Tefillin during the eulogies or while one is crying.<ref>Torat HaAdam (Inyan HaAveilut n. 67), Shulchan Aruch YD 388:2. Magen Avraham 38:6 asks how a mourner could be obligated in Tefillin if someone who is emotionally tormented and can't concentrate is exempt from Tefillin. He answers based on a Gemara Ketubot 6b that we encourage the mourner to settle his thoughts and reach a state of mind when he is able to wear Tefillin. </ref>
==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Aninus

2016-06-03T17:11:53Z

Sbmb: Redirected page to Onen

#REDIRECT [[Onen]]

Onen

2016-06-03T15:16:24Z

Sbmb:

{{Lacking}}
An "onen" is a person whose immediate relative has died<ref>This term is used several times in Chazal, and is derived from the pasuk in Devarim 26:14. Brachos 18b refers to a person "dead is lying before him," and this appears to be the same category as one who would be described as an "onen," although the equivalence of these two phrases is not necessarily absolute.</ref> and is yet to be buried.<ref>Yerushalmi Pesachim 8:8 records a dispute as to whether or not aninus Deoraisa, the day of death, continues until nightfall even if the burial already took place. Ramban (Toras HaAdam "Aninus") believes that it does, but Rashi to Zevachim 15b and 90b writes that it does not. In practice, one does not observe aninus after the burial at all even if it is still the day of death (Bach and Shach Y.D. 341:2).</ref> The state of being an onen is called "aninus".<ref>M'Deoraisa, an onen is prohibited from eating kodshim or maaser sheni, as evident from Vayikra 10:19 and Devarim 26:14 respectively.</ref>

==Upon Whom and When Does Aninus Apply==
# A person is an "onen" from the time that he hears of the death of any one of his seven relatives, until the time of burial. These seven relatives are: 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> Generally, anyone obligated in [[mourning]] after the burial is obligated to observe aninus before the burial.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:1. The Badei Hashulchan (341:4, Biurim page 75-76) writes, against Sh"t Bnyan Tziyon 113, that it is best to be stringent regarding meat, wine, and tashmish even for a child who has died before living out thirty days, despite the fact that there is no aveilus for such a child, but such a person is still obligated in mitzvos.</ref>
# The common practice is that even someone whose relative that has passed away is in a different city, or another relative is taking care of the burial needs, is still considered an "onen".<ref>Rabbeinu Tam, as quoted in Tosfos Brachos 18b and Rosh Brachos 3:3, did not consider himself to be an onen when his married sister died, either because his sister's husband would take care of the burial, or, as explained by the Bach Yoreh Deah 341:4 (and Shach Y.D. 341:5) explains, because he was in a different city. Either way, the Rosh there and Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 341:1) writes that this opinion was not accepted.</ref> However, not all agree with this view.<ref>See Shach Y.D. 341:4</ref>
# Nowadays most communities have specific people who deal with the meis and the burial, such as a "Chevra Kadisha," and so the immediate relatives of the deceased do not take care of the burial directly.<ref>This is the generally understood meaning of 'כתפים' in Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, cf. Moed Katan 22a</ref> Although some have stated that this custom frees the relatives from their status as onenim,<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:3 based on Tosfos Brachos 18b, Tur Y.D. 375 quoting Behag, Toras HaAdam (Chavel ed.) p. 70, Chochmas Adam Klal 153:3</ref> others believe that a relative is only free from being an onen if he does not accompany the meis to the burial.<Noda Biyhudah Tinyana Y.D 211 cited in Pischei Teshuvah 341:1, cf. Hagahos Maimoni Hil. Eivel 3:6.</ref> While some communities follow the first view, most believe that a person is still an onen nowadays when a Chevra Kadisha takes care of the meis.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 341:20-23 writes that this must be the case, considering that the Shulchan Aruch paskens (341:1) that even a relative who is in a faraway city and will not be involved in the burial is still an onen. Rather, the Gemara is referring to those who have followed the meis until a certain point, and then return home while the meis is sent to be buried.</ref>
# One who only accompanies the meis only until a certain point, but not all the way to the burial, is no longer an onen once they leave the meis.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2, Hashulchan Y.D. 341:21-22. Although the Aruch Hashulchan in 324:23 indicates that this is only true if the meis will be traveling for at least a two-day's journey, see Minchas Shelomo 91:25. See there also regarding a relative who will not be with the meis at all the entire time</ref>
# The relatives of someone who died in captivity do not practice aninus at all, and not aveilus until the burial.<ref>Tosfos Brachos 18a, Rambam Hilchos Avel 1:3, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:4, Shach 341:15</ref> However, many believe that this was only the case if the captors wouldn't release the body until ransom negotiations were made, but today, if the meis is being held for medical or legal reasons, aninus does apply right away, because one can be sure that the meis will be returned to the family eventually.<ref>Noda BiYhudah Tinyanana Y.D. 211, Aruch Hashulchan 341:18</ref>
==Aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov==
# The generally accepted pesak is that there is no aninus on Shabbos or Yom Tov,<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 341:1 based upon the Rosh</ref> and so an onen still performs all the usual mitzvos and brachos, including going to shul, on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Against what is written in the Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1. The Shulchan Aruch paskens that this is true if the onen is not doing anything at all to get ready for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov. If the onen is preparing for the burial on Shabbos or Yom Tov in a manner that is permitted, then the Shulchan Aruch writes that such a person would be a full onen even on Shabbos. Regarding Yom Tov Sheni of the diaspora, see Igros Moshe O.C. 3:76 who insists that today burials should not be performed on Yom Tov Sheni even by non-Jews.</ref>
# On Shabbos, therefore, the onen is permitted (but not necessarily obligated)<ref>Rama Y.D. 341:1 and Shach 341:7 indicate that there is no obligation to eat meat or drink wine on Shabbos for anyone. However, based upon the Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:1 and 250:2, the Badei Hashulchan 341:41 believes that someone who can afford to eat meat on Shabbos must do so, and this includes an onen. [Perhaps, because an onen is in a state of mental distress and might be uncomfortable eating meat, he can be described as השעה דחוקה לו as discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 242:2, which would permit him to forgo eating meat on Shabbos]</ref> to eat meat and drink wine.<ref>On Yom Tov, it would appear that all agree that an onen is obligated to do so; cf. Shaarei Teshuvah 241:13. See Orach Chaim 696:7 regarding one whose relative died on Purim.</ref>
# However, tashmish hamittah is prohibited for the onen even on Shabbos or Yom Tov.<ref>Moed Kattan 18a. Rabbeinu Yonah (on Rif Brachos 10b) writes that this is because it shows an excessive sense of frivolity, and Ramban (Torah HaAdam pg. 73 in Chavel edition) writes that the reason is because of כבוד המת, one must still show deference to the deceased.</ref>
# Poskim dispute whether an onen is permitted to study Torah on Shabbos<ref>Dagul Mervavah to Magen Avraham O.C. 548:8 believes that it is permitted, but Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 341:1 writes that it is prohibited. Badei Hashulchan 399:15 writes that it is permitted for an onen to study Torah on Yom Tov but not on Shabbos, like an avel.</ref> can be called to the Torah<ref>Rebbi Akiva Eiger to Y.D. 241:1 writes that because the Shulchan Aruch paskens in Y.D. 400:1 that an avel is prohibited from learning Torah on Shabbos, an avel and onen should therefore not be given an aliyah. </ref> or, if he is a kohen, perform [[Birkat Cohanim]].<ref>Mishnah Berurah O.C. 128:148 writes that ideally he should not perform birkat Kohanim, but if he was called up to do so, there is a dispute whether or not he should.</ref>

==Exemption from Mitzvot==
# An onen is exempt from all mitzvot.<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 23b, Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:6), Mishna Brurah 71:4</ref>
# An onen is exempt from all [[brachot]] including [[Brachot]] HaNehenin. <ref>The Rash MeShantz (Mishna Damai 1:4 s.v. UMazminin Alav) implies that an onen is obligated to say [[brachot]] for himself but may not exempt others, but this is not how Rashi (SOURCE) explains the mishna. The Mishna Brurah 71:4 writes that an onen is exempt from all [[brachot]].</ref>
# An onen is permitted to wear his tallit kattan as usual, but should not make a bracha on it.<ref>Minchas Shelomo 1:91:25</ref>
# A person who became a mourner after the time for [[Shacharit]] or [[Mincha]] began and didn’t yet pray, some say he’s obligated to make [[Tashlumin]] and some argue <ref> Mishna Brurah 71, Magen Giborim and Derech HaChaim hold that a person is chayav, while the Yad Efrayim (Aninut 29), Birkei Yosef 341:17, Chachmat Shlomo 71, and Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 6:11 hold that one is exempt from [[Tashlumin]]. </ref>

==A Mourner Wearing Tefillin==
# A mourner is exempt from Tefillin the first day of Aveilut<ref>
* The Gemara (Ketubot 6b, Sukkah 25b, Moed Katan 15a) states that a mourner is exempt from wearing Tefillin since Hashem commanded Yechezkel to abstain from wearing Tefillin when he was mourning his wife and by implication we learn that a regular mourner doesn't wear Tefillin. For how long does this apply? The Gemara (Moed Katan 21a) cites a dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua whether it applies for 2 or 3 days. The Rif (Moed Katan 13a), Rambam (Avel 4:9), Rosh (Moed Katan 3:37), and Tur and Shulchan Aruch OC 38:5 hold like Rabbi Yehoshua who says that the mourner is exempt the first two days.
* Regarding the second day according to Rabbi Yehoshua and the third day according to Rabbi Eliezer, Rashi explains that only a mourner is only exempt for a fraction of the day based on the concept of Miksat HaYom KeKulo (part of the day is like a complete day). Tosfot 21a, Rosh (Moed Katan 3:37), Raavad (cited by Ramban Torat HaAdam Inyan HaAveilut n. 67), and Ran (Sukkah 11a s.v. Aval) agree that a portion of the day needs to be observed in mourning without tefillin, before the mourner may wear tefillin. The Rosh holds that one only needs to wait until a bit after Netz HaChama and the Raavad says one needs to wait until the minyan with those comforting the mourner. However, Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Inyan HaAveilut n. 67) writes that according to the Rif (Moed Katan 13a) and Rambam (Avel 4:9) one can wear the Tefillin on the second day without waiting at all. Bach (YD 388) holds like the Ramban. However, Shulchan Aruch YD 388:1 explicitly rules like the Rosh that one must wait until after Netz.
* Rosh (Moed Katan 3:3) discusses whether this exemption is Biblical or rabbinic and seems to favor the approach of the exempt being rabbinic.</ref> even if the first day of aveilut is the day of the burial and not the day of the death. <ref>Taz 38:3, Mishna Brurah 38:16. See Pitchei Teshuva YD 388 who cites a dispute between the Maharitaz and the Dagul Mirvavah whether one is obligated or exempt. The Maharitaz believes that one is obligated since the first day of aveilut is only biblical if it is both the day of death and the day of burial and one is only exempt from Tefillin when mourning is biblical. The Dagul Mirvavah and others disagree. See Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Inyan HaAveilut n. 81) who seems to hold like the Maharitaz. </ref> In such a case, where the first day of aveilut isn't the same day as the death, according to Sephardim, one may rely on the practice not to wear Tefillin, however, it is proper to wear Tefillin without a bracha after the burial in private.<ref>Yabia Omer YD 2:27</ref>
# A mourner must have a proper concentration when wearing Tefillin even if one is in mourning and therefore one should not wear Tefillin during the eulogies or while one is crying.<ref>Torat HaAdam (Inyan HaAveilut n. 67), Shulchan Aruch YD 388:2. Magen Avraham 38:6 asks how a mourner could be obligated in Tefillin if someone who is emotionally tormented and can't concentrate is exempt from Tefillin. He answers based on a Gemara Ketubot 6b that we encourage the mourner to settle his thoughts and reach a state of mind when he is able to wear Tefillin. </ref>
==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Priestly Blessing

2016-06-03T14:49:45Z

Sbmb: Redirected page to Birkat Cohanim

#REDIRECT [[Birkat Cohanim]]

Onen

2016-06-03T13:17:52Z

Sbmb:

{{Lacking}}
An "onen" is a person whose immediate relative has died and is yet to be buried.<ref>This term is used several times in Chazal, and is derived from the pasuk in Devarim 26:14. Brachos 18b refers to a person "dead is lying before him," and this appears to be the same category as one who would be described as an "onen," although the equivalence of these two phrases is not necessarily absolute.</ref> The state of being an onen is called "aninus".

==Upon Whom and When Does Aninus Apply==
# A person is an "onen" from the time that he hears of the death of any one of his seven relatives, until the time of burial. These seven relatives are: one's (1) father, (2) mother, (3) son, (4) daughter, (5) sister, (6) brother, and (7) spouse.
# The common practice is that even someone whose relative that has passed away is in a different city, or another relative is taking care of the burial needs, is still considered an "onen".<ref>Rabbeinu Tam, as quoted in Tosfos Brachos 18b and Rosh Brachos 3:3, did not consider himself to be an onen when his married sister died, either because his sister's husband would take care of the burial, or, as explained by the Bach Yoreh Deah 341:4 (and Shach Y.D. 341:5) explains, because he was in a different city. Either way, the Rosh there and Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 341:1) writes that this opinion was not accepted.</ref> However, not all agree with this view.<ref>See Shach Y.D. 341:4</ref>
# Nowadays most communities have specific people who deal with the meis and the burial, such as a "Chevra Kadisha," and so the immediate relatives of the deceased do not take care of the burial directly.<ref>This is the generally understood meaning of 'כתפים' in Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, cf. Moed Katan 22a</ref> Although some have stated that this custom frees the relatives from their status as onenim,<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:3 based on Tosfos Brachos 18b, Tur Y.D. 375 quoting Behag, Toras HaAdam (Chavel ed.) p. 70, Chochmas Adam Klal 153:3</ref> others believe that a relative is only free from being an onen if he does not accompany the meis to the burial.<Noda Biyhudah Tinyana Y.D 211 cited in Pischei Teshuvah 341:1, cf. Hagahos Maimoni Hil. Eivel 3:6.</ref> While some communities follow the first view, most believe that a person is still an onen nowadays when a Chevra Kadisha takes care of the meis.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 341:20-23 writes that this must be the case, considering that the Shulchan Aruch paskens (341:1) that even a relative who is in a faraway city and will not be involved in the burial is still an onen. Rather, the Gemara is referring to those who have followed the meis until a certain point, and then return home while the meis is sent to be buried.</ref>
# One who only accompanies the meis only until a certain point, but not all the way to the burial, is no longer an onen once they leave the meis.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2, Hashulchan Y.D. 341:21-22. Although the Aruch Hashulchan in 324:23 indicates that this is only true if the meis will be traveling for at least a two-day's journey, see Minchas Shelomo 91:25. See there also regarding a relative who will not be with the meis at all the entire time</ref>

==Exemption from Mitzvot==
# An onen is exempt from all mitzvot.<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 23b, Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:6), Mishna Brurah 71:4</ref>
# An onen is exempt from all [[brachot]] including [[Brachot]] HaNehenin. <ref>The Rash MeShantz (Mishna Damai 1:4 s.v. UMazminin Alav) implies that an onen is obligated to say [[brachot]] for himself but may not exempt others, but this is not how Rashi (SOURCE) explains the mishna. The Mishna Brurah 71:4 writes that an onen is exempt from all [[brachot]].</ref>
# An onen is permitted to wear his tallit kattan as usual, but should not make a bracha on it.<ref>Minchas Shelomo 1:91:25</ref>
# A person who became a mourner after the time for [[Shacharit]] or [[Mincha]] began and didn’t yet pray, some say he’s obligated to make [[Tashlumin]] and some argue <ref> Mishna Brurah 71, Magen Giborim and Derech HaChaim hold that a person is chayav, while the Yad Efrayim (Aninut 29), Birkei Yosef 341:17, Chachmat Shlomo 71, and Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 6:11 hold that one is exempt from [[Tashlumin]]. </ref>

==A Mourner Wearing Tefillin==
# A mourner is exempt from Tefillin the first day of Aveilut<ref>
* The Gemara (Ketubot 6b, Sukkah 25b, Moed Katan 15a) states that a mourner is exempt from wearing Tefillin since Hashem commanded Yechezkel to abstain from wearing Tefillin when he was mourning his wife and by implication we learn that a regular mourner doesn't wear Tefillin. For how long does this apply? The Gemara (Moed Katan 21a) cites a dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua whether it applies for 2 or 3 days. The Rif (Moed Katan 13a), Rambam (Avel 4:9), Rosh (Moed Katan 3:37), and Tur and Shulchan Aruch OC 38:5 hold like Rabbi Yehoshua who says that the mourner is exempt the first two days.
* Regarding the second day according to Rabbi Yehoshua and the third day according to Rabbi Eliezer, Rashi explains that only a mourner is only exempt for a fraction of the day based on the concept of Miksat HaYom KeKulo (part of the day is like a complete day). Tosfot 21a, Rosh (Moed Katan 3:37), Raavad (cited by Ramban Torat HaAdam Inyan HaAveilut n. 67), and Ran (Sukkah 11a s.v. Aval) agree that a portion of the day needs to be observed in mourning without tefillin, before the mourner may wear tefillin. The Rosh holds that one only needs to wait until a bit after Netz HaChama and the Raavad says one needs to wait until the minyan with those comforting the mourner. However, Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Inyan HaAveilut n. 67) writes that according to the Rif (Moed Katan 13a) and Rambam (Avel 4:9) one can wear the Tefillin on the second day without waiting at all. Bach (YD 388) holds like the Ramban. However, Shulchan Aruch YD 388:1 explicitly rules like the Rosh that one must wait until after Netz.
* Rosh (Moed Katan 3:3) discusses whether this exemption is Biblical or rabbinic and seems to favor the approach of the exempt being rabbinic.</ref> even if the first day of aveilut is the day of the burial and not the day of the death. <ref>Taz 38:3, Mishna Brurah 38:16. See Pitchei Teshuva YD 388 who cites a dispute between the Maharitaz and the Dagul Mirvavah whether one is obligated or exempt. The Maharitaz believes that one is obligated since the first day of aveilut is only biblical if it is both the day of death and the day of burial and one is only exempt from Tefillin when mourning is biblical. The Dagul Mirvavah and others disagree. See Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Inyan HaAveilut n. 81) who seems to hold like the Maharitaz. </ref> In such a case, where the first day of aveilut isn't the same day as the death, according to Sephardim, one may rely on the practice not to wear Tefillin, however, it is proper to wear Tefillin without a bracha after the burial in private.<ref>Yabia Omer YD 2:27</ref>
# A mourner must have a proper concentration when wearing Tefillin even if one is in mourning and therefore one should not wear Tefillin during the eulogies or while one is crying.<ref>Torat HaAdam (Inyan HaAveilut n. 67), Shulchan Aruch YD 388:2. Magen Avraham 38:6 asks how a mourner could be obligated in Tefillin if someone who is emotionally tormented and can't concentrate is exempt from Tefillin. He answers based on a Gemara Ketubot 6b that we encourage the mourner to settle his thoughts and reach a state of mind when he is able to wear Tefillin. </ref>
==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Onen

2016-06-03T06:04:39Z

Sbmb:

{{Lacking}}
An "onen" is a person whose immediate relative has died and is yet to be buried.<ref>This term is used several times in Chazal, and is derived from the pasuk in Devarim 26:14. Brachos 18b refers to a person "dead is lying before him," and this appears to be the same category as one who would be described as an "onen," although the equivalence of these two phrases is not necessarily absolute.</ref> The state of being an onen is called "aninus".

==Upon Whom and When Does Aninus Apply==
# A person is an "onen" from the time that he hears of the death of any one of his seven relatives, until the time of burial. These seven relatives are: one's (1) father, (2) mother, (3) son, (4) daughter, (5) sister, (6) brother, and (7) spouse.<ref>
# The common practice is that even someone whose relative that has passed away is in a different city, or another relative is taking care of the burial needs, is still considered an "onen".<ref>Rabbeinu Tam, as quoted in Tosfos Brachos 18b and Rosh Brachos 3:3, did not consider himself to be an onen when his married sister died, either because his sister's husband would take care of the burial, or, as explained by the Bach Yoreh Deah 341:4 (and Shach Y.D. 341:5) explains, because he was in a different city. Either way, the Rosh there and Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 341:1) writes that this opinion was not accepted.</ref> However, not all agree with this view.<ref>See Shach Y.D. 341:4</ref>
# Nowadays most communities have specific people who deal with the meis and the burial, such as a "Chevra Kadisha," and so the immediate relatives of the deceased do not take care of the burial directly.<ref>This is the generally understood meaning of 'כתפים' in Yerushalmi Brachos 3:1, cf. Moed Katan 22a</ref> Although some have stated that this custom frees the relatives from their status as onenim,<ref>Shulchan Aruch 341:3 based on Tosfos Brachos 18b, Tur Y.D. 375 quoting Behag, Toras HaAdam (Chavel ed.) p. 70, Chochmas Adam Klal 153:3</ref> others believe that a relative is only free from being an onen if he does not accompany the meis to the burial.<Noda Biyhudah Tinyana Y.D 211 cited in Pischei Teshuvah 341:1, cf. Hagahos Maimoni Hil. Eivel 3:6.</ref> While some communities follow the first view, most believe that a person is still an onen nowadays when a Chevra Kadisha takes care of the meis.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 341:20-23 writes that this must be the case, considering that the Shulchan Aruch paskens (341:1) that even a relative who is in a faraway city and will not be involved in the burial is still an onen. Rather, the Gemara is referring to those who have followed the meis until a certain point, and then return home while the meis is sent to be buried.</ref>
# One who only accompanies the meis only until a certain point, but not all the way to the burial, is no longer an onen once they leave the meis.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 375:2, Hashulchan Y.D. 341:21-22. Although the Aruch Hashulchan in 324:23 indicates that this is only true if the meis will be traveling for at least a two-day's journey, see Minchas Shelomo 91:25. See there also regarding a relative who will not be with the meis at all the entire time</ref>

==Exemption from Mitzvot==
# An onen is exempt from all mitzvot.<ref>Gemara Moed Katan 23b, Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:6), Mishna Brurah 71:4</ref>
# An onen is exempt from all [[brachot]] including [[Brachot]] HaNehenin. <ref>The Rash MeShantz (Mishna Damai 1:4 s.v. UMazminin Alav) implies that an onen is obligated to say [[brachot]] for himself but may not exempt others, but this is not how Rashi (SOURCE) explains the mishna. The Mishna Brurah 71:4 writes that an onen is exempt from all [[brachot]].</ref>
# An onen is permitted to wear his tallit kattan as usual, but should not make a bracha on it.<ref>Minchas Shelomo 1:91:25</ref>
# A person who became a mourner after the time for [[Shacharit]] or [[Mincha]] began and didn’t yet pray, some say he’s obligated to make [[Tashlumin]] and some argue <ref> Mishna Brurah 71, Magen Giborim and Derech HaChaim hold that a person is chayav, while the Yad Efrayim (Aninut 29), Birkei Yosef 341:17, Chachmat Shlomo 71, and Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 6:11 hold that one is exempt from [[Tashlumin]]. </ref>

==A Mourner Wearing Tefillin==
# A mourner is exempt from Tefillin the first day of Aveilut<ref>
* The Gemara (Ketubot 6b, Sukkah 25b, Moed Katan 15a) states that a mourner is exempt from wearing Tefillin since Hashem commanded Yechezkel to abstain from wearing Tefillin when he was mourning his wife and by implication we learn that a regular mourner doesn't wear Tefillin. For how long does this apply? The Gemara (Moed Katan 21a) cites a dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua whether it applies for 2 or 3 days. The Rif (Moed Katan 13a), Rambam (Avel 4:9), Rosh (Moed Katan 3:37), and Tur and Shulchan Aruch OC 38:5 hold like Rabbi Yehoshua who says that the mourner is exempt the first two days.
* Regarding the second day according to Rabbi Yehoshua and the third day according to Rabbi Eliezer, Rashi explains that only a mourner is only exempt for a fraction of the day based on the concept of Miksat HaYom KeKulo (part of the day is like a complete day). Tosfot 21a, Rosh (Moed Katan 3:37), Raavad (cited by Ramban Torat HaAdam Inyan HaAveilut n. 67), and Ran (Sukkah 11a s.v. Aval) agree that a portion of the day needs to be observed in mourning without tefillin, before the mourner may wear tefillin. The Rosh holds that one only needs to wait until a bit after Netz HaChama and the Raavad says one needs to wait until the minyan with those comforting the mourner. However, Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Inyan HaAveilut n. 67) writes that according to the Rif (Moed Katan 13a) and Rambam (Avel 4:9) one can wear the Tefillin on the second day without waiting at all. Bach (YD 388) holds like the Ramban. However, Shulchan Aruch YD 388:1 explicitly rules like the Rosh that one must wait until after Netz.
* Rosh (Moed Katan 3:3) discusses whether this exemption is Biblical or rabbinic and seems to favor the approach of the exempt being rabbinic.</ref> even if the first day of aveilut is the day of the burial and not the day of the death. <ref>Taz 38:3, Mishna Brurah 38:16. See Pitchei Teshuva YD 388 who cites a dispute between the Maharitaz and the Dagul Mirvavah whether one is obligated or exempt. The Maharitaz believes that one is obligated since the first day of aveilut is only biblical if it is both the day of death and the day of burial and one is only exempt from Tefillin when mourning is biblical. The Dagul Mirvavah and others disagree. See Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Inyan HaAveilut n. 81) who seems to hold like the Maharitaz. </ref> In such a case, where the first day of aveilut isn't the same day as the death, according to Sephardim, one may rely on the practice not to wear Tefillin, however, it is proper to wear Tefillin without a bracha after the burial in private.<ref>Yabia Omer YD 2:27</ref>
# A mourner must have a proper concentration when wearing Tefillin even if one is in mourning and therefore one should not wear Tefillin during the eulogies or while one is crying.<ref>Torat HaAdam (Inyan HaAveilut n. 67), Shulchan Aruch YD 388:2. Magen Avraham 38:6 asks how a mourner could be obligated in Tefillin if someone who is emotionally tormented and can't concentrate is exempt from Tefillin. He answers based on a Gemara Ketubot 6b that we encourage the mourner to settle his thoughts and reach a state of mind when he is able to wear Tefillin. </ref>
==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Shiva

2016-06-03T04:02:26Z

Sbmb:

Shiva

2016-06-03T04:01:28Z

Sbmb:

{{Lacking}}
One whose relative has passed away has an obligation<ref></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.

==Comforting the mourner==
# It is a great Mitzvah for others to comfort a mourner (or "avel," person in mourning). <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:1. As it says in Koheles 7:2, it is better to attend a mourner's house than a party. According to the Rambam in Hilchos Avel 14:1, this mitzvah is derabanan, although Rabbeinu Yonah to the beginning of the third chapter of Brachos indicates that one fulfills a mitzvah deoraisa by comforting a mourner</ref> It is crucial to remember that the reason for one's visit to the house of mourning is to comfort the mourner(s), and so one must be considerate to their wishes.<ref>Cf. Sefer Ahavas Chessed 3:6 and Sh"T Teshuvos V'Hanhagos 3:378</ref>
# Those coming to comfort the avel should not initiate conversation but should respond when the mourner begins to speak. <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:1 </ref>
# 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>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:2</ref> Some require the avel to 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.</ref>
# One should not say “What could you have done? You can’t change what Hashem decreed.” since this implies that if one were able to change what Hashem decreed, one would have, which is blasphemous. Rather one should accept Hashem’s decrees.<ref>Gemara Bava Kama 38a, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:4</ref>

==Tefillin for a Mourner==
# On the first day of Shiva, if the burial is was on the same day as the passing, an Avel may not wear Tefillin, as the first day is most bitter.<ref>
'''The Basics''' 
The Gemara (Berachot 11a and 16b, Succah 25a, Moed Kattan 15a, and Ketubot 6b) learns from the fact that Hashem told Yechezkel to put on his Tefillin while mourning for his wife that a regular Avel may not do so. 

Elsewhere (Moed Kattan 21a), the Gemara presents two Machalokets between R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua. In the first, R' Eliezer holds an Avel is prohibited from wearing Tefillin (Hanacha) until the third day, and R' Yehoshua holds until the second day. Additionally, R' Yehoshua holds that, if the Avel put on Tefillin on the days he's permitted to, if Panim Chadashot (people who have not yet been Menachem him) come to visit, he must take them off (Choletz). R' Eliezer, on the hand, holds that he does not need to (Eino Choletz). The Amoraim debate the final Halacha and conclude that the Halacha follows R' Yehoshua regarding Hanacha and R' Eliezer with respect to Chalitzah, once the Avel puts them on on the second day. 
'''Miktzat HaYom KeKulo and the Rishonim''' 
Seemingly, the Gemara is employing the Halachic mechanism of Miktzat HaYom KeKulo in allowing him to put on Tefillin only from some point on the second day. See the exact text of the Gemara and Rashi for a clearer picture. 
In codifying this Halacha, the Rif and Rambam (Hilchot Avel 4:9) only write that an Avel may not wear Tefillin on the first day and seem to make no mention of the second day. In fact, the Rambam's use of the words "ביום הראשון בלבד" seem to clearly indicate that he understood the Gemara in its most minimal sense. 
The Rosh (Moed Kattan 3:23) begins unsure if the Rif implies the Miktzat HaYom is implemented from Netz or from after davening. He concludes that the Miktzat HaYom is fulfilled from Netz. 
The Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Shaar HaAvel, Inyan HaAvelut 67) quotes the Raavad who holds that the Miktzat HaYom is only completed from after Shacharit. He also picks up on the lack of a second day in the Rif and explains that it must be the Rif held the Mikzat HaYom was fulfilled with the preceding night, making the entire second day appropriate for putting on Tefillin. He also quotes the Yerushalmi, which makes no indication that there should be a Miktzat HaYom in the first place. See also Rosh ibid 3:3. 
Regarding the need for a Miktzat HaYom in the first place, Tosafot (ibid) says it's a din MiDeRabbanan, and the Ramban (ibid) quotes the Raavad that it's lehashlim the Aveilut. 
The Tur (OC 38:5) quotes just the language of the Rif. The Beit Yosef extrapolates from the Rosh that, even though Laylah is Zeman Tefillin, since it's Assur to wear them at night, one needs a Miktzat HaYom during the day itself to be able to wear them. The Ran (Succah, on the Rif 11b), who quotes the Ramban above, on the other hand, must hold that even though Laylah is not Zeman Tefillin, it still counts for Miktzat HaYom, since the Avel is still prohibited from wearing them. See Rambam Hilchot Tefillin 4:10. 
In Yoreh Deah (388), the Tur paskens the Gemara as explained above and then says how Yesh Omrim the Miktzat HaYom is from after davening, and the Rif and Rosh paskened from Netz (see Bach). Here, the Beit Yosef is very terse and seems to even equate the Rosh with the Rambam (see Ohr Letzion vol. 1 OC Siman 6, as this could be an additional proof to his thesis). 
The Shulchan Aruch in Yoreh Deah paskens like the Rosh that the Miktzat HaYom is from Netz, as does the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12).
</ref>
# If the burial is not on the day of passing, as is very common nowadays, many Poskim hold that the Avel is, in fact, obligated to put on Tefillin, while others firmly believe that he is still forbidden from doing so. According to those who hold one should wear them, one should do so in a closed room without a Beracha.<ref>
The Maharitatz (Chiddushim on Eizehu Neshech, quoted by Be'er Heitev (38:5) and Pitchei Teshuvah (YD 388) famously holds that the reason why the Avel is not allowed to wear Tefillin on the first day is because it's Min HaTorah, which is only when the burial and passing are on the same day. Therefore, when the burial takes place the next day and Avelut is subsequently MiDeRabbanan, the Avel is in fact Chayav in Tefillin. The Taz (OC 38:3), and Dagul Mervava, Birkei Yosef, and Mishnah Brurahh disagree. 
The Acharonim have have a field day taking sides for or against the Maharitatz in this Machaloket, the true scope of which is most suited for a Teshuva in Yabia Omer (vol. 2 YD Siman 27). 
Among recent Acharonim, the Ben Ish Chai (Shana Aleph, Chayeh Sarah 12; Od Yosef Chai, Vayera 11, 12, 45), Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:16), and Ohr Letzion (vol. 1, OC Siman 6) pasken against the Maharitatz. At the same time, due to the great number of Acharonim who do pasken like the Maharitatz (including R' Yitzchak Elchanan and the Chazon Ish, see Yabia Omer ibid for the full list), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo: Tefillah, Perek 18, 5), Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer ibid), and the Piskei Teshuvot (38, Seif Kattan 6) pasken that one should wear them privately without a Beracha. See Magen Avot (Lebhar, Yoreh Deah volume, Siman 388) where he brings the Moroccan Minhag not like the Maharitatz and claims the rest of the world holds that way, as well.
</ref>
# The Minhag is to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin during Avelut.<ref>The Chidah (Birkei Yosef) paskened that one shouldn't wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, as it's a Machaloket HaMekubalim and Shev ve'al Ta'aseh Adif. The Ben Ish Chai (ibid and Od Yosef Chai Vayera 11, 12, 45) claims that the Minhag in Yerushalayim and Baghdad was like the Rashash to wear Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin, so he disagrees with the Chidah. This is also the opinion of the Kaf HaChaim (OC 38:21), who says that, among other considerations, based on the Siddur HaChidah and the fact that we wear them beTorat Chiyuv, the Avel should wear them. HaRav David Yosef (Halacha Brurahh 38:5:13) also paskens this way.</ref>

==Davening at a Shiva Minyan==
# The minhag is to say Tefillim chapter 49 after [[Shacharit]] and [[Mincha]]. It is good also to learn mishnayot there for the Iylui Nishama. <ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 207:5 </ref>
==The Shiva House==
# Some have the practice not to bring food out of the shiva house<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 376:11</ref> if the person died at home<ref>Tzitz Eliezer (Even Yakov no. 44:4)</ref>, however, there many are lenient about this.<ref>Yosef Ometz p. 192</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Informing Others of Someone's Passing

2016-06-03T03:38:48Z

Sbmb:

{{Lacking}}
There are several laws pertaining to whether, and how, one should inform others of a person's death. Additionally, several laws of [[mourning]] depend upon when one first hears of the death of his/her relative.

==Informing one of the death of a relative==
# One should not tell someone that one of his or her relatives died; however, if he’s asked, one may not lie but should say something vague which implies this. <ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 206:9-10 </ref> Nowadays, the practice is to tell close relatives of the deceased in order that they would be able to attend the Levayan (funeral). Some put up signs informing people about a person’s death. <ref>Rav Modechai Eliyahu in his comments to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 206:4</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Laws and Customs of a Funeral

2016-06-03T03:38:39Z

Sbmb:

{{Lacking}}

There is a mitzvah to bury a dead body as soon as possible.

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Mourning]]

Informing Others of Someone's Passing

2016-06-03T03:37:08Z

Sbmb: Created page with "{{Lacking}} There are several laws pertaining to whether, and how, one should inform others of a person's death. Additionally, several laws of mourning depend upon when on..."

Burial

2016-06-03T03:35:38Z

Sbmb: Redirected page to Laws and Customs of a Funeral

#REDIRECT [[Laws and Customs of a Funeral]]

Funeral

2016-06-03T03:34:45Z

Sbmb: Redirected page to Laws and Customs of a Funeral

#REDIRECT [[Laws and Customs of a Funeral]]

Laws and Customs of a Funeral

2016-06-03T03:34:06Z

Sbmb: Created page with "{{Lacking}} There is a mitzvah to bury a dead body as soon as possible."

{{Lacking}}

There is a mitzvah to bury a dead body as soon as possible.

Aveilus

2016-06-03T03:18:18Z

Sbmb: created redirect page

#REDIRECT [[Mourning]]

Sefirat HaOmer

2016-05-08T17:29:19Z

Sbmb: /* A child who became Bar Mitzvahed during Sefirah */

[[Image:Sefirah.jpg|thumb|right|The first day of the Omer on Bet Midrash Gavoha's Sefira Calendar]]
There is a Torah obligation to count the days of the Omer stated in the Pasuk <ref>(Vayikra 23:15-16) </ref> as follows: וספרתם לכם ממחרת השבת מיום הביאכם את עמר התנופה שבע שבתות תמימת תהיינה: עד ממחרת השבת השביעת תספרו חמשים יום והקרבתם מנחה חדשה ליהוה:. The Mitzvah is to count 49 days (counting the days and the weeks) from the second day of [[Pesach]] (when the Korban HaOmer was brought) until [[Shavuot]]. The mitzvah applies nowadays. <Ref> Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvah Mitzvot Aseh #161) counts this as one mitzvah to count days and weeks and not as two separate mitzvot, seemingly based on the gemara menachot 66a. See Tosfot Menachot 65b s.v. Ketuv who asks why we only count 49 days when the Pasuk says to count 50 days and answers that the pasuk doesn't mean from the Korban Omer until the day after Ha[[Shabbat]] HaShevit count 50 days but rather means to from the Korban Omer until the day after Hashabbat HaShevit which is the 50th day one should count (up to but not including). Alternatively Tosfot answers that the command to count to the number 50 in the pasuk refers to when the Korban Shtei HaLechem is brought and not the count of the Omer. </ref>

==Procedure of counting Sefirat HaOmer==
# The bracha to be recited before counting the Omer is ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על ספירת העומר - Baruch Atta Hashem Elokeinu Melech HaOlam Asher Kideshanu BeMitzvotav VeTzivanu Al Sefirat HaOmer.<ref>The Levush 489:1 records the text of the Bracha to be said before counting the sefira as Al Sefirat HaOmer. This is also evident from Shulchan Aruch 489:2</ref>
# One should say the Sefirat HaOmer standing up. If one said it sitting, one fulfilled one's obligation after the fact.<Ref>Rosh (Pesachim 10:41) and Rambam (Temidin UMusafin 7:23) write that Sefirat HaOmer should be said standing. S”A 489:1 codifies this halacha that one should say Sefirat HaOmer while standing. The Rambam adds that, if one did say it while seated one fulfills one's obligation after the fact. The Mishna Brurah 489:6 concurs. Mishna Brurah adds that one should stand also for the bracha. </ref>
# There is a dispute if a person can fulfill Sefirat HaOmer by listening to someone else count. Therefore, one should avoid doing so. However, one may fulfill the bracha by listening to someone else count.<Ref>There is a major dispute amongst the Rishonim if [[Shomea KeOneh]] is operable by Sefirat HaOmer. The Ramban (Pesachim 7a s.v. VeAni) implies that you can't Sefirat HaOmer with [[Shomea KeOneh]], since in theory we should have said the bracha with a lamed as it can't be fulfilled by someone else. Rashi (Menachot 65b) also seems to say that Shomea KeOneh doesn't work since the Torah wanted each and every person to count. However, the Rashba 1:458 implies that the congregation can fulfill Sefirat HaOmer with [[Shomea KeOnah]]. The Beiur Halacha 489 s.v. UMitzvah quotes the Maharitz Geyitz and Orchot Chaim as saying that Shomea KeOnah is effective for Sefirat HaOmer. In conclusion, the Beiur Halacha writes that one should avoid using Shomea KeOnah for Sefirat HaOmer. Nonetheless, Mishna Brurah 489:5 points out that there's no dispute that Shomea KeOnah is effective for the bracha.</ref>
# If a person read an email or text aloud stating that today was such-and-such in the Omer and didn't have intent to fulfill one's obligation, if it was after the seventh day one hasn't fulfilled one's obligation since he has not mentioned weeks and may count afterwards with a bracha.<ref>[http://www.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?PageIndex=&ClipID=1629 Rabbi Mansour on dailyhalacha.com]</ref> However, if it was read without verbal expression or just mentally expressed, one certainly doesn't fulfill one's obligation. <ref>Pri Chadash 489:6</ref>
# If a person wrote in a letter that today was such-and-such in the Omer there is a dispute if one has fulfilled one's obligation and therefore, one should count again without a bracha.<ref>Kaf HaChaim 489:28 cites a dispute whether one has fulfilled his obligation and concludes that one should count again without a bracha. See [[Birchot_HaTorah#What_Type_of_Learning_Requires_Birchot_HaTorah.3F]] for a similar discussion.</ref>

==When to Count Sefira==
# According to most poskim, it is correct to wait until Tzet Hakochavim in order to count [[sefirat haomer]]; however, one fulfills his obligation by counting after sunset. <Ref>
* Tosfot (Menachot 66a s.v. zecher) has one opinion who says that one may count sefira during [[Bein HaShemashot]] since sefira is only derabbanan. Rosh (Pesachim 10:40) and Tur 489:1 agree. However, the Ran (Pesachim 28a) argues that it’s not proper to enter a safek initially. Similarly, Rambam (Temidin UMusafin 7:22) rules that sefira should be counted at night.
* Bet Yosef 489:1 quotes this dispute, and his ruling in S”A is unclear. Mishna Brurah 489:14 understands that S”A holds that the halacha follows Tosfot but that it is proper to wait until Tzet Hakochavim. Chazon Ovadyah (p. 232) agrees.
* After the fact, if one counted during [[Bein HaShemashot]], Magen Avraham 489:6 writes that he has fulfilled his obligation. Beiur HaGra 489:3 and Mishna Brurah 489:15 agree. However, Eliyah Rabba 489:10 argues that one should count again after Tzet Hakochavim without a Bracha. </ref>
# If one is praying in a [[minyan]] that finishes [[maariv]] after sunset and one wants to count after Tzet Hakochavim, he should count then without a Bracha and mentally stipulate, "if I don't remember to count with a bracha then this counting should fulfill my obligation, however, if I remember later then I have intent not to fulfill my obligation with this counting." If one in fact remembers, he should count after Tzet Hakochavim with a Bracha. <ref>
* The Avudraham (Tefillot HaPesach) writes that if one prays with an early [[minyan]], he should count without a Bracha, and if he remembers later, he should count with a Bracha. Shulchan Aruch 489:3 codifies this as the halacha. Taz 489:6 and Beiur HaGra 489:3 explain that the case is where the [[minyan]] finished during [[Bein HaShemashot]].
* Mishna Brurah 489:17 writes that if one wants to count after Tzet Hakochavim, he should count with the [[minyan]] without a Bracha and have in mind that if he remembers later to count with a Bracha, this original counting shouldn’t fulfill his obligation. Hagahot Rabbi Akiva Eiger 46:16 and Aruch HaShulchan 489:8 agree. Chazon Ovadyah ([[Yom Tov]] p. 233-4) adds that the stipulation should be "if I don't remember to count with a bracha then this counting should fulfill my obligation, however, if I remember later then I have intent not to fulfill my obligation with this counting." However, the Taz writes that making such a condition doesn’t work.
* See, however, the Levush 489:3, who explains that the case is where the [[minyan]] finished before sunset, and the reason they counted was for Amei HaAretz who wouldn’t count later at night. </ref>
# If one is going to pray [[maariv]] with a [[minyan]] that is late at night, some poskim hold that one should wait to count with the [[minyan]], while others say that one should count at Tzet Hakochavim. <Ref>
* S”A 489:1 writes that on the second night of [[Pesach]], one should count sefira after [[maariv]]. The Chok Yaakov 489:16 explains that this is based on the halacha of giving precedence to the more common activity (Tadir). However, Mor UKetziah 489:1 argues that Tadir doesn’t apply here since sefira is deoraitta, or at least the mitzvah is explicit in the pasuk even though nowadays it’s derabbanan, while [[tefillah]] is entirely derabbanan. Thus, he explains that sefira must be said in the beginning of the night (Tzet Hakochavim) because one shouldn’t delay a mitzvah.
* Sh”t Igrot Moshe 4:99(1) defends the Chok Yaakov and writes that one must wait to count sefira after [[maariv]] even if he prays later in the night. Rav Elyashiv (quoted by Piskei Shemuot p. 18) agrees. On the other hand, Shevet HaLevi 6:53(3) agrees with the Mor UKetziah and says that if one is going to daven in a late [[minyan]], he should count by himself earlier, but he defends the minhag to wait to count with the [[minyan]] because otherwise many people would forget to count. Similarly, Halichot Shlomo (Tefilaa 16:16) also writes that the minhag is not to eat from the time of Sefirat HaOmer, and even if one still didn't pray [[Maariv]], one should count the sefira. </ref>
# If one counted during the day (before Plag [[Mincha]]) one has not fulfilled one’s obligation even if one Davened [[Mariv]] early and one must count it again that night with a Bracha. <Ref>S”A 489:2, Mishna Brurah 489:13, Beiur Halacha 489:3 s.v. MeBeOd Yom</ref>However, because of a minority opinion who says one did fulfill one's obligation, some say one should count again at night without a bracha. <ref>Kaf HaChaim 489:47</reF>
# If one said [[Mariv]] before [[Shekiyah]] after Plag [[Mincha]] one shouldn’t count then but rather wait until at least [[Bein HaShemashot]], However if one did so then one should count again at night without a Bracha unless one didn’t daven [[mariv]] before [[Shekiyah]] in which case one should count again with a Bracha. <Ref>Hilchot Chag BaChag (pg 29) </ref>
# If someone is insistent on saying [[Kriyat Shema]] at night after [[Tzet HaKochavim]] of Rabbenu Tam, one should also wait until [[Tzet HaKochavim]] in order to count Sefirat HaOmer. <Ref>Piskei Shemuot ([[Shavuot]] pg 40-1) in name of Rav Nassim Karlitz </ref>
# One shouldn’t rely on the minhag to count after Plag [[Mincha]]. <Ref>Rav Elyashiv in Kovetz Teshuvot (vol 3, end of chapter 4) quoted by Piskei Shemuot ([[Shavuot]] pg 42), Beiur Halacha 489:3 s.v. MeBeOd Yom </ref>

==If one forgot to count==
# One should say the Sefirah in the beginning of the night, if one forgot one can say the Sefirah with a Bracha the entire next night. <Ref> Tur 489:1 writes that if one forgot to count at the beginning of the night one can count all night. Perisha 489:1 quotes the Ran (Pesachim 28a s.v. VeBeHaggadah Gam Ken) who agrees. This is also the opinion of S”A 489:1. </ref>
# If one forgot to count the Omer an entire night and day one should continue to count without a Bracha. <Ref> Shulchan Aruch 489:8, Yabia Omer 3:28. Mishna Brurah 489:36-37 explains that we continue counting to satisfy the opinions that say that you can, but don't say a beracha because of the opinions that you cannot, namely the Behag quoted by Tosafot Menachot 66a "zecher" that if you miss one night you can't count any longer because to fulfill the mitzva you need seven full weeks. Tosafot themselves disagree and say you can continue counting, as does Rabbeinu Yitzchak quoted in the Rosh Pesachim 10:41 because the Behag believes that the mitzva is only one long mitzva. Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik quoted by Rav Herschel Schachter in Eretz Hatzvi 3:6-7 explains the behag not as saying that you need seven full weeks, but that you need the 49 consecutive days, and that is why the halacha is that if you count during the day even if you missed it the night before, you can continue through the rest of sefira with a beracha because you accomplished this obligation of consecutive nights. Sh"t Beit Halevi 1:39 says that since there is a mitzva to count days and weeks, if somebody misses a night in the middle of the week, he can count with a beracha on the nights that complete the week. Shearim mitzuyanim Bihalacha 120:4 says that nowadays when people miss a night they think they are exempt, and that is not what the Shulchan Aruch intended by saying that one should count without a beracha, and therefore, nowadays one should continue counting with a beracha. </ref>
# If one is unsure whether one missed an entire day one should continue to count with a Bracha. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 489:8 </ref>
# If one forgot to count one entire day and night, some say that one can be the Shaliach Tzibbur and make the bracha for others, however, others argue that one may not do so, rather once one missed a night and day, one may not count with a bracha but one may listen to someone making the bracha for himself.<ref>Pri [[Chadash]] 489:8 quotes one Rabbi who said that just like the Shaliach Tzibbur can make the [[brachot]] of chazarat hashatz even if no one in the congregation needs those [[brachot]] to fulfill an obligation, so too a Shaliach Tzibbur may make tha bracha of Sefirat HaOmer even if he isn't obligated in that bracha because he missed a day. However, the Pri [[Chadash]] argues that once he missed a day he isn't considered mechuyachav in the mitzvah of sefiarh according to that opinion that one may not miss any days. He compares it to the Yerushalmi which says that a person who lives in a city that reads the [[megillah]] on the 14th can't fulfill the obligation of a person who lives in a walled city who reads the [[megillah]] on the 15th. He argues that even Rashi ([[Megillah]] 2a) who seems to argue on the Yerushalmi, doesn't really disagree (see also Tosfot Yevamot 14a s.v. Ki).</ref>
# If a person counted in a self-contradictory manner, like saying the correct number of days but wrong number of weeks or vice versa and he didn't fix it by the next night, he can only continue to count without a beracha. <ref> [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=563 Rabbi Eli Mansour Dailyhalacha] </ref>

==If someone asks the day of the Omer==
# If someone asks "What day of the Omer is it?" if one hasn't fulfilled one's obligation yet, one should answer that "yesterday was such and such" rather than answering "today is such and such in the Omer" because if one were to do so, then one would fulfill one's obligation without having made the Bracha (and wouldn't be allowed to then say the Bracha). <ref>Shulchan Aruch 489:4 </ref>
# If it's before [[Shekiah]] then one may answer the day in the Omer in a straightforward manner and still say that night's Omer with a Bracha. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 489:4 </ref>However, because of a minority opinion that one fulfills one's obligation by counting after Plag [[Mincha]], even before [[Shekiyah]], one should be careful not to answer in a straightforward manner but rather say "yesterday was such and such".<ref>Kaf HaChaim 489:52 quoting Shulchan Aruch 489:15</ref>
# If a person asks the day of the Omer and one answered by saying the number of the Omer without saying the number of weeks many authoriites hold that one hasn't fulfilled one's obligation and one should repeat the counting with a Bracha <ref> Sh"t Maharash HaLevi Siman 5 ([http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1834&st=&pgnum=16&hilite= see it inside]) argues at length that the mitzvah includes an element of counting the days and an element of counting weeks and if one lacks either one the obligation wasn't fulfilled and one should repeat it with a Bracha. The Mishna Brurah 489:22 (and Shaar HaTziyun 489:28) hold like the Eliyah Rabba who also holds that if one didn't count the weeks one must repeat the counting with a Bracha. </ref>, while others argue that one should repeat the counting without a Bracha <ref> Knesset HaGedolah on Bet Yosef 489 s.v. VaAni </ref>, and some make a compromise to obligate one in repeating the counting with a Bracha on days when a week is completed. <ref> Shaar HaTziyun 489:28 in name of the Pri [[Chadash]] </ref>
# Some say that if a person answered the number in abbreviation (such as Lag for 33 or Dalet for 4) one has not fulfilled one’s obligation and one should repeat counting the Sefirah with a Bracha. <Ref> Sh"t Maharash HaLevi Siman 5 </ref> while others hold that one fulfills one's obligation with an abbreviation and one should not repeat the Omer with a Bracha. <ref> Knesset HaGedolah on Bet Yosef 489 s.v. VaAni </ref>
# If a person made the Bracha and then said the number in abbreviation one shouldn’t repeat the counting with a Bracha (since he clearly intended to fulfill his obligation and there is some significance to an abbreviation.)<Ref> Sh"t Maharash HaLevi Siman 5 </ref>
# If one makes the Bracha and counts by saying the next number of the Omer minus one such as saying that today is forty minus one instead of saying thirty nine one has fulfilled one's obligation. <ref> The Pri HaAretz Siman 10 quotes the Mahari Malcho who says that if on the 39th day one said that tonight is 40 minus 1 one fulfilled one’s obligation. This is also quoted by the Kemach Solet pg 118b s.v. Mi SheShachach, Bear Hetiev 489:8, Yad Aharon (on the Tur Siman 489 s.v. Im Amar). </ref>
# If a person asks the day of the Omer and one answered by saying the next number of the Omer minus one such as saying that today is forty minus one instead of saying thirty nine, some say that one fulfilled one's obligation, while others disagree and hold that one should repeat the counting with a Bracha. <ref> Sh"t Pri HaAretz Siman 10 (at the end in parentheses), Kemach Solet pg 118b s.v. Im Shoalo Chavero </ref>
# If a person asks the day of the Omer and one answered by saying that tomorrow the Omer is such and such (and it's implied that today's Omer is one less) nonetheless one has not fulfilled one's obligation and one must repeat counting the Omer with a Bracha. <ref> Sh"t Vayan Avraham Siman 35 and Chazon Ovadyah ([[Yom Tov]] pg 247) based on the distinction of the Sh"t Pri HaAretz Siman 10 (at the end in parentheses)</ref>

==Eating before counting the Omer==
# From a half hour before the time for sefira (according to some poskim, this refers to sunset, while others maintain that it refers to Tzet Hakochavim), one shouldn’t eat a meal until he counts sefira. More than a [[KeBaytzah]] of bread is considered a meal, however, even a lot of fruit isn’t a meal. There is a dispute whether [[Pas HaBah Bekisnin]] is considered like bread for this halacha. Nonetheless, many poskim defend the minhag to eat before sefira if one regularly attends a later [[minyan]].<ref>
* Rama 489:4 writes that from the time of sefira, it is forbidden to eat until one counts. Mishna Brurah 489:23 writes that really the prohibition begins from a half hour before Tzet Hakochavim, while the S”A HaRav 489:17 and Kaf HaChaim 489:64 hold that the prohibition begins from a half hour before sunset.
* Kaf HaChaim 489:66 clarifies that it is forbidden only to eat a meal that fits the criteria given by S”A 232:3, meaning more than a KeBeitzah of bread; fruit, even in large quantities, is not considered a meal. Yalkut Yosef 489:43 and Hilchot Chag BeChag (p. 16) write that Pat HaBah Bekisnin is the same as bread for this halacha; Nitei Gavriel 26:5 disagrees.
* Sh”t Igrot Moshe 4:99 writes that the logic permitting a person to eat before [[maariv]] - namely, that if one usually prays in a [[minyan]] he won’t forget to pray - should also permit eating before sefira, even after Tzet Hakochavim. Az Nidbaru 6:52, Rav Elyashiv (quoted by Piskei Shemuot p. 47), and Nitei Gavriel 26:4 agree. See Aruch HaShulchan 232:16, who records this leniency regarding [[mincha]]. </ref>
# Learning is permitted before sefira if one usually goes to a later [[minyan]]. <Ref> Regarding [[Shacharit]], Rashi [[Brachot]] 5b understands that Abba Binyamin wouldn’t learn before [[Davening]], however, Tosfot disagrees. Rosh 1:7 explains that Rashi meant only that a person who doesn’t usually pray with a [[minyan]] shouldn’t learn before praying. Someone who usually prays with a [[minyan]], on the other hand, is unlikely to forget to pray and thus may learn before praying. Tur and S”A 89:6 codify the Rosh as halacha. Mishna Brurah 232:11 writes that the same is true of [[mincha]]. Therefore, when Mishna Brurah 489:24 writes that doing any activity before [[counting sefira]] is the same as by [[mincha]], he means that it’s permitted if one usually davens with a [[minyan]]. </ref>

==Who is obligated to count?==
# Women are exempt from counting since it’s a Mitzvah Aseh SheZman Grama. <Ref>Rambam (Temidin UMusafin 7:24, Sefer Hamitzvot #161) rules that women are exempt from counting Sefirah. This is brought in Bet Yosef 489:1 s.v. VeTzarich and is also the opinion of Magen Avraham 489:1 (who also quotes Zohar Titzaveh pg 319 to show women are exempt) and Mishna Brurah 489:3. Interestingly, Ramban (Kiddushin 34a) holds that women are obligated ''because it is a Mitzvat Aseh She'ein HaZman Grama''. Many Acharonim grapple with this Ramban, as, seemingly, it's indeed time bound between Pesach and Shavuot. The Avnei Nezer (O.C. 384) postulates that since the Torah ties Sefirat HaOmer to the day after Yom Tov, and not Yom Tov itself, it's not really dependent on the 16th of Nissan, but the day before, and, therefore, SheHaZman Grama. In opposition, the Sridei Esh (vol. 2 Siman 116) argues that Zeman Grama means there is a specific interval of time in which one must fulfill the Mitzvah. Sefirat HaOmer isn't bound to a time interval, however, it itself is a time interval, in which we are obligated to acknowledge during each of its days. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchic (Nefesh HaRav pg. 191, see also MiPininei HaRav pg. 124) and the editors of the Rambam Frankel (Sefer HaMitzvot ibid.) felt it was just a copyist error, as none of the Ramban's major Talmidim who usually quote his opinions cite it. [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/854004/rabbi-hershel-schachter/sanhedrin-84-chazarah-6/ Rav Hershel Schachter] and [http://www.torahbase.org/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A8-%D7%A0%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%91%D7%9E%D7%A6%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%99%D7%A8%D7%AA-%D7%94%D7%A2%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%A8/ Rav Asher Weiss] point out how a recent discovery of the [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=49831&st=&pgnum=471&hilite= Sefer Imrei Shefer], Chiddushim of the son of the Maharam Chalawa, who was a Talmid of a Talmid of the Rashba, shed light on the matter. The son quotes his father, the Maharam Chalawah, who explains that Sefirah isn’t Zman Grama since the time doesn’t cause Sefirah, but the Korban HaOmer, just like Birkat HaMazon on Shabbat isn't Zeman Grama, as the Mitzvah of Seudat Shabbat is Gorem it. Rav Schachter felt that the Maharam Chalawah's explanation was most relevant, as it was coming from a Talmid from the same Beit Midrash who most probably had a masorah. For a more detailed discussion, see the above article by HaRav Asher Weiss, Biur Sefer HaMitzvot LeRav Saadia Gaon by Rav Yerucham Fischel Perlow (Mevo chapter 12, specifically s.v. veOmnam), and the essay by HaRav Shlomo Wahrman, Rosh Yeshiva of HANC, in [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=51478&st=&pgnum=360&hilite= Orot HaPesach], pg. 289.
* Shulchan Shlomo 489:3 writes that women shouldn't count [[sefirat haomer]] with a bracha because they might forget to count one night and they won't know the halacha (that they're supposed to continue without a bracha). </ref>

==A child who became [[Bar Mitzvah]]ed during Sefirah==
# According to R. Ovadiah Yosef, a child who became [[Bar Mitzvah]]ed during Sefirah should continue counting after his Bar Mitvah without a bracha.<ref> Sh"t Yabia Omer 3:27-28</ref> However, most Ashkenazi poskim say that he may continue counting even with a bracha.<ref>Shaarei Teshuvah O.C. 489:20, Aruch HaShulchan O.C. 489:15, Sheilot U'teshuvot Kesav Sofer 99, Sheilot U'teshuvot Maharam Shick 260, and Sheilot U'Teshuvot Mishnah Halachos 11:398. Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik quoted in Eretz Hatzvi 3:6-7 says that according to the Behag quoted in Tosafot 66a "zecher" the bar-mitzva boy should be allowed to continue with a beracha because the mitzva is dependent on the consecutiveness of the 49 nights, which he fulfills even before becoming of age. </ref>
# A convert who converted during Sefirah should not count with a bracha from the time of his conversion.<ref>Shaarei Teshuvah O.C. 489:20, Aruch HaShulchan O.C. 489:15</ref>

==Language of the Sefirah==
# Lechatchila, one should know the number of the day when you make the bracha. Bedieved, if one said the bracha with intent to hear the number of the day from his friend and paused to hear his friend after his bracha, he’s Yotsei. <ref> S”A 489:5 writes that if one said the bracha with in mind that one will say the Hayom that his friend says, he fulfills his obligation. Yet, Taz 489:8 writes that implied from S”A is that Lechatchila one should say the bracha only when you know the number of the day. Mishna Brurah 489:29 adds that Lechatchila it’s forbidden to pause for more than [[Toch Kedi Dibbur]]. </ref>
# Lechatchila, one should count today is such and such “to the Omer”, Bedieved if one just said today is such and such day you’re yotzei. <Ref> Sh”t Rashba 1:457 brought in Bet Yosef 489 s.v. Katav rules that really to fulfill the mitzvah it deosn’t matter whether you mention the Omer or not, however, it’s preferable to mention the Omer to clarify. This is also the opinion of the Mishna Brurah 489:8. </ref>
==Incorrect intent during Bracha==
# Preferably, one should know the day of the Omer while making the Bracha, however, if one didn't know the day of the Omer but made the Bracha with intent to complete it as one will hear from one's friend and one did do so one has fulfilled one's obligation. <ref> Mishna Brurah 489:29, Shulchan Aruch 489:5 </ref>
# If one started the bracha (Baruch Atta…Melech HaOlam) with in mind to say the wrong night and then finished the bracha with the intent to say the correct night and then said the correct Hayom, one is Yotzei. <ref> Tur 489:6 quotes the Avi Ezri that writes that a person who had in mind the wrong number during the beginning of the bracha and during the end of the bracha he thought of the correct number and said the HaYom correctly, isn’t Yotzei as he needs the beginning and end of the bracha to be with the correct intention. Bet Yosef 489:6 quotes the Mordechai that this Avi Ezri is going according to the opinion that Sefira is Deoritta and therefore since it’s a Safek whether such a Bracha is sufficient (as in [[Brachot]] 12a) he must make a new bracha. However, Bet Yosef concludes since majority of RIshonim hold Sefira is Derabbanan, we are lenient on this safek and is Yotzei. This is also the opinion of the S”A 489:6 and all achronim agree including Mishna Brurah 489:32. </ref>
# If one started the bracha (Baruch Atta…Melech HaOlam) with in mind to say the correct night and then finished the bracha with the intent to say the wrong night and then said the wrong Hayom, according to Sephardim, one is Yotzei, while Ashkenazim hold that if one corrects the Hayom within [[Toch Kedi Dibbur]] one is Yotsei but otherwise one isn’t Yotzei and needs a new bracha. <ref> (1) Tur 489:6 quotes the Avi Ezri that writes that a person who had in mind the correct number during the beginning of the bracha and during the end of the bracha he thought of the wrong number and said the wrong HaYom, isn’t Yotzei as he needs the beginning and end of the bracha to be with the correct intention. (2) Bet Yosef 489:6 quotes the Mordechai that this Avi Ezri is going according to the opinion that Sefira is Deoritta and therefore since it’s a Safek whether such a Bracha is sufficient (as in [[Brachot]] 12a) he must make a new bracha. However, Bet Yosef concludes since majority of Rishonim hold Sefira is Derabbanan, we are lenient on this safek and is Yotzei. So rules the S”A 489:6 and some achronim agree including Magen Avraham 489:12, Olot [[Shabbat]] 489:6, Chok Yakov 489:19, and Kaf HaChaim 489:75. Yalkut Yosef (Moadim edition 5764 pg 615) writes that one should count again to fulfill the obligation according to everyone however one shouldn’t make a Bracha like S”A. (3) However, Bach (489 s.v. UMah SheKatav Katav Od Avi Ezri) argues on the Bet Yosef and says that according to everyone one isn’t Yotzei in such a case as the counting was simply wrong. This is also the opinion of the Levush, Pri Chadash and Mishna Brurah 489:32. (4) The third approach is that of the Maamer Mordechai 489:8 and Chok Yosef who explains S”A as where one corrected himself within [[Toch Kedi Dibbur]]. (5) Another explanation of S”A is that of the Taz 489:9 (to defend S”A against his father-in-law the Bach) who explains that the S”A was only dealing with someone who made the bracha with the wrong intent either in the beginning or in the end and then counted the Hayom correctly and so one fulfills his obligation according to the majority of Rishonim that Sefirah is Derabbanan. </ref>

==Prohibited practices during the Sefirat HaOmer==
The practice is to observe certain practices of [[mourning]] during the Sefirah because the 24,000 students of Rabbi Akiva died during this time. <ref> Tur and Shulchan Aruch 493:1 based on gemara in Yevamot 62b. </ref> There’s three basic minhagim about the [[mourning]] period between [[Pesach]] and [[Shavuot]]:
# One practice is to mourn the first 33 days from the beginning of the Omer until the 34th day in the morning. This practice is followed by Sephardim. <Ref>The source for this minhag is the [[Teshuvah]] of R. Yehoshua Ibn Shuib (cited by Bet Yosef 493:2) which says that the students of Rabbi Akiva died during the Omer except for the last 15 days which leaves the first 34 days, however, based on Miksat HaYom KeKulo (a minority of the day is considered like a whole day) one may stop [[mourning]] on the morning of the 34th. This is the ruling of S”A 493:2 and the practice of Sephardim as recorded in Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 493:1), Yabia Omer 3:26, Yechave s.v. Nohagin, Beiur Halacha 493 Daat 4:32. This is explained clearly in Biur HaGra 493:6 s.v. Yesh Nohagim, and [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/714562/Rabbi_Josh_Flug/The_Mourning_Period_Of_Sefirat_Ha'omer Rabbi Flug's article on Sefirat HaOmer]. </ref>
# A second practice is to mourn from the beginning of the Omer until the 33rd day in the morning. This practice is followed by most Ashkenazim. <Ref>The source for this minhag is the Rama 493:2 who holds that the students of Rabbi Akiva stopped dying on the 33rd day of the Omer and by the principle of Miksat HaYom KeKulo (a minority of the day is considered like a whole day) one may stop [[mourning]] on the morning of the 33rd. This is the explanation of the Biur HaGra 493:9 s.v. UMarbim, and the practice of Ashkenazim as recorded by [https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thehalacha.com%2Fattach%2FVolume5%2FIssue8.pdf Halachically Speaking] (Volume 3, Issue 8, page 3).
This is explained clearly in Beiur Halacha 493 s.v. Yesh Nohagim and [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/714562/Rabbi_Josh_Flug/The_Mourning_Period_Of_Sefirat_Ha'omer Rabbi Flug's article on Sefirat HaOmer]. </ref>
# A third practice is to mourn 33 not consecutive days during the Omer. <ref>
Bet Yosef 493:3 quotes the Ri Ibn Shoiv who records another tradition that Rabbi Akiva’s students only died on the 33 days during the Sefira when there’s no [[Tachanun]], which are the 7 days of [[Pesach]], 7 Shabbatot, and 2 days of [[Rosh Chodesh]]. Based on this tradition, Sh"t Igrot Moshe 1:159 writes, there is a minhag to mourn for 33 non-consecutive days during the sefira. </ref>This practice is followed by some Ashkenazim. <Ref> Mishna Brurah 489:5 </ref>
## Some observe this practice by [[mourning]] from the day after [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar until Erev [[Shavuot]] excluding [[Lag BaOmer]]. <Ref>Magen Avraham 489:5, Mishna Brurah 493:15 </ref>
##Some observe this practice by [[mourning]] from the first day of [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar until the third day before [[Shavuot]]. <Ref>Rama 493:3, Magen Avraham 489:5 </ref>
## Some observe this practice by [[mourning]] from after [[Issru Chag]] until [[Rosh Chodesh]] Sivan excluding the two days of [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar and [[Lag BaOmer]]. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 489:15 quoting the Siddur Derech Chaim </ref>
## Some observe this practice by [[mourning]] all the days of the Omer expect for [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar and Sivan. <Ref> Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:159 explains that the reason for this minhag is that it holds that the students of Rabbi Akiva died on all the days between [[Pesach]] and [[Shavuot]] except for the 16 days when one can not say [[Tachanun]] (7 days of [[Pesach]], 6 [[Shabbat]]ot, 3 days of [[Rosh Chodesh]]) and so the minhag forbids getting married and cutting hair the entire Sefira except for [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar and Sivan (and [[Pesach]] and [[Shabbat]] are already forbidden to get married). </ref>
# A fourth minhag followed by some is to observe sefira, in regards to not cutting one's hair, for the entire duration of the sefira from Erev [[Pesach]] until Erev [[Shavuot]].<ref>Arizal quoted by Shaarei Teshuva 493:8</ref>
# It is permitted for a wife to observe her family’s [[mourning]] period, as long as her husband does not object. <ref> Rav Doniel Neustadt [[Daily Halacha]] Discussion page 219 </ref>
===Getting Married===
# The Sephardic custom is not to get married during the Sefira until the 34th day in the morning. <ref> Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 428) </ref>
# The Ashkenazic custom is not to get married during the Sefira until the 33rd day ([[Lag BaOmer]]). <Ref> Rama 493:1 </ref>
# If the [[marriage]] involves a couple with one side who is Ashkenazic and one side Sephardic, the custom of the husband should be followed. <ref> Sh"t Yabia Omer 3:26(4), Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 429) </ref>
# If one is invited to a wedding which takes place during a time of the sefira when one's custom is to observe the practices of [[mourning]], and the one who is getting married has the custom that it is permissible to get married then, one should not refrain from going to the wedding because of the sefira.<Ref>[http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/774533/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Shiur_#80_-_Yevamos_-_מפני_מה_גרים_בזה'ז_מעונים,_יש_זיקה,_ספירת_העומר Rabbi Hershel Schachter on yutorah.org (at the very end)] based on a ruling of Rav Moshe Feinstein Iggerot Moshe 1:159, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Shalmei Simcha page 84), Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish 3:65:30), Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky (Emet Liyaakov 493). However, Minchat Yitzchak 4:84 disagrees and feels that one may not attend a wedding during their Sefira </ref>

===Getting engaged===
# It's permissible to get engaged during the Sefirah.<ref> Mishna Brura 493:3 </ref> However one may not have musical instruments and one shouldn't dance. <ref> Nitei Gavriel (Pesach v. 3, 51:5), Maamer Mordechai of Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Sefirat HaOmer #45), Hanisuin Kihilchatam pg. 122 and Halichot Shlomo Moadim 2:11:18 </ref>

===Cutting hair===
# In commemoration of the death of the students of Rabbi Akiva, the minhag is not to cut one’s hair during sefira. Although many minhagim exist, the common minhag is that Sephardim don’t cut their hair until the 34th day of sefira in the morning and Ashkenazim don’t cut their hair until the 33rd in the morning.<ref>
* The Gemara Yevamot 62b records the tragic story of Rabbi Akiva’s student passing away between [[Pesach]] and [[Shavuot]]. The Tur 493:1 records the minhag not to take hair cuts during sefirat HaOmer in order to mourn the death of Rabbi Akiva’s students. The Tur writes that some would cut their hair from [[Lag BaOmer]] and on because there’s a tradition that the students of Rabbi Akiva stopped dying on [[Lag BaOmer]]. The Tashbetz 1:178, however, says that they died until 15 days before [[Shavuot]] (Pros HaAseret), which is the 34th of the Omer. S”A 493:2 follows the Tashbetz, while the Rama quotes some who follow the Tur and some who don’t take a hair cut from [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar until [[Shavuot]].
* Bet Yosef 493:3 quotes the Ri Ibn Shoiv who records another tradition that Rabbi Akiva’s students only died on the 33 days during the Sefira when there’s no [[Tachanun]]. According to this tradition, Beiur Halacha 493 s.v. Yesh the minhag developed to mourn 33 days during the sefira corresponding to the days they died. Kitzur S”A 120:6-7 writes that some mourn the last 33 days of sefira starting after [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar excluding [[Lag BaOmer]] and a variant minhag is to mourn from the first day of [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar until the Shelosha Yemei Hagbala excluding [[Lag BaOmer]].
* S”A 493:2 writes that the minhag is to mourn from the beginning of the sefira until the morning of the 34th of the Omer. Kaf HaChaim 493:12 and Chazon Ovadyah (pg 253) agree that this is the common minhag among Sephardim. Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 430) and Maamer Mordechai of Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Sefirat HaOmer #48) agree. Kaf HaChaim 493:12-3 adds that some follow the Arizal’s practice not to cut one’s hair the entire Sefira.
* Although the Mishna Brurah 493:15 records the Ashkenazic minhag to mourn from the first day of [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar until the Shelosha Yemei Hagbala, [http://www.yeshiva.org.il/midrash/shiur.asp?id=301 Peninei Halacha] (Hilchot Sefirat HaOmer) writes that nowadays the common Ashkenazic minhag is like the Rama to mourn from the beginning of the Omer until [[Lag BaOmer]] in the morning.
* Mishna Brurah 493:6 explains S”A as saying that one may only cut one’s hair starting from the 34th in the morning because Miksat HaYom KeKulo only operates starting in the daytime. In 493:10 he writes that the same for the Rama regarding the 33rd. However, Mishna Brurah 493:11 quotes some achronim who argue that one may even cut one’s hair from the nighttime. Rav Shlomo Zalman (cited by Halichot Shlomo p 364, note 80) once permitted taking a hair cut on Lag BeOmer at night. </ref>
# The Sephardic custom on a year that [[Lag BaOmer]] falls out on Friday is that one may cut one's hair on Friday morning out of respect for [[Shabbat]] and if one is unable to cut one's hair on Friday morning, it's permissible to cut one's hair on Thursday night after [[Tzet HaKochavim]]. <ref> Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 431-2) </ref>
# According to Ashkenazim, if there's a pressing need women may cut their hair during Sefirat HaOmer.<ref>Sh"t Igrot Moshe YD 2:137. See [https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.thehalacha.com/attach/Volume5/Issue8.pdf&pli=1 Halachically Speaking article on Sefirah]. See Nitei Gavriel ([[Pesach]] 49:11) who writes that the minhag not to cut one's hair during sefirah also applies to women. </ref> According to Sephardim, women may cut their hair during the Sefirah.<Ref>Chazon Ovadyah ([[Yom Tov]] pg 261)</ref>
# According to some poskim, children under the age of bar mitzvah are permitted to get haircuts during the omer as they are not included in the [[mourning]] of the [[sefirat haomer]]. <ref> Sh"t Or Litzion 3:page 184 </ref>
# If one has a [[Brit Milah]] during the Sefira, the father of the baby, the Mohel, and the Tzandak may cut their hair that day. <ref> Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 432) </ref>
# It is permissible to tweeze eyebrows or eyelashes. <ref> Bein [[Pesach]] Lishavuot page 241 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and Rav Shmuel Wosner. </ref>
# It is permissible to comb hair even if some hairs will be removed in the process. <ref> Mishna Brurah 551:20 </ref>
===Shaving===
# Included in the minhag not to take hair cuts is not to shave. <ref> Tur 493 says that some have the custom "lo lihistaper." Masekhet Semachot (7:11) in regards to [[mourning]] writes that lihistaper means to cutting the hair of one's head, mustache, beard, and all other hair. Nitei Gavriel ([[Pesach]] vol 3, 49:2) and Chazon Ovadyah (p. 262) write that including in the minhag not to take a hair cut is not to shave.</ref> Some authorities permitted someone who shaves daily after having waited 3 or 5 days of not [[shaving]] to shave during the Sefira. <ref> Rav Soloveitchik (cited by Rav Schachter in Nefesh HaRav pg 191-2) compared the Sefira to the 12 months of [[mourning]] in which a person who shaves daily may shave after waiting a few days. Rav Soloveitchik felt that this was the case because all customs have to be based on some opinion or patterned after another halacha. Therefore, he argues that the [[mourning]] of the Omer is parallel to the [[mourning]] during the year of [[mourning]] for a parent. Therefore since the halacha says that it is permissible to shave during the year once one's friends scold him to tell him that his hair is too long ("ad she-yig'aru bo chaveirav": Moed Katan 22b, Rambam Hilkhot Evel 6:3), it would be permissible during the omer also.
Rav Schachter (“Halachos of [[Chol HaMoed]]”, min 67-70) clarified that not [[shaving]] for 3 or 5 days is sufficient. Rabbi Willig (“Hilchos [[Pesach]] and Sefira#1”, min 85-90) also quotes Rav Soloveitchik. Rav Aharon Lictenstein [http://vbm-torah.org/archive/halak65/24halak.htm vbm.org] says that it is even an obligation to shave for kavod [[shabbat]] on Friday incorporating Rav Soloveitchik's approach. </ref>
# Many Sephardic authorities are lenient regarding shave on [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar if it causes one pain not to shave, however, Ashekanzic authorities seem not to accept such a leniency.<ref>
* Bet Yosef 493:3 writes that those who cut their hair on [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar because they consider it a [[Yom Tov]] are mistaken because the minhag is not to cut their hair on [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar. He adds that they may have mistakenly thought it was permitted based on another minhag which would mourn another 33 days during the sefira. Similarly, Mishna Brurah 493:14 summarizes that according to those who don’t cut their hair the first 33 days of the Sefira, it would be contradictory to shave on [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar.
* However, the Radvaz 2:687 permits cutting one’s hair on [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar if not cutting one’s hair causes one’s pain based on the halacha that one who is pain is exempt from the mitzvah of [[Sukkah]]. Sh”t Chazon Ovadyah (vol 1, pg 55) clarifies that although the halacha of [[Sukkah]] is based on Teshvu Kein Taduro, the Radvaz means that it’s logical that one can be lenient if it’s bothersome since sefira is only a minhag. Chida in Yosef Ometz 40:2 and Kaf HaChaim 493:40 write that some rely on this Radvaz. Similarly, Rav Ovadyah in Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 431) and Chazon Ovadyah (pg 262) writes that one should be careful not to shave during sefira and if it’s difficult not to shave, one may shave on [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar.
* The Bach 493 quotes the Minhagim who says that it’s permitted to get married on [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar if it falls out on [[Shabbat]] and explains that it’s based on the fact that there’s a combination of the [[kedusha]] of [[rosh chodesh]] and [[kedusha]] of [[Shabbat]] to override [[mourning]] of Sefira. Pri Megadim (E”A 493:2) clarifies that the Bach means getting married on Friday because it’s forbidden to get married on [[Shabbat]]. Regarding this Bach, the Pri [[Chadash]] 493:3 writes that the same is true for haircuts. Thus, Mishna Brurah 493:5 writes that if [[Rosh Chodesh]] Iyar falls out on [[Shabbat]] one may cut one’s hair on Friday. Kitzur S”A 120:6 and S”A HaRav 493:8 agree. It seems clear from the above achronim that [[Rosh Chodesh]] alone isn’t sufficient to permit cutting one’s hair. </ref>
# Many authorities hold that one may not shave on Friday for [[Kavod Shabbat]]. If a person is in great pain from not [[shaving]], some say one may shave.<ref>
* It also seems evident from the Bach and Mishna Brurah (see previous footnote) that one may not cut one’s hair because of [[Kavod Shabbat]] alone. Thus, Rav Shlomo Zalman (cited by Shalmei Moed pg 449-450) and Rav Yacov Kamenetsky (Emet L’Yaakov 493 note 467) hold that one may not shave in the sefira for [[Kavod Shabbat]].
* However, Rav Lichtenstein (vbm.org) ruled that not only is it permitted but an obligation to shave for [[kavod Shabbat]] during sefira just like [[Kavod Shabbat]] theoretically overrides the [[nine days]] (see Mishna Brurah 551:32). Similarly, Rav Ovadyah in Chazon Ovadyah ([[Yom Tov]] pg 262) and Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 431) writes that if one is in great pain one may shave every Friday.</ref>
# Some authorities permit [[shaving]] in honor of [[Yom HaAtzmaut]], however, some disagree. <ref> Rabbi Eliezer Melamed (Peninei Halacha "[[Yom HaAtzmaut]]") writes that those who shave regularly should shave prior [[Yom HaAtzmaut]] in order to look presentable for the holiday. He also quotes Rav Yitzchak Nissim and Rav Tzvi Yehuda HaCohen Kook who agreed. Shana Beshana (5752, p. 145) quotes Rav Tzvi [[Pesach]] Frank as agreeing. Shana B’shana (5752, p. 145) quotes Rav Tzvi [[Pesach]] Frank as agreeing. Rav Shaul Yisraeli in Mareh HaBezek 4:54 permits [[shaving]] from after midday prior to [[Yom HaAtzmaut]] even for those living outside [[Israel]]. However, Yaskil Avdi 6:10 and Rav Soloveitchik (quoted by Rav Schachter in Nefesh HaRav p. 94) argue.</ref>
# Many authorities permit [[shaving]] if not [[shaving]] will cause one a loss of income; however, each case should be judged individually. <ref>
* Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe 4:102 rules that if one will lose money by not [[shaving]], one may shave during sefira, because the minhag never applied in a case of monetary loss. In 5:24(9), he explains his position and says that only a person who is concerned about losing his income for the duration of the sefira is permitted to shave. If, however, he can simply borrow money and then repay it with later income, this leniency wouldn’t apply. See Maadanei Shlomo (p. 54) who quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman as also being lenient.
* Similarly, Sh”t Zera Emet 69 writes that for [[parnasa]] it is permitted, but each case should be judged independently. Chida in Machzik Bracha 493:4, Kaf Hachaim 493:19, Sh”t Yaskil Avdi 6:5, and Nitei Gavriel (49:8) agree.
* However, Piskei Shemuot (p. 62) quotes Rav Elyashiv saying that nowadays it’s forbidden to shave for [[parnasa]] because it’s not considered strange to go unshaven. </ref>
# Many authorities hold that one is not permitted to shave during his custom of sefira in order to look presentable for a date. <Ref> [http://thehalacha.com/wp-content/uploads/Vol5Issue8.pdf Halachically Speaking] quoting Rav Belsky, Piskei Shmuos (pg 62-63) quoting Rav Elyashiv </ref>

===Cutting nails===
# It is permissible to cut one's nail during the Sefirat HaOmer. <ref>Maamer Mordechai of Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Sefirat HaOmer #54), Kaf Hachayim 493:16, Chazon Ovadia Hilchot [[Yom Tov]] page 261, Sh"t Rivivot Ephrayim 4:126:5 </ref>

===Making Shehecheyanu===
# If something occurs that would require a [[shehecheyanu]], one should recite it as usual. <ref> Mishna Brurah 493:2. The minhag not to is quoted in the Eliyahu Zuta 493:1 quoting Rabbeinu Yerucham and Leket Yosher page 97 quoting the Terumat Hadeshen. </ref>
# It is preferable not to wear new clothing which would require one to make a [[Shehecheyanu]] during the Sefira, however, if there's a need one should do it on a [[Shabbat]], at a Simcha of a [[Bar Mitzvah]] or [[Brit Milah]]. <ref> Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 433). Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach Aleihu Lo Yibol 286 and Shalmei Moed page 441 rules that it is completely permissible to buy new clothing if it is not your minhag not to. See Taamei Haminhagim page 251. </ref> The accepted Sephardic minhag is to make [[Shehecheyanu]] as usual. <Ref> Maamer Mordechai of Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Sefirat HaOmer #55) </ref> If one thought it was prohibited to recite [[shehecheyanu]] but later found out that it is not, doesn't need a [[hatarat nedarim]] to start saying [[shehecheyanu]] during sefira. <ref> Yechave Daat 1:24. </ref>
# It is permitted to buy new undergarments which do not regularly require a [[Shehecheyanu]] during sefira. <ref> Piskei Teshuvot 493:3 </ref>
# It is permissible to eat a new fruit which would require one to make a [[Shehecheyanu]] during the Sefira. <ref> Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 434), Rav Elyashiv quoted in Mivakshei Torah 19 </ref>
# It is permissible to move into a new apartment and make the requisite [[Shehecheyanu]] during the Sefira. <ref> Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 434) </ref>
===Moving to a New House===
# It is permitted to move to a new house or apartment during sefira. <ref> Piskei Teshuvot 493: note 6 quoting the Satmar Rebbe, Mevakshei Torah 19 quoting Rav Elyashiv, Tzitz Eliezer 11:41. Piskei Teshuvot 493:1 quotes several poskim who bring down this minhag. </ref>
# It is permitted to redecorate or paint one's home. <ref> Yechave Daat 3:30, Tzitz Eliezer 11:41. Piskei Teshuvot 493:1 quotes several poskim who bring this minhag as well. </ref>
===Listening to Music===
{{Listening to Music during Sefira}}

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

Month of Nissan

2016-03-29T03:10:01Z

Sbmb: /* Parshat HaNesiyim */

==Preparation for Pesach==
# Thirty days before [[Pesach]] one should start learning the halachot of [[Pesach]]. <ref>In Gemara Pesachim 6a, Rabbanan hold that one should begin to learn Hilchot [[Pesach]] thirty days in advance of [[Pesach]], whereas Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel holds only 2 weeks. Rabbanan learn this idea from Moshe who taught the laws of [[Pesach]] Sheni thirty days in advance which was [[Pesach]] in Nissan. Shulchan Aruch 429:1 rules like the opinion of the Rabbanan. Mishna Brurah 429:2 writes that it begins on [[Purim]] and it’s an obligation upon each individual to learn the Halachot of [[Pesach]] in this time. </ref> The 30 days begin from [[Purim]] itself. <ref> Mishna Brurah 429:2. Chazon Ovadyah ([[Pesach]] pg 1) agrees that the thirty days before [[Pesach]] begins on [[Purim]] itself. Nonetheless, he adds that if someone has a question about [[Pesach]] and someone has a question about [[Purim]], the question about [[Purim]] takes precedence.</ref> All the more so, on the holiday itself one should learn the halachot of [[Pesach]]. <ref> Gemara [[Megillah]] 32b states that on [[Pesach]] itself, one should learn the halachot of [[Pesach]] on [[Pesach]]. Mishna Brurah 429:1 and Chazon Ovadyah ([[Pesach]] pg 1) quote this as halacha as opposed to Shulchan Aruch HaRav 429:4 who writes that on the holiday itself the Rabbi should speak about the topic of the day, meaning the miracle that occurred and Aggadah because the halachot are easily found in books.</ref>
# This doesn't mean that a talmid chacham should stop his regular learning to learn halacha of the upcoming holiday, but rather it means that a question about hilchot [[pesach]] is given precedence to questions not about [[pesach]].<ref>Yabea Omer 2:22, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Pesach]] pg 1) explains that the halacha in Gemara Pesachim 6a is relevant in regards to the laws established in Tosefta Sanhedrin 7:5 which state that a person should ask relevant questions and a relevant question has precedence over the irrelevant questions. Bach 429 writes that this obligation applies even to somebody who has learnt it in the past, because he should refresh his memory. </ref>
# Also it is very important for the (local) Rabbi to give [[shiurim]] informing people of the halachot of [[Pesach]]. <ref>Mishna Brurah in Shaar HaTziyun 429:5 points out that the primary teaching on the holiday itself should be halacha and not just the idea of the day. Chazon Ovadyah ([[Pesach]] pg 1) writes that it's important for the (local) Rabbi to give [[shiurim]] about hilchot [[pesach]]. See Kaf HaChaim 429:3 who speaks about the importance of these drashot of the Rabbi and how they should include halacha.</ref>

==Tachanun, Fasting, and Eulogies==
# There's no [[Tachanun]] for the entire month of Nissan. <Ref>Shulchan Aruch 429:2 writes that there's no [[Tachanun]] for the entire month of Nissan. Mishan Brurah 429:7 explains that since the Nesiyim (in Bamidbar 7) brought the [[Korbanot]] for the first 12 days of Nissan, the days were considered a [[Yom Tov]] for them. Then [[Erev Pesach]], [[Pesach]], and [[Issru Chag]] are connected to [[Pesach]]. Altogether since most of the month is related to [[Kedusha]] it's all considered Kodesh. Chazon Ovadyah (pg 2) adds that the celebration of the building of the third Bet Hamikdash, which will occur in Nissan and in particular on [[Pesach]], will extend for another week after [[Pesach]]. This is also brought down in Shu"t Chatam Sofer 103. </ref>
# According to Ashkenazim, one shouldn’t fast during Nissan; even an individual who has Yehrzheit shouldn’t fast during Nissan. <Ref>Rama 429:2 </ref> However, according to Sephardim, one shouldn’t establish a communal fast during Nissan. However, an individual is permitted to fast, such as for a Yehrzheit during Nissan, except on [[Pesach]] and [[Rosh Chodesh]]. <Ref>S”A 429:2, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Pesach]] pg 5-7). Or Le’sion (vol. 3, 5:1). </ref>
# There aren't supposed to be communal fasts or eulogies during the month of Nissan. <Ref>S”A 429:2. Mishna Brurah 429:9 adds that the minhag Ashkenaz was for even individuals not to fast during Nissan. </ref>
# A bride and groom the day of their wedding may fast during Nissan even on [[Rosh Chodesh]] Nissan. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 429:10, Halichot Shlomo (Moadim vol 1, 2:3) </ref>
# It’s permissible to fast a Tanit Chalom, a fast made to rectify a bad dream, during Nissan. <Ref>Rama 429:10 </ref>

==Parshat HaNesiyim==
# During the first 13 days of Nissan, there is a nice minhag, for the first 12 days to read the Parsha of the Nesiyim for that day (found in Bamidbar 7), and on the 13th day to read the first four pesukim of Parshat Bahalotcha. <ref>Shulchan Aruch HaRav 429:15, Kaf HaChaim 429:22, Chazon Ovadyah (pg 3), Mishna Brurah 429:8. However, the Aruch Hashulchan (429:7) writes that on the 13th day of Nissan, one should begin a few pesukim ealier, from "Vezot chanukat" (Bamidbar 7:10) </ref> The minhag is to read it from a chumash. <Ref> Perisha YD 270:7 writes that since nowadays writing down Torah SheBaal Peh is treated as though it’s permitted and that we don’t learn from nuances in the text, one shouldn’t degrade the holiness of a [[Sefer Torah]] to learn from it, but rather one should learn from a sefer. Chazon Ovadyah ([[Pesach]] pg 4) argues that this is only according to the Shach’s explanation of the Rosh that nowadays there’s no mitzvah to write a [[Sefer Torah]] and the primary mitzvah is to write sefarim. However, according to the Bet Yosef’s explanation of the Rosh that even nowadays there’s a mitzvah to write a [[Sefer Torah]], then it seems one may learn from a [[Sefer Torah]] and there’s no issue of degrading its holiness. He supports this from the Radvaz 3:529 who recommends reading [[Shenayim Mikrah]] from a [[Sefer Torah]]. Chazon Ovadyah (pg 3) concludes that the minhag is to read it from a chumash. </ref>

==Maot Chitim==
# It’s proper to give Maot Chitim, [[charity]] to the poor in order that they have money for [[Matzah]] on [[Pesach]]. <Ref>Rama 429:1. Mishna Brurah 429:6 and Shaar Hatziyun 429:10 emphasizes the significance of the obligation. </ref>
# It’s permissible to give Maot Chitim from money of Maaser Kesafim, a tith of one’s money. <Ref>Halichot Shlomo (Moadim vol 1, 2:2), since there is no set amount that must be given and it isn't considered a a total obligation. </ref>
==Shabbat Hagadol==
see [[Shabbat HaGadol]]

==Birkat Ilanot==
See the [[Birkat Ilanot]] page.

==Links==
* [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/810712/Rabbi_Ezra_Schwartz/Practices_of_Nissan Practices of Nissan] by Rabbi Ezra Schwartz
* [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/760192/Rabbi_Moshe_D_Tendler/Halachos_for_the_Month_of_Nissan Halachos for the Month of Nissan] by Rabbi Moshe D. Tendler

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

Doing Activities Before Davening

2015-12-14T18:08:12Z

Sbmb: /* Traveling, Showering, Shaving */

In general, one should not begin an activity which will require of one to become engaged in it, before performing a mitzvah at hand. When it comes to davening specifically, there are unique stringencies and leniences for each of the davenings as detailed below.
==Shacharit==
===Learning===
# There is a positive aspect to learning before [[davening]] to prepare oneself for [[davening]]. <ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:23. See there where he writes that the minhag is to be lenient to learn before [[davening]] because of the positive aspect of learning before [[davening]].</ref>
# If one usually goes to daven in a [[minyan]] which is at a set time, then it is permissible to learn before [[davening]] even after [[Olot HaShachar]] and so, the minhag is to learn before [[davening]]. <ref>S”A 89:6, Piskei Teshuvot 89:23 </ref>
# It is permissible to learn until [[Olot HaShachar]]. However, once Olot Hashachar comes, it is forbidden to begin learning until one has prayed. <Ref>S”A 89:6 </ref>Some are lenient to permit learning after [[Olot HaShachar]] until close to [[HaNetz HaChama]]. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:31 </ref>Nonetheless, it is permissible to learn even after [[Olot Hashachar]] in any of the following three circumstances:
## if one is learning in the place where a tzibbur will come to daven, <ref>Mishna Brurah 89:32 </ref>
## if one asked a friend who was not learning to remind one to daven before the latest time of Shema and [[Tefilla]], <ref>Mishna Brurah 89:34. See the collolary to this for [[Kriyat Shema]] [[Arvit]] in Mishna Brurah 235:17. </ref> or
## if one was teaching Torah to a group or is learning in a group and if there is no concern that one will miss the [[latest time for Shema]]. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 89:6 permits davening later if one is teaching a group. Mishna Brurah 89:35 says that this is only if there is no concern for missing Shema. Ishei Yisrael 13:34 in the name of Mekor Chaim 89:6 includes the case of learning in a group. </ref>
## Some add that it is permissible if one is not learning in-depth. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:23 quoting Sh”t Avnei Tzedek 19 (however, see Mishna Brurah 89:33 who implies the opposite). </ref>
# If one already began learning before [[Olot HaShachar]], one should continue and does not have to stop. If one began learning after [[Olot HaShachar]], some say that one should stop for [[Kriyat Shema]] and some say that one does not have to stop as long as there is time prior to the [[latest time for Shema]]. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:30 </ref>
# Someone who can not learn after [[Olot HaShachar]] and the tzibbur is only [[davening]] later, it is preferable for them to daven earlier and then learn even though one will not be davening together at the time of the tzibbur. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:33 </ref>

===Working===
# It is forbidden to do work after [[Olot HaShachar]] until one has prayed. From a half hour before [[Olot HaShachar]] it is preferable to say Birchot HaShachar before working. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:37, Ishei Yisrael 13:18 </ref> However, work for a mitzvah is permissible <ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:19 </ref>
# If one began working prior to [[Olot HaShachar]] it is permissible to continue afterwards. <Ref> Mishna Brurah 70:23-5, Ishei Yisrael 13:22 </ref>
# One may take out the garbage on one's way to Shul before [[davening]].<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted by [[Tefillah]] Kehilchata c. 6, n. 36 and Ishei Yisrael c. 13, n. 46, p. 122) ruled that it is permitted to quickly look over a newspaper, take out the trash on one's way to Shul, or put a load of sorted laundry into the washer before [[davening]]. See also Eshel Avraham 89:3 who says that perhaps anything which is a quick and simple task which would be permitted on [[Chol HaMoed]] would be permitted before [[davening]].</ref>
# It is permitted to do an activity which is a mitzvah before [[davening]]. <Ref>Ishrei Yisrael (p. 122). A strong proof is: Rashi ([[Megillah]] 23a s.v. BeYom Tov), Mishna Brurah 529:14</ref> In some contexts, it may only be permitted if one can not do that mitzvah after [[davening]] and also that one should say [[Kriyat Shema]] before that activity. <ref>Mishna Brurah 250:1</ref>
===Travel===
#Generally speaking, it is forbidden to travel before davening<ref>Brachos 14a as understood by Rosh Brachos 1:7, Rif 8a, and Beis Yosef 89</ref> even if one knows that he will be able to daven upon arrival.<ref>Mishnah Berurah 89:20, see also Mishnah Berurah 90:53</ref>
#Traveling is usually defined by being on the road for a minimum of 72 minutes, and some say that this is true here as well: only a trip that would take 72 minutes or more would one be prohibited to make before davening.<ref>Shut Ohr Letzion 2:32</ref> However, some say that even a shorter trip is consiered ‘traveling’ and would be prohibited (if not taken to get to one’s usual place of davening).<ref>See Halichos Shlomo Tefillah 2:11:14 who writes that even taking a short and easy trip before davening is prohibited.</ref>
#Some say that even traveling for the purposes of doing a mitzvah is prohibited<ref>Shut Divrei Yatziv O.C. #8</ref> although most disagree and say that it would be permissible to travel before davening to perform a mitzvah,<ref>Pri Chadash 89:6, Pri Megadim (Eishel Avraham) 89:15, Aruch Hashulchan 89:22, Mishnah Berurah 90:53</ref> and even in order to daven better<Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:16</ref> or to daven at the Kosel Hamaaravi.<ref>Or Letzion vol 2, Yalkut Yosef 89:29 (pg 94 in ed. 5764)</ref>
#If traveling will be sufficiently easier if done before davening (for example, in a case where, if one were to wait until after davening, there will much more traffic on the roads and the trip will take much more time), some permit traveling before davening,<ref>Shut Shevet Halevi 8:19, although Shut Divrei Yatziv O.C. 8 would likely disagree with this leniency</ref> especially if waiting would cause someone to miss a bus or otherwise not be able to travel at all.<ref>Magen Avraham 89:10, Aruch Hashulchan 89:22, Leket Hakemach 89:37 quoted in Dirshu edition of the Mishnah Berurah, Siman 89 note 24. Needless to say, one must still make sure to daven and say [[Keriyas Shema]] before too late in the morning.</ref>
#In all of the cases in which traveling before davening is permissible, it is still better to say the birkos hashachar before one embarks on his or her travels.<ref>Rama 89:3 quotes an opinion to the effect that traveling is always permitted after making brachos, although Aruch Hashulchan 89:21 points out that there is in fact no such legitimate opinion. Nonetheless, Mishnah Berurah 89:17 and 89:37 writes that making the brachos beforehand is preferable.</ref>
#The prohibition of traveling before Shacharis applies beginning from [[Olot HaShachar|Alos Hashachar]].<Ref>Shulchan Aruch 89:3, Aruch Hashulchan 89:22</ref> although some say that it begins from half an hour beforehand.<ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:23 footnote 61; cf. Biur Halacha 70:5 s.v. Hayah and Mishnah Berurah 89:17, 89:37 regarding working during the half hour before Alos Hashacher </ref>

===Sleeping===
# If one stayed up all night, then it is forbidden to go to sleep within a half hour before [[Olot HaShachar]] until one has prayed. If one asks a friend who already slept that night to wake one up then it is permissible.<Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:22, Ishei Yisrael 13:31</ref> If one can not ask a friend and one can not pray, one may be lenient and just say [[Kriyat Shema]] and then go to sleep. <Ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:31 </ref>
# If one was sleeping and woke up to go to the bathroom one may go back to sleep even after [[Olot HaShachar]] as long as one will not miss the [[latest time for Shema]]. <Ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:31, Piskei Teshuvot 89:22 </ref>
===Showering===
# It is permissible to go to the bathhouse or cut one's hair until [[Olot HaShachar]] but afterwards one may not start to go to the bathhouse or cut one's hair. <Ref>S”A 89:7, Mishna Brurah 89:36 </ref> However, a short shower with a little soap for someone who feels unclean in order to prepare for [[davening]] is permissible. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:24 </ref>
# It is permissible to go to the mikveh after [[Olot HaShachar]] prior to praying <ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:21 </ref>
===Shaving===
# Some are lenient and allow to shave before [[davening]] if one can not do so afterwards. <Ref> Halacha Brurah (Rav Dovid Yosef) 89:36, Avnei Yishfeh (pg 90) in name of Rav Vosner, Peninei Halacha (pg 162), and Piskei Teshuvot 89:24 are lenient for someone who regularly shaves. However, Sh”t Or Letzion (vol 2 7:9) and Halichot Shlomo ([[Tefilla]] 2:8) quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach are strict under all circumstances and compare [[shaving]] to haircutting. Similarly, Yalkut Yosef ([[Tefillah]] pg 99, Siman 89:32) is strict but adds that those who do so regularly have what to rely on. </ref>
===Other===
# Prior to [[davening]] one should not pick up a child which may soil itself, or begin to cry when one puts it down and by the time one cleans up or appeases the child one may have missed the time for [[davening]]. <Ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:37 </ref>
# One should give tzedaka before praying.
<ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch of Rav Mordechai Eliyahu 12:2 </ref>

==Mincha==
===Learning===
# It is permissible to learn until [[Mincha]] Ketana (9½ hours into the day). However, once [[Mincha]] Ketana comes, it is forbidden to learn until one prays. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 232:11 writes that the laws of learning before [[Mincha]] are the same as those for [[Shacharit]] after [[Olot HaShachar]]. </ref> Nonetheless, under four circumstances it is permissible to learn even after [[Mincha Ketana]]:
## if one usually goes to daven in a tzibbur ([[minyan]]),
## if one is learning in the place where a tzibbur will come to daven,
## if one asked a friend who was not learning to remind one before the latest time of [[Mincha]], or
## if one was teaching Torah to a group and if there is no concern that one will miss the latest [[time for Mincha]]. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 89:6 with Mishna Brurah regarding [[Shacharit]]</ref>
===Working===
# From 9 hours in the day, one may not start work that could drag on and make one miss the time for [[Mincha]].<Ref>Mishna Brurah 232:9 </ref> If one always goes to [[minyan]] and there is a set time, it is permissible, even after 9½ hours. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 232:3 </ref>
===Traveling, Showering, Shaving===
# Most poskim assume that the prohibition of traveling also applies to traveling before one davens Mincha or Maariv,<ref>Rabbeinu Manoach quoted by Kesef Mishnah on Rambam Hilchos Tefillah 6:4, Mishnah Berurah 89:19-20. However, Halichos Shlomo 2:11 footnote 50 points out that the formulation of the Shulchan Aruch and especially Shulchan Aruch Harav indicate that the prohibition applies solely to Shacharis. See also Siach Halachah 19:17</ref> although the custom is to be more lenient regarding Minchah and Maariv for someone who would anyway be waiting for the usually scheduled minyan or for Minchah Ketanah.<ref>Halichos Shelomo 2:11:16</ref>
# If one always goes to [[minyan]] at a set time, it is permissible to shower and shave even after 9½ hours. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 232:3 </ref>

===Sleeping===
# One should not sleep after 9½ hours. If one asks a friend to wake one up, then it is permissible. <Ref>Ishei Yisreal 27:27 </ref>

==Mariv==
===Learning===
# It is permissible to learn until [[Tzet HaKochavim]]. However, once [[Tzet HaKochavim]] comes, it is forbidden to learn until one has prayed. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 235:17 </ref> Nonetheless, under two circumstances it is permissible to learn even after [[Tzet HaKochavim]]:
## if one is going to pray with a tzibbur,<ref>Shaar HaTziyun 235:19 </ref> or
## if one asked a friend who was not learning to remind one before the latest time of [[Mincha]]. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 235:17 at the end </ref>
===Working, Traveling, Showering, Shaving===
# If one always goes to [[minyan]] and there is a set time, it is permissible to work, travel, shower, and shave, even after [http://halachipedia.com/index.php?title=Reference_of_Measurements_in_Halacha#Tzet_HaKochavim_.28Emergence_of_the_stars.29 Tzet HaKochavim]. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 235:6 </ref>
===Sleeping===
# One should not sleep within a half hour of Tzet HaChachavim. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 235:17 </ref>Asks a friend to wake one up only works at a time when people are not going to sleep and the friend is reliable. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 235:7 </ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Prayer]]

Doing Activities Before Davening

2015-12-14T18:06:01Z

Sbmb: /* Travel */

In general, one should not begin an activity which will require of one to become engaged in it, before performing a mitzvah at hand. When it comes to davening specifically, there are unique stringencies and leniences for each of the davenings as detailed below.
==Shacharit==
===Learning===
# There is a positive aspect to learning before [[davening]] to prepare oneself for [[davening]]. <ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:23. See there where he writes that the minhag is to be lenient to learn before [[davening]] because of the positive aspect of learning before [[davening]].</ref>
# If one usually goes to daven in a [[minyan]] which is at a set time, then it is permissible to learn before [[davening]] even after [[Olot HaShachar]] and so, the minhag is to learn before [[davening]]. <ref>S”A 89:6, Piskei Teshuvot 89:23 </ref>
# It is permissible to learn until [[Olot HaShachar]]. However, once Olot Hashachar comes, it is forbidden to begin learning until one has prayed. <Ref>S”A 89:6 </ref>Some are lenient to permit learning after [[Olot HaShachar]] until close to [[HaNetz HaChama]]. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:31 </ref>Nonetheless, it is permissible to learn even after [[Olot Hashachar]] in any of the following three circumstances:
## if one is learning in the place where a tzibbur will come to daven, <ref>Mishna Brurah 89:32 </ref>
## if one asked a friend who was not learning to remind one to daven before the latest time of Shema and [[Tefilla]], <ref>Mishna Brurah 89:34. See the collolary to this for [[Kriyat Shema]] [[Arvit]] in Mishna Brurah 235:17. </ref> or
## if one was teaching Torah to a group or is learning in a group and if there is no concern that one will miss the [[latest time for Shema]]. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 89:6 permits davening later if one is teaching a group. Mishna Brurah 89:35 says that this is only if there is no concern for missing Shema. Ishei Yisrael 13:34 in the name of Mekor Chaim 89:6 includes the case of learning in a group. </ref>
## Some add that it is permissible if one is not learning in-depth. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:23 quoting Sh”t Avnei Tzedek 19 (however, see Mishna Brurah 89:33 who implies the opposite). </ref>
# If one already began learning before [[Olot HaShachar]], one should continue and does not have to stop. If one began learning after [[Olot HaShachar]], some say that one should stop for [[Kriyat Shema]] and some say that one does not have to stop as long as there is time prior to the [[latest time for Shema]]. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:30 </ref>
# Someone who can not learn after [[Olot HaShachar]] and the tzibbur is only [[davening]] later, it is preferable for them to daven earlier and then learn even though one will not be davening together at the time of the tzibbur. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:33 </ref>

===Working===
# It is forbidden to do work after [[Olot HaShachar]] until one has prayed. From a half hour before [[Olot HaShachar]] it is preferable to say Birchot HaShachar before working. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:37, Ishei Yisrael 13:18 </ref> However, work for a mitzvah is permissible <ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:19 </ref>
# If one began working prior to [[Olot HaShachar]] it is permissible to continue afterwards. <Ref> Mishna Brurah 70:23-5, Ishei Yisrael 13:22 </ref>
# One may take out the garbage on one's way to Shul before [[davening]].<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted by [[Tefillah]] Kehilchata c. 6, n. 36 and Ishei Yisrael c. 13, n. 46, p. 122) ruled that it is permitted to quickly look over a newspaper, take out the trash on one's way to Shul, or put a load of sorted laundry into the washer before [[davening]]. See also Eshel Avraham 89:3 who says that perhaps anything which is a quick and simple task which would be permitted on [[Chol HaMoed]] would be permitted before [[davening]].</ref>
# It is permitted to do an activity which is a mitzvah before [[davening]]. <Ref>Ishrei Yisrael (p. 122). A strong proof is: Rashi ([[Megillah]] 23a s.v. BeYom Tov), Mishna Brurah 529:14</ref> In some contexts, it may only be permitted if one can not do that mitzvah after [[davening]] and also that one should say [[Kriyat Shema]] before that activity. <ref>Mishna Brurah 250:1</ref>
===Travel===
#Generally speaking, it is forbidden to travel before davening<ref>Brachos 14a as understood by Rosh Brachos 1:7, Rif 8a, and Beis Yosef 89</ref> even if one knows that he will be able to daven upon arrival.<ref>Mishnah Berurah 89:20, see also Mishnah Berurah 90:53</ref>
#Traveling is usually defined by being on the road for a minimum of 72 minutes, and some say that this is true here as well: only a trip that would take 72 minutes or more would one be prohibited to make before davening.<ref>Shut Ohr Letzion 2:32</ref> However, some say that even a shorter trip is consiered ‘traveling’ and would be prohibited (if not taken to get to one’s usual place of davening).<ref>See Halichos Shlomo Tefillah 2:11:14 who writes that even taking a short and easy trip before davening is prohibited.</ref>
#Some say that even traveling for the purposes of doing a mitzvah is prohibited<ref>Shut Divrei Yatziv O.C. #8</ref> although most disagree and say that it would be permissible to travel before davening to perform a mitzvah,<ref>Pri Chadash 89:6, Pri Megadim (Eishel Avraham) 89:15, Aruch Hashulchan 89:22, Mishnah Berurah 90:53</ref> and even in order to daven better<Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:16</ref> or to daven at the Kosel Hamaaravi.<ref>Or Letzion vol 2, Yalkut Yosef 89:29 (pg 94 in ed. 5764)</ref>
#If traveling will be sufficiently easier if done before davening (for example, in a case where, if one were to wait until after davening, there will much more traffic on the roads and the trip will take much more time), some permit traveling before davening,<ref>Shut Shevet Halevi 8:19, although Shut Divrei Yatziv O.C. 8 would likely disagree with this leniency</ref> especially if waiting would cause someone to miss a bus or otherwise not be able to travel at all.<ref>Magen Avraham 89:10, Aruch Hashulchan 89:22, Leket Hakemach 89:37 quoted in Dirshu edition of the Mishnah Berurah, Siman 89 note 24. Needless to say, one must still make sure to daven and say [[Keriyas Shema]] before too late in the morning.</ref>
#In all of the cases in which traveling before davening is permissible, it is still better to say the birkos hashachar before one embarks on his or her travels.<ref>Rama 89:3 quotes an opinion to the effect that traveling is always permitted after making brachos, although Aruch Hashulchan 89:21 points out that there is in fact no such legitimate opinion. Nonetheless, Mishnah Berurah 89:17 and 89:37 writes that making the brachos beforehand is preferable.</ref>
#The prohibition of traveling before Shacharis applies beginning from [[Olot HaShachar|Alos Hashachar]].<Ref>Shulchan Aruch 89:3, Aruch Hashulchan 89:22</ref> although some say that it begins from half an hour beforehand.<ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:23 footnote 61; cf. Biur Halacha 70:5 s.v. Hayah and Mishnah Berurah 89:17, 89:37 regarding working during the half hour before Alos Hashacher </ref>

===Sleeping===
# If one stayed up all night, then it is forbidden to go to sleep within a half hour before [[Olot HaShachar]] until one has prayed. If one asks a friend who already slept that night to wake one up then it is permissible.<Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:22, Ishei Yisrael 13:31</ref> If one can not ask a friend and one can not pray, one may be lenient and just say [[Kriyat Shema]] and then go to sleep. <Ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:31 </ref>
# If one was sleeping and woke up to go to the bathroom one may go back to sleep even after [[Olot HaShachar]] as long as one will not miss the [[latest time for Shema]]. <Ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:31, Piskei Teshuvot 89:22 </ref>
===Showering===
# It is permissible to go to the bathhouse or cut one's hair until [[Olot HaShachar]] but afterwards one may not start to go to the bathhouse or cut one's hair. <Ref>S”A 89:7, Mishna Brurah 89:36 </ref> However, a short shower with a little soap for someone who feels unclean in order to prepare for [[davening]] is permissible. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:24 </ref>
# It is permissible to go to the mikveh after [[Olot HaShachar]] prior to praying <ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:21 </ref>
===Shaving===
# Some are lenient and allow to shave before [[davening]] if one can not do so afterwards. <Ref> Halacha Brurah (Rav Dovid Yosef) 89:36, Avnei Yishfeh (pg 90) in name of Rav Vosner, Peninei Halacha (pg 162), and Piskei Teshuvot 89:24 are lenient for someone who regularly shaves. However, Sh”t Or Letzion (vol 2 7:9) and Halichot Shlomo ([[Tefilla]] 2:8) quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach are strict under all circumstances and compare [[shaving]] to haircutting. Similarly, Yalkut Yosef ([[Tefillah]] pg 99, Siman 89:32) is strict but adds that those who do so regularly have what to rely on. </ref>
===Other===
# Prior to [[davening]] one should not pick up a child which may soil itself, or begin to cry when one puts it down and by the time one cleans up or appeases the child one may have missed the time for [[davening]]. <Ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:37 </ref>
# One should give tzedaka before praying.
<ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch of Rav Mordechai Eliyahu 12:2 </ref>

==Mincha==
===Learning===
# It is permissible to learn until [[Mincha]] Ketana (9½ hours into the day). However, once [[Mincha]] Ketana comes, it is forbidden to learn until one prays. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 232:11 writes that the laws of learning before [[Mincha]] are the same as those for [[Shacharit]] after [[Olot HaShachar]]. </ref> Nonetheless, under four circumstances it is permissible to learn even after [[Mincha Ketana]]:
## if one usually goes to daven in a tzibbur ([[minyan]]),
## if one is learning in the place where a tzibbur will come to daven,
## if one asked a friend who was not learning to remind one before the latest time of [[Mincha]], or
## if one was teaching Torah to a group and if there is no concern that one will miss the latest [[time for Mincha]]. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 89:6 with Mishna Brurah regarding [[Shacharit]]</ref>
===Working===
# From 9 hours in the day, one may not start work that could drag on and make one miss the time for [[Mincha]].<Ref>Mishna Brurah 232:9 </ref> If one always goes to [[minyan]] and there is a set time, it is permissible, even after 9½ hours. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 232:3 </ref>
===Traveling, Showering, Shaving===
# If one always goes to [[minyan]] and there is a set time, it is permissible to travel, shower, and shave, even after 9½ hours. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 232:3 </ref>
===Sleeping===
# One should not sleep after 9½ hours. If one asks a friend to wake one up, then it is permissible. <Ref>Ishei Yisreal 27:27 </ref>

==Mariv==
===Learning===
# It is permissible to learn until [[Tzet HaKochavim]]. However, once [[Tzet HaKochavim]] comes, it is forbidden to learn until one has prayed. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 235:17 </ref> Nonetheless, under two circumstances it is permissible to learn even after [[Tzet HaKochavim]]:
## if one is going to pray with a tzibbur,<ref>Shaar HaTziyun 235:19 </ref> or
## if one asked a friend who was not learning to remind one before the latest time of [[Mincha]]. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 235:17 at the end </ref>
===Working, Traveling, Showering, Shaving===
# If one always goes to [[minyan]] and there is a set time, it is permissible to work, travel, shower, and shave, even after [http://halachipedia.com/index.php?title=Reference_of_Measurements_in_Halacha#Tzet_HaKochavim_.28Emergence_of_the_stars.29 Tzet HaKochavim]. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 235:6 </ref>
===Sleeping===
# One should not sleep within a half hour of Tzet HaChachavim. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 235:17 </ref>Asks a friend to wake one up only works at a time when people are not going to sleep and the friend is reliable. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 235:7 </ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Prayer]]

Doing Activities Before Davening

2015-12-14T14:19:55Z

Sbmb: /* Travel */

In general, one should not begin an activity which will require of one to become engaged in it, before performing a mitzvah at hand. When it comes to davening specifically, there are unique stringencies and leniences for each of the davenings as detailed below.
==Shacharit==
===Learning===
# There is a positive aspect to learning before [[davening]] to prepare oneself for [[davening]]. <ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:23. See there where he writes that the minhag is to be lenient to learn before [[davening]] because of the positive aspect of learning before [[davening]].</ref>
# If one usually goes to daven in a [[minyan]] which is at a set time, then it is permissible to learn before [[davening]] even after [[Olot HaShachar]] and so, the minhag is to learn before [[davening]]. <ref>S”A 89:6, Piskei Teshuvot 89:23 </ref>
# It is permissible to learn until [[Olot HaShachar]]. However, once Olot Hashachar comes, it is forbidden to begin learning until one has prayed. <Ref>S”A 89:6 </ref>Some are lenient to permit learning after [[Olot HaShachar]] until close to [[HaNetz HaChama]]. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:31 </ref>Nonetheless, it is permissible to learn even after [[Olot Hashachar]] in any of the following three circumstances:
## if one is learning in the place where a tzibbur will come to daven, <ref>Mishna Brurah 89:32 </ref>
## if one asked a friend who was not learning to remind one to daven before the latest time of Shema and [[Tefilla]], <ref>Mishna Brurah 89:34. See the collolary to this for [[Kriyat Shema]] [[Arvit]] in Mishna Brurah 235:17. </ref> or
## if one was teaching Torah to a group or is learning in a group and if there is no concern that one will miss the [[latest time for Shema]]. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 89:6 permits davening later if one is teaching a group. Mishna Brurah 89:35 says that this is only if there is no concern for missing Shema. Ishei Yisrael 13:34 in the name of Mekor Chaim 89:6 includes the case of learning in a group. </ref>
## Some add that it is permissible if one is not learning in-depth. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:23 quoting Sh”t Avnei Tzedek 19 (however, see Mishna Brurah 89:33 who implies the opposite). </ref>
# If one already began learning before [[Olot HaShachar]], one should continue and does not have to stop. If one began learning after [[Olot HaShachar]], some say that one should stop for [[Kriyat Shema]] and some say that one does not have to stop as long as there is time prior to the [[latest time for Shema]]. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:30 </ref>
# Someone who can not learn after [[Olot HaShachar]] and the tzibbur is only [[davening]] later, it is preferable for them to daven earlier and then learn even though one will not be davening together at the time of the tzibbur. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:33 </ref>

===Working===
# It is forbidden to do work after [[Olot HaShachar]] until one has prayed. From a half hour before [[Olot HaShachar]] it is preferable to say Birchot HaShachar before working. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 89:37, Ishei Yisrael 13:18 </ref> However, work for a mitzvah is permissible <ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:19 </ref>
# If one began working prior to [[Olot HaShachar]] it is permissible to continue afterwards. <Ref> Mishna Brurah 70:23-5, Ishei Yisrael 13:22 </ref>
# One may take out the garbage on one's way to Shul before [[davening]].<ref>Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted by [[Tefillah]] Kehilchata c. 6, n. 36 and Ishei Yisrael c. 13, n. 46, p. 122) ruled that it is permitted to quickly look over a newspaper, take out the trash on one's way to Shul, or put a load of sorted laundry into the washer before [[davening]]. See also Eshel Avraham 89:3 who says that perhaps anything which is a quick and simple task which would be permitted on [[Chol HaMoed]] would be permitted before [[davening]].</ref>
# It is permitted to do an activity which is a mitzvah before [[davening]]. <Ref>Ishrei Yisrael (p. 122). A strong proof is: Rashi ([[Megillah]] 23a s.v. BeYom Tov), Mishna Brurah 529:14</ref> In some contexts, it may only be permitted if one can not do that mitzvah after [[davening]] and also that one should say [[Kriyat Shema]] before that activity. <ref>Mishna Brurah 250:1</ref>
===Travel===
#Generally speaking, it is forbidden to travel before davening<ref>Brachos 14a as understood by Rosh Brachos 1:7, Rif 8a, and Beis Yosef 89</ref> even if one knows that he will be able to daven upon arrival.<ref>Mishnah Berurah 89:20, see also Mishnah Berurah 90:53</ref>
#Traveling is usually defined by being on the road for a minimum of 72 minutes, and some say that this is true here as well: only a trip that would take 72 minutes or more would one be prohibited to make before davening.<ref>Shut Ohr Letzion 2:32</ref> However, some say that even a shorter trip is consiered ‘traveling’ and would be prohibited (if not taken to get to one’s usual place of davening).<ref>See Halichos Shlomo Tefillah 2:11:14 who writes that even taking a short and easy trip before davening is prohibited.</ref>
#Some say that even traveling for the purposes of doing a mitzvah is prohibited<ref>Shut Divrei Yatziv O.C. #8</ref> although most disagree and say that it would be permissible to travel before davening to perform a mitzvah,<ref>Pri Chadash 89:6, Pri Megadim (Eishel Avraham) 89:15, Aruch Hashulchan 89:22, Mishnah Berurah 90:53</ref> and even in order to daven better<Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:16</ref> or to daven at the Kosel Hamaaravi.<ref>Or Letzion vol 2, Yalkut Yosef 89:29 (pg 94 in ed. 5764)</ref>
#If traveling will be sufficiently easier if done before davening (for example, in a case where, if one were to wait until after davening, there will much more traffic on the roads and the trip will take much more time), some permit traveling before davening,<ref>Shut Shevet Halevi 8:19, although Shut Divrei Yatziv O.C. 8 would likely disagree with this leniency</ref> especially if waiting would cause someone to miss a bus or otherwise not be able to travel at all.<ref>Magen Avraham 89:10, Aruch Hashulchan 89:22, Leket Hakemach 89:37 quoted in Dirshu edition of the Mishnah Berurah, Siman 89 note 24. Needless to say, one must still make sure to daven and say [[Keriyas Shema]] before too late in the morning.</ref>
#In all of the cases in which traveling before davening is permissible, it is still better to say the birkos hashachar before one embarks on his or her travels.<ref>Rama 89:3 quotes an opinion to the effect that traveling is always permitted after making brachos, although Aruch Hashulchan 89:21 points out that there is in fact no such legitimate opinion. Nonetheless, Mishnah Berurah 89:17 and 89:37 writes that making the brachos beforehand is preferable.</ref>
#The prohibition of traveling before Shacharis applies beginning from [[Olot HaShachar|Alos Hashachar]].<Ref>Shulchan Aruch 89:3, Aruch Hashulchan 89:22</ref> although some say that it begins from half an hour beforehand.<ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:23 footnote 61; cf. Biur Halacha 70:5 s.v. Hayah and Mishnah Berurah 89:17, 89:37 regarding working during the half hour before Alos Hashacher </ref>
#Most poskim assume that this prohibition also applies to traveling before one davens Mincha or Maariv,<ref>Rabbeinu Manoach quoted by Kesef Mishnah on Rambam Hilchos Tefillah 6:4, Mishnah Berurah 89:19-20. However, Halichos Shlomo 2:11 footnote 50 points out that the formulation of the Shulchan Aruch and especially Shulchan Aruch Harav indicate that the prohibition applies solely to Shacharis. See also Siach Halachah 19:17</ref> although the custom is to be more lenient regarding Minchah and Maariv for someone who would anyway be waiting for the usually scheduled minyan or for Minchah Ketanah.<ref>Halichos Shelomo 2:11:16</ref>

===Sleeping===
# If one stayed up all night, then it is forbidden to go to sleep within a half hour before [[Olot HaShachar]] until one has prayed. If one asks a friend who already slept that night to wake one up then it is permissible.<Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:22, Ishei Yisrael 13:31</ref> If one can not ask a friend and one can not pray, one may be lenient and just say [[Kriyat Shema]] and then go to sleep. <Ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:31 </ref>
# If one was sleeping and woke up to go to the bathroom one may go back to sleep even after [[Olot HaShachar]] as long as one will not miss the [[latest time for Shema]]. <Ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:31, Piskei Teshuvot 89:22 </ref>
===Showering===
# It is permissible to go to the bathhouse or cut one's hair until [[Olot HaShachar]] but afterwards one may not start to go to the bathhouse or cut one's hair. <Ref>S”A 89:7, Mishna Brurah 89:36 </ref> However, a short shower with a little soap for someone who feels unclean in order to prepare for [[davening]] is permissible. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 89:24 </ref>
# It is permissible to go to the mikveh after [[Olot HaShachar]] prior to praying <ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:21 </ref>
===Shaving===
# Some are lenient and allow to shave before [[davening]] if one can not do so afterwards. <Ref> Halacha Brurah (Rav Dovid Yosef) 89:36, Avnei Yishfeh (pg 90) in name of Rav Vosner, Peninei Halacha (pg 162), and Piskei Teshuvot 89:24 are lenient for someone who regularly shaves. However, Sh”t Or Letzion (vol 2 7:9) and Halichot Shlomo ([[Tefilla]] 2:8) quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach are strict under all circumstances and compare [[shaving]] to haircutting. Similarly, Yalkut Yosef ([[Tefillah]] pg 99, Siman 89:32) is strict but adds that those who do so regularly have what to rely on. </ref>
===Other===
# Prior to [[davening]] one should not pick up a child which may soil itself, or begin to cry when one puts it down and by the time one cleans up or appeases the child one may have missed the time for [[davening]]. <Ref>Ishei Yisrael 13:37 </ref>
# One should give tzedaka before praying.
<ref> Kitzur Shulchan Aruch of Rav Mordechai Eliyahu 12:2 </ref>

==Mincha==
===Learning===
# It is permissible to learn until [[Mincha]] Ketana (9½ hours into the day). However, once [[Mincha]] Ketana comes, it is forbidden to learn until one prays. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 232:11 writes that the laws of learning before [[Mincha]] are the same as those for [[Shacharit]] after [[Olot HaShachar]]. </ref> Nonetheless, under four circumstances it is permissible to learn even after [[Mincha Ketana]]:
## if one usually goes to daven in a tzibbur ([[minyan]]),
## if one is learning in the place where a tzibbur will come to daven,
## if one asked a friend who was not learning to remind one before the latest time of [[Mincha]], or
## if one was teaching Torah to a group and if there is no concern that one will miss the latest [[time for Mincha]]. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 89:6 with Mishna Brurah regarding [[Shacharit]]</ref>
===Working===
# From 9 hours in the day, one may not start work that could drag on and make one miss the time for [[Mincha]].<Ref>Mishna Brurah 232:9 </ref> If one always goes to [[minyan]] and there is a set time, it is permissible, even after 9½ hours. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 232:3 </ref>
===Traveling, Showering, Shaving===
# If one always goes to [[minyan]] and there is a set time, it is permissible to travel, shower, and shave, even after 9½ hours. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 232:3 </ref>
===Sleeping===
# One should not sleep after 9½ hours. If one asks a friend to wake one up, then it is permissible. <Ref>Ishei Yisreal 27:27 </ref>

==Mariv==
===Learning===
# It is permissible to learn until [[Tzet HaKochavim]]. However, once [[Tzet HaKochavim]] comes, it is forbidden to learn until one has prayed. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 235:17 </ref> Nonetheless, under two circumstances it is permissible to learn even after [[Tzet HaKochavim]]:
## if one is going to pray with a tzibbur,<ref>Shaar HaTziyun 235:19 </ref> or
## if one asked a friend who was not learning to remind one before the latest time of [[Mincha]]. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 235:17 at the end </ref>
===Working, Traveling, Showering, Shaving===
# If one always goes to [[minyan]] and there is a set time, it is permissible to work, travel, shower, and shave, even after [http://halachipedia.com/index.php?title=Reference_of_Measurements_in_Halacha#Tzet_HaKochavim_.28Emergence_of_the_stars.29 Tzet HaKochavim]. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 235:6 </ref>
===Sleeping===
# One should not sleep within a half hour of Tzet HaChachavim. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 235:17 </ref>Asks a friend to wake one up only works at a time when people are not going to sleep and the friend is reliable. <Ref>Piskei Teshuvot 235:7 </ref>

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category:Prayer]]

General Laws of Traveling

2015-12-14T14:14:41Z

Sbmb:

General Laws of Traveling

===Types of Trips===
#Before traveling, one should be sure these travels will not cause a compromise of halakhic laws. Under most circumstances, it would seem as though one cannot travel to a place where he/she will not be able to fulfill one’s halakhic obligations.<ref>Cf. Pri Megadim, Eishel Avraham 640:15 and Shut Igros Moshe III O.C. 93 regarding the mitzvah of Sukkah, and Avnei Nezer O.C. 321 regarding escaping one’s obligation in general</ref> However, some poskim assume that if the only mitzvah that will be missed is tefillah betzibur, one can still make such a trip<ref> Chavos Yair 115. Halichos Shelomo Tefillah 5:4 (pg. 61) writes that R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach thought that it was permitted to travel for pleasure to a place without a minyan, as does R. Moshe Feinstein in Igros Moshe O.C. 2:27, but R. Zalman Nechemiah Goldberg’s comment in Halichos Shlomo on Tefillah pg. 358 permits it</ref> especially for the purpose of doing a mitzvah or business.<ref>Halichos Shelomo ibid. Shevet Ha’Levi 6:21:3, Ishei Yisroel 12:2</ref>
#Normally, one is not allowed to place oneself in a dangerous situation,<ref>Shabbos 32b, Rambam Hilchos Rotzeach Chapter 11, Shulchan Aruch C.M. 427:8 and Y.D. 116, see also Mesilas Yesharim Ch. 9</ref> and so traveling to a dangerous place or using a dangerous method of transportation should not be allowed. However, it is very hard to know what is considered dangerous enough to be prohibited, and so activities or places that normal people do not avoid due to the danger are considered permissible.<ref>Shut Minchas Shelomo 2:37, see also Shut Binyan Tzion 137 and Shut Chasam Sofer Y.D. 338</ref> A certain amount of personal risk is also allowed to be incurred for the purpose of making a parnassa.<ref>Shut Igros Moshe Choshen Mishpat 104</ref>
#One is not allowed to leave Eretz Yisrael<ref>Rambam Hilchos Melachim 5:9, Chachmas Adam Shaar Mishpetei HaAretz 11:14</ref> except for the purposes of marriage, learning or teaching Torah<ref>Rambam Hilchos Melachim 5:9, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 342:1, Pe’as Hashulchan 1:11</ref> to to make a living, <ref>Rambam Hilchos Melachim 5:9, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 342:1, Pe’as Hashulchan 1:11</ref> and to honor one’s parents.<ref>Tashbetz 3:288</ref> The same is true for performance of a mitzvah, and perhaps even visiting friends.<ref>Shut Tzitz Eliezer 10:42, Mishnah Berurah 531:14 and Magen Avraham 531:7</ref>
#There is a prohibition to move to Egypt,<ref>Rambam Hilchos Melachim 5:8</ref> but most assume that this does not apply to visiting Egypt.<ref>Sanhedrin Yerushalmi 10:8, Shut Radvaz 4:73</ref>
#A wife has a right to demand that her husband not undertake a particular trip, even if he says he must do so for business.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 76:5</ref>
#A student should ask permission from his teacher before embarking on a trip<ref>Rama Y.D. 242:16</ref> even if traveling for the purpose of a mitzvah.<ref>Kaf Hachayim O.C. 110:17</ref>

===Preparing for a Trip===
#One should not travel without his tefillin.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan O.C. 110:5, Mishnah Berurah O.C. 110:20</ref>
#Before traveling, one must make sure that he or she has enough food and water for possible delays, as well as water for the purposes of hand washing.<ref>Kaf Hachayim 110:23</ref>
#It is a good practice to give charity both before embarking on a journey, and to take some money to give to charity once one arrives.<ref>Sefer Chassidim 1056, Kaf Hachayim 110:27</ref>
#One should ensure that his or her traveling plans will not involve violations of halakha. However, most poskim say that a kohen does not need to check if a plane’s path will be flying over gravesites.<ref>Shut Betzel Hachachmah 2:82, Tzitz Eliezer 12:62:10, Mishneh Halachos 9:226</ref>

===While Traveling===
#It is important to learn Torah while traveling.<ref> Eliyah Rabbah 110:8, Aruch Hashulchan O.C. 110:15, Kaf Hachayim 110:24</ref>
#When traveling through an area that is considered to be more dangerous for Jews than non-Jews, then one may dress as a non-Jew, provided that one is not violating a prohibition (of kilayim, etc.) by doing so.<Bach Y.D. 147</ref> Some say that this is true even when traveling in an area that is not known to be specifically more dangerous for Jews.<ref>Shach Y.D. 147</ref>

==Sources==
<references/>

General Laws of Traveling

2015-12-14T03:48:03Z

Sbmb: Created page with "General Laws of Traveling ===Types of Trips=== # Before traveling, one should be sure these travels will not cause a compromise of halakhic laws. Under most circumstances, i..."

General Laws of Traveling

===Types of Trips===
# Before traveling, one should be sure these travels will not cause a compromise of halakhic laws. Under most circumstances, it would seem as though one cannot travel to a place where he/she will not be able to fulfill one’s halakhic obligations.<ref>Cf. Pri Megadim, Eishel Avraham 640:15 and Shut Igros Moshe III O.C. 93 regarding the mitzvah of Sukkah, and Avnei Nezer O.C. 321 regarding escaping one’s obligation in general</ref> However, some poskim assume that if the only mitzvah that will be missed is tefillah betzibur, one can still make such a trip<Chavos Yair 115. Halichos Shelomo Tefillah 5:4 (pg. 61) writes that R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach thought that it was permitted to travel for pleasure to a place without a minyan, as does R. Moshe Feinstein in Igros Moshe O.C. 2:27, but R. Zalman Nechemiah Goldberg’s comment in Halichos Shlomo on Tefillah pg. 358 permits it</ref> especially for the purpose of doing a mitzvah or business.<ref>Halichos Shelomo ibid. Shevet Ha’Levi 6:21:3, Ishei Yisroel 12:2</ref>

# Normally, one is not allowed to place oneself in a dangerous situation,<ref>Shabbos 32b, Rambam Hilchos Rotzeach Chapter 11, Shulchan Aruch C.M. 427:8 and Y.D. 116, see also Mesilas Yesharim Ch. 9</ref> and so traveling to a dangerous place or using a dangerous method of transportation should not be allowed. However, it is very hard to know what is considered dangerous enough to be prohibited, and so activities or places that normal people do not avoid due to the danger are considered permissible.<ref>Shut Minchas Shelomo 2:37, see also Shut Binyan Tzion 137 and Shut Chasam Sofer Y.D. 338</ref> A certain amount of personal risk is also allowed to be incurred for the purpose of making a parnassa.<ref>Shut Igros Moshe Choshen Mishpat 104</ref>

# One is not allowed to leave Eretz Yisrael<ref>Rambam Hilchos Melachim 5:9, Chachmas Adam Shaar Mishpetei HaAretz 11:14<ref> except for the purposes of marriage, learning or teaching Torah<ref>Rambam ibid. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 342:1, Pe’as Hashulchan 1:11</ref> to to make a living, <ref>ibid.</ref> and to honor one’s parents.<ref>Tashbetz 3:288</ref> The same is true for performance of a mitzvah, and perhaps even visiting friends.<ref>Shut Tzitz Eliezer 10:42, Mishnah Berurah 531:14 and Magen Avraham 531:7</ref>

# There is a prohibition to move to Egypt,<ref>Rambam Hilchos Melachim 5:8</ref> but most assume that this does not apply to visiting Egypt.<ref>Sanhedrin Yerushalmi 10:8, Shut Radvaz 4:73</ref>

# A wife has a right to demand that her husband not undertake a particular trip, even if he says he must do so for business.<ref>Shulchan Aruch E.H. 76:5</ref>

# A student should ask permission from his teacher before embarking on a trip<ref>Rama Y.D. 242:16</ref> even if traveling for the purpose of a mitzvah.<ref>Kaf Hachayim O.C. 110:17</ref>

===Preparing for a Trip===
# One should not travel without his tefillin.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan O.C. 110:5, Mishnah Berurah O.C. 110:20</ref>

# Before traveling, one must make sure that he or she has enough food and water for possible delays, as well as water for the purposes of hand washing.<ref>Kaf Hachayim 110:23</ref>

# It is a good practice to give charity both before embarking on a journey, and to take some money to give to charity once one arrives.<ref>Sefer Chassidim 1056, Kaf Hachayim 110:27</ref>

# One should ensure that his or her traveling plans will not involve violations of halakha. However, most poskim say that a kohen does not need to check if a plane’s path will be flying over gravesites.<ref>Shut Betzel Hachachmah 2:82, Tzitz Eliezer 12:62:10, Mishneh Halachos 9:226</ref>

===While Traveling===
# It is important to learn Torah while traveling.<ref> Eliyah Rabbah 110:8, Aruch Hashulchan O.C. 110:15, Kaf Hachayim 110:24</ref>

# When traveling through an area that is considered to be more dangerous for Jews than non-Jews, then one may dress as a non-Jew, provided that one is not violating a prohibition (of kilayim, etc.) by doing so.<Bach Y.D. 147</ref> Some say that this is true even when traveling in an area that is not known to be specifically more dangerous for Jews.<ref>Shach Y.D. 147</ref>

Pat Akum

2015-09-20T03:53:29Z

Sbmb:

==Background: The Gezairah==
# The Chachomim enacted a gezairah forbidding bread that was baked by a non-Jew<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. It's clear from the Gemara Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b that this prohibition is mi'derabanan. This prohibition is independent from that of bishul akum; see Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b "ve'hapas" regarding which gezairah was made first. Ramban ibid. also notes that there are more leniencies for pas akum than for bishul akum, because everyone needs bread to live. The Aruch Hashulchan 113:2 suggests that since bishul akum was also prohibited because of the possibility of the non-Jew mixing in non-kosher besides for the fear of intermarriage, we are more strict regarding bishul akum than pas akum.</ref> so as to avoid intermingling with them too much, which could lead to intermarriage<ref>cf. Rashi Avodah Zarah 35b "shelakos" and Rambam Peirush Hamishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. However, from the Gemara on daf 17b and 36b it seems like the real concern was actually idolatry, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim on page 4. Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b, Rabbeinu Yonah ad. loc., and Shach Y.D. 112:3 note that there is no reason to be concerned for other issues of kashrus. It should be pointed out though that today one still cannot buy bread without a hechsher, see Iggros Moshe Y.D. 2:33</ref>. However, the bread of a non-Jew is prohibited even if there's no possibility of intermarriage,<ref>Such as if the non-Jewish baker was a priest who wouldn't have any daughters. Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba.</ref> and doesn't depend on whether or not the non-Jew is an idolater<ref>Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4, Pri Tohar 112:3</ref>
# It is permitted to derive benefit from bread baked by a non-Jew without eating it.<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:3-6</ref>
# While the Bavli's conclusion is somewhat ambiguous, most Rishonim understand that the prohibition of eating pas akum was revoked to some degree.<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b quotes from R. Meir Halevi who believed that the prohibition was not revoked at all, but the Ritva himself, his teachers, Tosfos, Rash miShantz, Rabbeinu Yonah, Ramban, Ra"ah, Rashba, Ran, Nimukei Yosef, and the Rosh in their comments to the aforementioned Gemara all beleive that the decree was limited by later Chachamim. See below regarding the opinion of the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch.</ref> According to some<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b. Such a position is also implied by Tosafos 35b "michlal", as well as by the Rosh's opinion recorded in Tur 112 and the Mordechai according to Shach 112:8</ref>, the prohibition was revoked by the sages entirely. Another opinion, which is followed by Ashkenazim, is that the rabbis allowed bread baked only by a non-Jewish baker ("''pas paltar''", as opposed to "''pas baal habayis''"),<ref>Yerushalami Avodah Zarah 2:8, Rama YD 112:2 based on Tosafot Avoda Zara 35b "michlal", Mordechai, and Issur VeHeter Klal 44, Chochmat Adam 65:2. This also appears to be the position of Rashba and Ran. See below regarding the definition of a 'baker' for this halakha.</ref> whether or not there is bread baked by a Jew available.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Rama in Sefer Toras Chatas 75, Gra Y.D. 112:7-8, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1</ref> The third, and most stringent opinion, is that bread of a baker was permitted only in cases where bread baked by a Jew is not available.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Maachalos Asuros 17:12, Ramban, Ran and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b</ref> This appears to be the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch.<ref>Cf. Y.D. 112:2 and 112:8. Thus, it would appear that this should be the practice for Sefardim, though see Ben Ish Chai II Chukas 2 who follows the lenient opinion. According to the second opinion, which is that of the Rama, in a case where no Jewish-baked bread is available, even "pas baal habayis" is permitted (Rama Y.D. 112:8, see also Rashba Avodah Zarah 35b in his explanation of the Rif)</ref>
# Although Ashkenazi practice is to usually follow the Rama, several poskim indicate that it is still proper to be stringent in this manner and not eat pas paltar where pas yisroel is available.<ref>Shach 112:8, Aruch Hashulchan 112:9, 112:17, Chochmas Adam 65:2 and Chelkes Binyomin 112:23.</ref> Others are not concerned with this for most of the year.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1. The Orthodox Union, as do most Kashrus organizations, certify ''pas paltar'' foods as kosher.</ref> Someone whose practice was to be careful not to eat ''pas paltar'' and wants to change this practice must be ''mattir neder''.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 112:94</ref>
# The Tur writes that even those who are not careful about pas paltar during the year are careful to only eat pas yisrael during Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.<ref>Raavyah Rosh Hashana siman 529, Rosh to Rosh Hashanah 4:14, Tur Orach Chaim 603, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 603:1 and Mishnah Berurah there, Shach Y.D. 112:9. However, the Tashbetz quoted by the Beis Yosef there O.C. 603 doesn't approve of changing one's practice during the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.</ref> Several reasons are given for this custom.<ref>The Chayei Adam 143:1 and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 130:2 write that because God is more merciful than 'necessary' during this time period, we should respond by keeping stringencies which we wouldn't normally consider to be necessary. Levush O.C. 603:1 writes that extra stringencies will remind us to be in a state of teshuvah. Rabbi Netanel Wiederblank [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/838739/Rabbi_Netanel_Wiederblank/Pas_Akum_Part_1 suggested], based on Ramban, that being careful about pas yisrael was a custom of talmidei chachamim, and so we want to act like talmidei chachamim at this time. Rabbi Sobolofsky [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-3%20Pat%20Akum%202.htm offered] another possibility that because the decree was rescinded only because it would be impossible to keep all year long, it is not unreasonable to adhere to it for only ten days of the year.</ref> Some say that this is true of Shabbos and Yom Tov as well, as part of kavod shabbos.<ref>Magen Avraham O.C. 242:4. From the Rama it appears as though this only matters for the bread that one is actually using for the bracha to begin the meals, but the Shaar Tziyun 242:18 writes that even throughout the meal, because of the honor of Shabbos or Yom Tov, one should be careful about ''pas yisroel''</ref>

==Who Baked the Bread==
# A "non-Jewish baker" (''paltar'') in this context is anyone who baked bread with the intent to sell it, and not someone who happens to sell bread for a living.<ref>This is the opinion of the Rama 112:2 based on the Beis Yosef and Rashba (see Gra 112:9), although the Tur's language suggests that he might believe that it depends upon whether or not the non-Jew is baking the bread en masse or not. Shach 112:11 writes that even the bread that a professional commercial baker baked for himself would be included in the prohibition.</ref> Thus, if a baker invited a Jew to partake of his bread, it wouldn't be considered "pas paltar" and would be prohibited.<ref>Rama 112:3 quoting Ra"ah in Bedek HaBayis. However, the Shach 112:12 points out that the Rashba disagrees, and if the Shulchan Aruch is consistent in believing that the prohibition depends on the status of the bread when it was baked, and not when it is sold, then this case should be permitted. Nekudos HaKesef, however, points out that perhaps even if normally the prohibition depends on the time when the bread was baked, this case is too similar to the case of a non-Jew baking the bread for himself.</ref> Bread that was baked with the intention to give to guests is like bread that was meant to be sold, and has the status of "pas paltar".<ref>Kaf Hachayim 112:46</ref>
# As mentioned above, all non-Jews are included in this prohibition.<ref>Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba, Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Pri Tohar on Shulchan Aruch 112:3, Darchei Teshuva 112:4. See Rav Chaim Kanievsky's commentary to Maseches Geirim 1:5, that according to Rabbi Akiva, even a convert cannot eat his own bread that he baked before converting.</ref>
# It is a machlokes haposkim as to whether or not bread baked by an irreligious Jew would be prohibited.<ref>Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 112:1 quoting Tiferes LeMoshe is lenient because one would be allowed to marry his daughter as is Iggeros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, but the Pri Chodosh 112:2, Pri Megadim, and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 72:2 all write that a Jew who does not keep Shabbos is considered like a non-Jew in this regard. See Maharam Shik O.C. 281, Darchei Teshuva 112:5, Avnei Nezer Y.D. 92 (who suggests that it might be prohibited to marry someone not-religious), Shut Yehudah Yaaleh 12, Minchas Yitzchak 3:72, Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 112:11, Mishneh Halachos 11:111, Shut M’Bais Levi 8:page 23:footnote 2, Titz Eliezer 9:41, Yabia Omer Y.D. 5:10, and Chelkes Binyomin 112:4. Also refer to Bishul Yisroel pages 412-413. Rav Shternbach in Halachos Ve'Hanhagos 1:470 writes that even though one must be stringent, in a sha'as hadechak one can eat the bread of someone who is merely a ''tinok shenishbah'', which he applies to anyone who was raised in a non-religious environment. Rav Schachter in OU document A-133 and Rav Asher Weiss in Minchas Asher Devarim no. 5 write that the custom has always been to be lenient.</ref>
# Some poskim have thought that because one would never recognize who baked his bread that was baked industrially in a factory, all commercially sold factory-made bread would not be categorized as "pas akum".<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1 pg. 95 and Rivevos Ephraim 5:596 both quote such a position in the name of R. Moshe Feinstein z"l</ref> However, in practice few poskim would rely on this on its own.<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1, Rivevos Ephraim 5:596, Minchas Yitzchak 3:26:6 and 3:26:10, Yabea Omer Y.D. 5:9:5, and Shevet Halevi 6:108:6 quotes that the Chazon Ish refused to accept such a possibility at all. See also Chelkes Binyamin 113:4</ref>
# The Shulchan Aruch paskens that the prohibition depends on who baked the bread, and not on who sold the bread.<ref>This is a dispute between the Rashba and Ra'ah in Toras Habayis and Bedek Habayis 3:7, quoted by the Beis Yosef Y.D. 112, and the Shulchan Aruch 112:7 paskens like the Rashba, cf. Shach 112:12.</ref> Therefore, a ''baal habayis'' who sells bread baked by a baker has the status of ''pas paltar'', and vice versa.
# If a Jew owned the dough, then most poskim assume that in such a case the bread would fall under the category of [[Bishul Akum]] instead of ''pas paltar''.<ref>Tur 112, Perishah Yoreh De'ah 112:10, Shach Y.D. 112:7 quoting Issur Ve'Heter and Toras Chatas, Taz 112:7.</ref> However, some are lenient<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:10 and 112:29. However, the Aruch Hashulchan derives his opinion from Shach 112:1, which is very difficult considering what the Shach says in 112:7</ref> especially for a large factory that is owned by a Jew.<ref>See Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45. Rav Moshe explains that the Tur must mean that because the prohibiton of Bishul is not applicable for any bread that would otherwise be ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'', bread owned by a Jew falls into neither or these categories and is therefore [[Bishul Akum]]. Rav Moshe argues that this is only the case because making dough that is owned by a Jew into ''bishul Yisroel'' is very easy, but when doing so would involve significant difficulty, such as in a factory, this stringency does not apply. This may depend on the dispute between the Ramban (Avodah Zarah 35b) and Rabbeinu Tam (Sefer Hayasher 392) as to which decree was made first. Rav Moshe does not clarify whether such bread should be considered ''pas paltar'' or ''pas yisrael''.</ref><ref>It would appear that even according to the Rambam and Rashba who don't believe that merely adding to the fire suffices to avoid [[Bishul Akum]], it would suffice for bread owned by a Jew, because doing so is a ''melachah chashuvah b'pas'', as indicated by the Rashba to Avodah Zarah 38b, Ran, Ritva ad loc., and Bedek Habayis 3:7, even if the Rashba argues in Mishmeres Habayis that raising the fire is sufficient for bread only because bread is more necessary for day-to-day sustenance. Thus, according to most of the Rishonim, raising the fire would suffice for bread owned by a Jew according to the Tur, but according to the Mishmeres Habayis, the bread would still be prohibited unless the Jew assisted in the actual baking.</ref>

==When Pas Yisroel is Unavailable==
# When there is no pas yisroel available, the Shulchan Aruch quotes two opinions<ref>Yoreh De'ah 112:2 and 112:8</ref> as to whether or not one would be allowed to eat only ''pas paltar'' or even ''pas ba'al habayis''.<ref>The second opinion is that of the Ra"ah. Because the Shulchan Aruch does not seem to hold like his opinion through the rest of the siman, and because of a general rule to follow the first opinion quoted by the Shulchan Aruch instead of an opinion which he prefaces by "there are those who say", those who follow the Shulchan Aruch should be stringent in this regard, unless there is a very serious need, such as in a case where a person hasn't had bread for three days. Kaf Hachayim 112:49-50 and Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 112:3-4.</ref> The Rama<ref>Y.D. 112:8, Shach 112:8 and Matteh Yonasan there. This is also clearly the opinion of the Rosh as quoted by the Tur, see above</ref> writes that the custom is to follow the lenient opinion. Thus, the following rules in determining "lack of availability" permits either ''pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch, but ''pas baal habayis'' according to the Rama.<ref>This is clear from Shu"t Rama 132:8, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 58</ref>
# ''Pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch and ''pas ba'al habayis'' according to the Rama is permitted only as long as there is no Jewish baker, and then becomes prohibited until the Jewish baker runs out of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:4</ref> If someone already bought the ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'' while it was permitted, and then a Jewish baker came to town, there's a machlokes as to whether the bread already bought becomes prohibited<ref>Between the Rashba Toras Ha-Bayis and Ra"ah in Bedek Habayis, page 185</ref>, but most poskim are lenient.<ref>Shach 112:13 and Chelkas Binhyamin 112:40, as long as the bread was bought while it was permitted</ref>
# Even if there is ''pas yisroel'' bread, but it is a different kind of bread or a lower quality than the ''pas paltar'', then one is allowed to consider it as if there is no ''pas yisroel'' available if he wants the other type of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:5 quoting the Rashba in Toras Habayis and Shach 112:9. Based on the language of the Bach and Shulchan Aruch, Chelkas Binyamin 112:51 and 112:18 says that if the ''pas yisroel'' is merely more expensive but is the same quality, it would not be permissible to buy the ''pas paltar''. Footnote 2 on the Meiri to Avodah Zarah 35b "mah she-hutar" leaves the question open.</ref> Some say that this is not true during ''Aseres Yemei Teshuvah''<ref>Sefer Bishul Yisroel, footnote on pg. 18</ref>
# The availability of ''pas yisroel'' depends on whether or not it is obtainable in one's own city, and so even if there's a place to get ''pas yisroel'' just outside the city, one is not required to do so.<ref>Meiri 35b "ve'hinei". Chelkas Binyamin 112:18 indicates that if one lives in a big city and would have to travel four [[mil]] or more to obtain ''pas yisrael'' he might not have to travel that far.</ref>
# Someone who is on the road without ''pas yisroel'' would have to travel a distance<ref>See Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 59 who discusses whether this is measured by distance or by travel time, and see Aruch Hashulchan 112:18, who writes ד' מילין הוא אם צריך לילך לשם אבל כשאין לו דרך לשם או שצריך לחזור לאחוריו אין כאן שיעור ד' מילין [פר"ח סקכ"ח] ומיהו שיעור מיל צריך להמתין [חכ"א] ואין חילוק בכל זה בין דרך טובה לדרך רעועה ובין נוסע בעגלה או רוכב על הסוס או הולך רגלי דחכמים השוו מדותיהם</ref> as far as four [[mil]] before he would be allowed to eat ''pas paltar'' (according to the Shulchan Aruch),<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:16 and Mishnah Berurah Orach Chayim 603:1</ref> and one does not have to travel in the opposite direction in order to get to ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Pri Chadash 112:28, Darchei Teshuva 112:95</ref>

==What Breads and Foods are Included==
# Only bread made from "[[Wheat and Grain Products|The Five Grains]]" is included in the laws of ''pas akum''; anything else falls under the category of [[Bishul Akum]].<ref>As implied by Brachos 37a. Rosh (Teshuvos) 19:21, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 112:1</ref>
# When a food is a combination of bread and something else, such as egg, then we follow the ''ikkar''<ref>Tosafos and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b, Avnei Nezer 94:1-2, R' Belsky in OU Document A-65</ref>, but if the egg is still visible as a separate entity, such as in the case of French Toast, then the food as a whole will be subject to the rule of [[Bishul Akum]] as well.<ref>Rama 112:6 and Aruch Hashulchan 112:21, though see Pri Megadim there who implies that only if the egg is mixed in afterwords would there be a problem of [[Bishul Akum]], and not if they were cooked together. Regarding French toast in particular, Rav Belsky paskened in OU Document A-63 that the eggs are certainly separate enough to be considered "be'en", even though the OU is lenient regarding white bread, which has an egg-glaze, because the glaze is so thin that it is barely recognizable at all.</ref>
# Regarding a food that contains only a little bit of bread mixed into it, such as Babylonian "kutach" or borscht, the bit of bread is considered nullified.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7 and Tur 112 quoted in the Shulchan Aruch 112:14. The Rama there writes that this is is true even if there's solid being mixed into a liquid, and the Shach 112:23 adds that even if the bread would normally be considered a "davar chashuv". All this is as long as someone didn't mix the bread into a food specifically in order to permit it (Rama).</ref>
# Included in foods that are bread for the purpose of ''bishul akum'' is anything that would have the bracha of [[Hamotzi]] if eaten as a meal.<ref>Rabbi Yechiel of Paris as quoted in Tosfos Beitza 16b and Darkei Moshe Y.D. 112 (against the Shaarei Dura 69, who believes that as long as the food is cooked and not baked it shouldn't be considered bread), Pri Chadash and Beis Meir to Rama 112:6, Avnei Nezer 93:3. See [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> However, some say that this is true only if the dough used was thick like bread dough, instead of like cake batter, and the food looks like bread.<ref>Shach 112:18, though see Chelkas Binyamin 112:64 that most poskim seem to disagree. There appears to be a contradiction in the Toras Chatas regarding this issue between 69:4 and 75:12. See next halacha, however, that this is only true of baked products.</ref> Based on this, cakes, wafers, and crackers are subject to ''Pas Akum''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:8, see [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> The same would be true of foods such as pancakes and waffles.<ref>Assuming that pancakes are the ''terisin'' discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, then there is a machlokes between the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham 168:41 as to whether or not one would make [[Hamotzi]] on such foods if one were to eat them as a meal. There also appears to be contradiction in the Mishnah Berurah between 168:38 where he paskens like the Shulchan Aruch, and 168:90 where he says that we should be stringent and try to avoid eating too much of these foods at a time. Thus, based on Rama Y.D. 113:11 who says that we can follow the lenient opinion when it comes to disagreements, Rabbi Genack suggested in OU Document A-63 that we can consider these foods to be bread instead of [[Bishul Akum]]. However, very thin waffles as described by Shaar HaTziyun 168:36 are not bread at all, and would be subject to the rules of [[Bishul Akum]].</ref>
# A dough-food that was deep fried is, according to some poskim, included in ''pas akum'' instead of [[Bishul Akum]]<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:31 based upon Tashbetz 3:11 and Rivash 28, although they all say that 'sufganin', which are also kept thin and deep fried, are [[Shehakol]] and not ''pas''.</ref> but others reject this opinion.<ref>OU Document A-105 shows that the Aruch Hashulchan's sources rely on the rejected opinion of Rabbeinu Tam quoted in Tosafos Pesachim 37b who holds that fried dough is subject to [[Challah]], which is not how we pasken in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13 and Y.D. 329. Therefore, OU policy (OU Document A-105 and M-7) is to consider doughnuts as if they are not bread, and consider small doughnuts made of yeast to be "fit for a king's table" and require ''bishul yisrael'', though most doughnuts do not.</ref> The proper ''bracha'' on doughnuts is itself a matter of dispute.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13, Aruch Hashulchan 168:42, Mishnah Berurah 168:67-73 and 168:85, Sefer V'Zos HaBeracha pg. 496 footnote 3</ref>
# Bagels are included in ''pas akum'' and not in [[Bishul Akum]] because even though they are boiled before being baked, they are not made edible by the boiling.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:31, Iggerot Moshe YD 2:33 and see the letter from Rav Moshe Feinstein that was published in Sefer Yigal Yaakov.</ref>
# Breakfast cereals which are [[Mezonot|''Mezonos'']] would be subject to ''Pas Akum'' only if they have ''tzuras hapas'', because otherwise one would never make [[Hamotzi]] on them<ref>Rama O.C. 168:13, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, Mishnah Berurah 168:3</ref>. Some poskim think that cereals such as Cheerios should be considered to have ''tzuras hapas''<ref>Rav Scheinberg zt"l, as quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 192 </ref> while others disagree.<ref>R. Schachter, R. Belsky, and R. Genack in OU Document A-94 all assume that cereals such as Cheerios and Corn Flakes are permitted to be eaten when made by a non-Jew, because they lack ''tzuras hapas'' and are also not fit for a king's table, and this is the OU's policy.</ref>
# Pretzels should be considered ''pas'', because they are generally made from bread-dough and have the same general form of bread. However, thin, hard pretzels might lack ''tzuras hapas'' and therefore not be prohibited under ''pas akum''.<ref>This is the opinion of R. Schachter as quoted in OU Document M-7, footnote 97, where he also notes that there's no prohibition of [[Bishul Akum]] either because hard pretzels are not served to kings.</ref>
# Although there is a leniency applicable to [[Bishul Akum]], that if the food is "not fit for a king's table" it would be permissible, most poskim<ref>with the exception of Avnei Nezer YD 1:92</ref> believe that this is not applicable to bread, and so even low-quality breads are included in the prohibition. <ref>Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav 112:3 and see the sources quoted by Chelkas Binyamin 112:12 in the biurim</ref>

==Involvement of a Jew in the Baking==
# The Gemara states that as long as the Jew lit the fire or performed the actual baking, the bread is considered ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Avodah Zarah 38b. The opinion of the Ran and Rashba there, that all of these actions are required only if the Jew doesn't actually own the bread, is rejected by the Shulchan Aruch and Rama; see Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 and Shach 112:1. In fact, as noted above, the Shach in 112:7 is more stringent for bread owned by a Jew than for bread owned by a non-Jew, saying that the former has the status of [[Bishul Akum]] if baked by a non-Jew.</ref>
# The Geonim allowed bread baked by a non-Jew even if the Jew merely added to the fire by throwing in extra kindling<ref>Sefer Minhagim She-Bein Bavel V'Eretz Yisrael pg. 60, quoted by Tosfos Avodah Zarah 38b and Rosh Avodah Zarah 2:33. This can be explained based on the Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 who writes that really all one needs to do is some perfunctory act to show that ''pas akum'' is generally prohibited.</ref> and the custom is in accordance with this opinion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:9, Chochmas Adom 65:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:2, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:26. The Rama Y.D. 113:7, Taz 113:8, and Shach 113:10 say that the Jew doesn't need to have intent to raise the fire in order to have a Jew be involved in the baking, but the Kaf HaChayim Y.D. 112:52 disagrees.</ref>
# Poskim disagree about modern cooking appliances, such as glow plugs<ref>Rabbi Moshe Heinemann, and thus the Star-K, considers this device to add significant heat to the ovens, and therefore if a Jew were to turn on a glow plug that runs through the ovens, the food would be permitted (Star-K Kashrus Kurrents 36:2, Spring 2014). However, many poskim do not agree with this assessment, and the OU does not make use of glow plugs.</ref> and pilot lights or light bulbs.<ref>Refer to OU Document A-54</ref>

==Links==
* [http://www.yutorah.org/search/?s=cohen+crc&category=0,234643 Shiur Series by Rabbi Dovid Cohen of the CRC]
* Article on [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-2%20Pat%20Akum%201.htm Pat Akum] by Rabbi Chaim Jachter
* [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/volume_5_Issue_15.pdf Halachically Speaking Volume 5 Issue 15] and [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/Volume_5_Issue_16.pdf Volume 5 Issue 16]: "Pas Akum, Pas Paltur, & Pas Yisroel" Parts I & II

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

Pat Akum

2015-09-18T16:21:42Z

Sbmb:

==Background: The Gezairah==
# The Chachomim enacted a gezairah forbidding bread that was baked by a non-Jew<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. It's clear from the Gemara Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b that this prohibition is mi'derabanan. This prohibition is independent from that of bishul akum; see Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b "ve'hapas" regarding which gezairah was made first. Ramban ibid. also notes that there are more leniencies for pas akum than for bishul akum, because everyone needs bread to live. The Aruch Hashulchan 113:2 suggests that since bishul akum was also prohibited because of the possibility of the non-Jew mixing in non-kosher besides for the fear of intermarriage, we are more strict regarding bishul akum than pas akum.</ref> so as to avoid intermingling with them too much, which could lead to intermarriage<ref>cf. Rashi Avodah Zarah 35b "shelakos" and Rambam Peirush Hamishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. However, from the Gemara on daf 17b and 36b it seems like the real concern was actually idolatry, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim on page 4. Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b, Rabbeinu Yonah ad. loc., and Shach Y.D. 112:3 note that there is no reason to be concerned for other issues of kashrus. It should be pointed out though that today one still cannot buy bread without a hechsher, see Iggros Moshe Y.D. 2:33</ref>. However, the bread of a non-Jew is prohibited even in a case where there's no possibility of intermarriage,<ref>Such as where the non-Jewish baker doesn't have daughters. Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba.</ref> and doesn't depend on whether or not the non-Jew is an idolater<ref>Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4</ref>
# It is permitted to derive benefit from bread baked by a non-Jew without eating it.<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:3-6</ref>
# While the Bavli's conclusion is somewhat ambiguous, most Rishonim understand that the prohibition of eating pas akum was revoked to some degree.<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b quotes from R. Meir Halevi who believed that the prohibition was not revoked at all, but the Ritva himself, his teachers, Tosfos, Rash miShantz, Rabbeinu Yonah, Ramban, Ra"ah, Rashba, Ran, Nimukei Yosef, and the Rosh in their comments to the aforementioned Gemara all beleive that the decree was limited by later Chachamim. See below regarding the opinion of the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch.</ref> According to some<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b. Such a position is also implied by Tosafos 35b "michlal", as well as by the Rosh's opinion recorded in Tur 112 and the Mordechai according to Shach 112:8</ref>, the prohibition was revoked by the sages entirely. Another opinion, which is followed by Ashkenazim, is that the rabbis allowed bread baked only by a non-Jewish baker ("pas paltar"),<ref>Yerushalami Avodah Zarah 2:8, Rama YD 112:2 based on Tosafot Avoda Zara 35b "michlal", Mordechai, and Issur VeHeter Klal 44, Chochmat Adam 65:2. This also appears to be the position of Rashba and Ran. See below regarding the definition of a 'baker' for this halakha.</ref> whether or not there is bread baked by a Jew available.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Rama in Sefer Toras Chatas 75, Gra Y.D. 112:7-8, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1</ref> The third, and most stringent opinion, is that bread of a baker was permitted only in cases where bread baked by a Jew is not available.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Maachalos Asuros 17:12, Ramban, Ran and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b</ref> This appears to be the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch.<ref>Cf. Y.D. 112:2 and 112:8. Thus, it would appear that this should be the practice for Sefardim, though see Ben Ish Chai II Chukas 2 who follows the lenient opinion. According to the second opinion, which is that of the Rama, in a case where no Jewish-baked bread is available, even "pas baal habayis" is permitted (Rama Y.D. 112:8, see also Rashba Avodah Zarah 35b in his explanation of the Rif)</ref>
# Although Ashkenazi practice is to usually follow the Rama, several poskim indicate that it is still proper to be stringent in this manner and not eat pas paltar where pas yisroel is available.<ref>Shach 112:8, Aruch Hashulchan 112:9, 112:17, Chochmas Adam 65:2 and Chelkes Binyomin 112:23.</ref> Others are not concerned with this for most of the year.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1. The Orthodox Union, as do most Kashrus organizations, certify ''pas paltar'' foods as kosher.</ref> Someone who used to be careful not to eat ''pas paltar'' and wants to change his practice must be ''mattir neder''.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 112:94</ref>
# The Tur writes that even those who are not careful about pas paltar during the year are careful to only eat pas yisrael during Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.<ref>Raavyah Rosh Hashana siman 529, Rosh to Rosh Hashanah 4:14, Tur Orach Chaim 603, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 603:1 and Mishnah Berurah there, Shach Y.D. 112:9. However, the Tashbetz quoted by the Beis Yosef there O.C. 603 doesn't approve of changing one's practice during the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.</ref> Several reasons are given for this custom.<ref>The Chayei Adam 143:1 and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 130:2 write that because God is more merciful than 'necessary' during this time period, we should respond by keeping stringencies which we wouldn't normally consider to be necessary. Levush O.C. 603:1 writes that extra stringencies will remind us to be in a state of teshuvah. Rabbi Netanel Wiederblank [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/838739/Rabbi_Netanel_Wiederblank/Pas_Akum_Part_1 suggested], based on Ramban, that being careful about pas yisrael was a custom of talmidei chachamim.</ref> Some say that this is true of Shabbos and Yom Tov as well, as part of kavod shabbos.<ref>Magen Avraham O.C. 242:4. From the Rama it appears as though this only matters for the bread that one is actually using for the bracha to begin the meals, but the Shaar Tziyun 242:18 writes that even throughout the meal, because of the honor of Shabbos or Yom Tov, one should be careful about ''pas yisroel''</ref>

==Who Baked the Bread==
# A "non-Jewish baker" (''paltar'') in this context is anyone who baked bread with the intent to sell it, and not someone who happens to sell bread for a living.<ref>This is the opinion of the Rama 112:2 based on the Beis Yosef and Rashba (see Gra 112:9), although the Tur's language suggests that he might believe that it depends upon whether or not the non-Jew is baking the bread en masse or not. Shach 112:11 writes that even the bread that a professional commercial baker baked for himself would be included in the prohibition.</ref> Thus, if a baker invited a Jew to partake of his bread, it wouldn't be considered "pas paltar" and would be prohibited.<ref>Rama 112:3 quoting Ra"ah in Bedek HaBayis. However, the Shach 112:12 points out that the Rashba disagrees, and if the Shulchan Aruch is consistent in believing that the prohibition depends on the status of the bread when it was baked, and not when it is sold, then this case should be permitted. Nekudos HaKesef, however, points out that perhaps even if normally the prohibition depends on the time when the bread was baked, this case is too similar to the case of a non-Jew baking the bread for himself.</ref> Bread that was baked with the intention to give to guests is like bread that was meant to be sold, and has the status of "pas paltar".<ref>Kaf Hachayim 112:46</ref>
# As mentioned above, all non-Jews are included in this prohibition.<ref>Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba, Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Pri Tohar on Shulchan Aruch 112:3, Darchei Teshuva 112:4. See Rav Chaim Kanievsky's commentary to Maseches Geirim 1:5, that according to Rabbi Akiva, even a convert cannot eat his own bread that he baked before converting.</ref>
# It is a machlokes haposkim as to whether or not bread baked by an irreligious Jew would be prohibited.<ref>Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 112:1 quoting Tiferes LeMoshe is lenient because one would be allowed to marry his daughter as is Iggeros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, but the Pri Chodosh 112:2, Pri Megadim, and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 72:2 all write that a Jew who does not keep Shabbos is considered like a non-Jew in this regard. See Maharam Shik O.C. 281, Darchei Teshuva 112:5, Avnei Nezer Y.D. 92 (who suggests that it might be prohibited to marry someone not-religious), Shut Yehudah Yaaleh 12, Minchas Yitzchak 3:72, Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 112:11, Mishneh Halachos 11:111, Shut M’Bais Levi 8:page 23:footnote 2, Titz Eliezer 9:41, Yabia Omer Y.D. 5:10, and Chelkes Binyomin 112:4. Also refer to Bishul Yisroel pages 412-413. Rav Shternbach in Halachos Ve'Hanhagos 1:470 writes that even though one must be stringent, in a sha'as hadechak one can eat the bread of someone who is merely a ''tinok shenishbah'', which he applies to anyone who was raised in a non-religious environment. Rav Schachter in OU document A-133 and Rav Asher Weiss in Minchas Asher Devarim no. 5 write that the custom has always been to be lenient.</ref>
# Some poskim have thought that because one would never recognize who baked his bread that was baked industrially in a factory, all commercially sold factory-made bread would not be categorized as "pas akum".<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1 pg. 95 and Rivevos Ephraim 5:596 both quote such a position in the name of R. Moshe Feinstein z"l</ref> However, in practice few poskim would rely on this on its own.<ref>Rivevos Ephraim 5:596, Minchas Yitzchak 3:26:6, Yabea Omer Y.D. 5:9:5, and Shevet Halevi 6:108:6 quotes that the Chazon Ish refused to accept such a possibility at all. See also Chelkes Binyamin 113:4</ref>
# The Shulchan Aruch paskens that the prohibition depends on who baked the bread, and not on who sold the bread.<ref>This is a dispute between the Rashba and Ra'ah in Toras Habayis and Bedek Habayis 3:7, quoted by the Beis Yosef Y.D. 112, and the Shulchan Aruch 112:7 paskens like the Rashba, cf. Shach 112:12.</ref> Therefore, a ''baal habayis'' who sells bread baked by a baker has the status of ''pas paltar'', and vice versa.
# If a Jew owned the dough, then most poskim assume that in such a case the bread would become prohibited even if baked by a baker, instead of having the status of ''pas paltar''.<ref>Perishah Yoreh De'ah 112:10, Shach Y.D. 112:1, Taz 112:7.</ref> However, some are lenient, especially for a large factory owned by a Jew.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:29, Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45</ref>

==When Pas Yisroel is Unavailable==
# When there is no pas yisroel available, the Shulchan Aruch quotes two opinions<ref>Yoreh De'ah 112:2 and 112:8</ref> as to whether or not one would be allowed to eat only ''pas paltar'' or even ''pas ba'al habayis''.<ref>The second opinion is that of the Ra"ah. Because the Shulchan Aruch does not seem to hold like his opinion through the rest of the siman, and because of a general rule to follow the first opinion quoted by the Shulchan Aruch instead of an opinion which he prefaces by "there are those who say", those who follow the Shulchan Aruch should be stringent in this regard, unless there is a very serious need, such as in a case where a person hasn't had bread for three days. Kaf Hachayim 112:49-50 and Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 112:3-4.</ref> The Rama<ref>Y.D. 112:8, Shach 112:8 and Matteh Yonasan there. This is also clearly the opinion of the Rosh as quoted by the Tur, see above</ref> writes that the custom is to follow the lenient opinion. Thus, the following rules in determining "lack of availability" permits either ''pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch, but ''pas baal habayis'' according to the Rama.<ref>This is clear from Shu"t Rama 132:8, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 58</ref>
# ''Pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch and ''pas ba'al habayis'' according to the Rama is permitted only as long as there is no Jewish baker, and then becomes prohibited until the Jewish baker runs out of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:4</ref> If someone already bought the ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'' while it was permitted, and then a Jewish baker came to town, there's a machlokes as to whether the bread already bought becomes prohibited<ref>Between the Rashba Toras Ha-Bayis and Ra"ah in Bedek Habayis, page 185</ref>, but most poskim are lenient.<ref>Shach 112:13 and Chelkas Binhyamin 112:40, as long as the bread was bought while it was permitted</ref>
# Even if there is ''pas yisroel'' bread, but it is a different kind of bread or a lower quality than the ''pas paltar'', then one is allowed to consider it as if there is no ''pas yisroel'' available if he wants the other type of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:5 quoting the Rashba in Toras Habayis and Shach 112:9. Based on the language of the Bach and Shulchan Aruch, Chelkas Binyamin 112:51 and 112:18 says that if the ''pas yisroel'' is merely more expensive but is the same quality, it would not be permissible to buy the ''pas paltar''. Footnote 2 of the Meiri to Avodah Zarah 35b "mah she-hutar" leaves the question open.</ref>
# The availability of ''pas yisroel'' depends on whether or not it is obtainable in one's own city, and so even if there's a place to get ''pas yisroel'' just outside the city, one is not required to do so.<ref>Meiri 35b "ve'hinei". Chelkas Binyamin 112:18 indicates that if one lives in a big city and would have to travel four [[mil]] or more to obtain ''pas yisrael'' he might not have to travel that far.</ref>
# Someone who is on the road without ''pas yisroel'' would have to travel a distance<ref>See Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 59 who discusses whether this is measured by distance or by travel time, and see Aruch Hashulchan 112:18, who writes ד' מילין הוא אם צריך לילך לשם אבל כשאין לו דרך לשם או שצריך לחזור לאחוריו אין כאן שיעור ד' מילין [פר"ח סקכ"ח] ומיהו שיעור מיל צריך להמתין [חכ"א] ואין חילוק בכל זה בין דרך טובה לדרך רעועה ובין נוסע בעגלה או רוכב על הסוס או הולך רגלי דחכמים השוו מדותיהם</ref> as far as four [[mil]] before he would be allowed to eat ''pas paltar'' (according to the Shulchan Aruch),<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:16 and Mishnah Berurah Orach Chayim 603:1</ref> and one does not have to travel in the opposite direction in order to get to ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Pri Chadash 112:28, Darchei Teshuva 112:95</ref>

==What Breads and Foods are Included==
# Only bread made from "[[Wheat and Grain Products|The Five Grains]]" is included in the laws of ''pas akum''; anything else falls under the category of [[Bishul Akum]].<ref>As implied by Brachos 37a. Rosh (Teshuvos) 19:21, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 112:1</ref>
# When a food is a combination of bread and something else, such as egg, then we follow the ''ikkar''<ref>Tosafos and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b, Avnei Nezer 94:1-2, R' Belsky in OU Document A-65</ref>, but if the egg is still visible as a separate entity, such as in the case of French Toast, then the food as a whole will be subject to the rule of [[Bishul Akum]] as well.<ref>Rama 112:6 and Aruch Hashulchan 112:21, though see Pri Megadim there who implies that only if the egg is mixed in afterwords would there be a problem of [[Bishul Akum]], and not if they were cooked together. Regarding French toast in particular, Rav Belsky paskened in OU Document A-63 that the eggs are certainly separate enough to be considered "be'en", even though the OU is lenient regarding white bread, which has an egg-glaze, because the glaze is so thin that it is barely recognizable at all.</ref>
# Regarding a food that contains only a little bit of bread mixed into it, such as Babylonian "kutach" or borscht, the bit of bread is considered nullified.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7 and Tur 112 quoted in the Shulchan Aruch 112:14. The Rama there writes that this is is true even if there's solid being mixed into a liquid, and the Shach 112:23 adds that even if the bread would normally be considered a "davar chashuv". All this is as long as someone didn't mix the bread into a food specifically in order to permit it (Rama).</ref>
# Included in foods that are bread for the purpose of ''bishul akum'' is anything that would have the bracha of [[Hamotzi]] if eaten as a meal.<ref>Rabbi Yechiel of Paris as quoted in Tosfos Beitza 16b and Darkei Moshe Y.D. 112 (against the Shaarei Dura 69, who believes that as long as the food is cooked and not baked it shouldn't be considered bread), Pri Chadash and Beis Meir to Rama 112:6, Avnei Nezer 93:3. See [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> However, some say that this is true only if the dough used was thick like bread dough, instead of like cake batter, and the food looks like bread.<ref>Shach 112:18, though see Chelkas Binyamin 112:64 that most poskim seem to disagree. There appears to be a contradiction in the Toras Chatas regarding this issue between 69:4 and 75:12. See next halacha, however, that this is only true of baked products.</ref> Based on this, cakes, wafers, and crackers are subject to ''Pas Akum''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:8, see [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> The same would be true of foods such as pancakes and waffles.<ref>Assuming that pancakes are the ''terisin'' discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, then there is a machlokes between the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham 168:41 as to whether or not one would make [[Hamotzi]] on such foods if one were to eat them as a meal. There also appears to be contradiction in the Mishnah Berurah between 168:38 where he paskens like the Shulchan Aruch, and 168:90 where he says that we should be stringent and try to avoid eating too much of these foods at a time. Thus, based on Rama Y.D. 113:11 who says that we can follow the lenient opinion when it comes to disagreements, Rabbi Genack suggested in OU Document A-63 that we can consider these foods to be bread instead of [[Bishul Akum]]. However, very thin waffles as described by Shaar HaTziyun 168:36 are not bread at all, and would be subject to the rules of [[Bishul Akum]].</ref>
# A dough-food that was deep fried is, according to some poskim, included in ''pas akum'' instead of [[Bishul Akum]]<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:31 based upon Tashbetz 3:11 and Rivash 28, although they all say that 'sufganin', which are also kept thin and deep fried, are [[Shehakol]] and not ''pas''.</ref> but others reject this opinion.<ref>OU Document A-105 shows that the Aruch Hashulchan's sources rely on the rejected opinion of Rabbeinu Tam quoted in Tosafos Pesachim 37b who holds that fried dough is subject to [[Challah]], which is not how we pasken in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13 and Y.D. 329. Therefore, OU policy (OU Document A-105 and M-7) is to consider doughnuts as if they are not bread, and consider small doughnuts made of yeast to be "fit for a king's table" and require ''bishul yisrael'', though most doughnuts do not.</ref> The proper ''bracha'' on doughnuts is itself a matter of dispute.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13, Aruch Hashulchan 168:42, Mishnah Berurah 168:67-73 and 168:85, Sefer V'Zos HaBeracha pg. 496 footnote 3</ref>
# Bagels are included in ''pas akum'' and not in [[Bishul Akum]] because even though they are boiled before being baked, they are not made edible by the boiling.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:31, Iggerot Moshe YD 2:33 and see the letter from Rav Moshe Feinstein that was published in Sefer Yigal Yaakov.</ref>
# Breakfast cereals which are [[Mezonot|''Mezonos'']] would be subject to ''Pas Akum'' only if they have ''tzuras hapas'', because otherwise one would never make [[Hamotzi]] on them<ref>Rama O.C. 168:13, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, Mishnah Berurah 168:3</ref>. Some poskim think that cereals such as Cheerios should be considered to have ''tzuras hapas''<ref>Rav Scheinberg zt"l, as quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 192 </ref> while others disagree.<ref>R. Schachter, R. Belsky, and R. Genack in OU Document A-94 all assume that cereals such as Cheerios and Corn Flakes are permitted to be eaten when made by a non-Jew, because they lack ''tzuras hapas'' and are also not fit for a king's table, and this is the OU's policy.</ref>
# Pretzels should be considered ''pas'', because they are generally made from bread-dough and have the same general form of bread. However, thin, hard pretzels might lack ''tzuras hapas'' and therefore not be prohibited under ''pas akum''.<ref>This is the opinion of R. Schachter as quoted in OU Document M-7, footnote 97, where he also notes that there's no prohibition of [[Bishul Akum]] either because hard pretzels are not served to kings.</ref>
# Although there is a leniency applicable to [[Bishul Akum]], that if the food is "not fit for a king's table" it would be permissible, most poskim<ref>with the exception of Avnei Nezer YD 1:92</ref> believe that this is not applicable to bread, and so even low-quality breads are included in the prohibition. <ref>Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav 112:3 and see the sources quoted by Chelkas Binyamin 112:12 in the biurim</ref>

==Involvement of a Jew in the Baking==
# The Gemara states that as long as the Jew lit the fire or performed the actual baking, the bread is considered ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Avodah Zarah 38b. The opinion of the Ran and Rashba there, that all of these actions are required only if the Jew doesn't actually own the bread, is rejected by the Shulchan Aruch and Rama; see Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 and Shach 112:1. In fact, as noted above, the Shach in 112:7 is more stringent for bread owned by a Jew than for bread owned by a non-Jew, saying that the former has the status of [[Bishul Akum]] if baked by a non-Jew.</ref>
# The Geonim allowed bread baked by a non-Jew even if the Jew merely added to the fire by throwing in extra kindling<ref>Sefer Minhagim She-Bein Bavel V'Eretz Yisrael pg. 60, quoted by Tosfos Avodah Zarah 38b and Rosh Avodah Zarah 2:33. This can be explained based on the Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 who writes that really all one needs to do is some perfunctory act to show that ''pas akum'' is generally prohibited.</ref> and the custom is in accordance with this opinion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:9, Chochmas Adom 65:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:2, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:26. The Rama Y.D. 113:7, Taz 113:8, and Shach 113:10 say that the Jew doesn't need to have intent to raise the fire in order to have a Jew be involved in the baking, but the Kaf HaChayim Y.D. 112:52 disagrees.</ref>
# Poskim disagree about modern cooking appliances, such as glow plugs<ref>Rabbi Moshe Heinemann, and thus the Star-K, considers this device to add significant heat to the ovens, and therefore if a Jew were to turn on a glow plug that runs through the ovens, the food would be permitted (Star-K Kashrus Kurrents 36:2, Spring 2014). However, many poskim do not agree with this assessment, and the OU does not make use of glow plugs.</ref> and pilot lights or light bulbs.<ref>Refer to OU Document A-54</ref>

==Links==
* [http://www.yutorah.org/search/?s=cohen+crc&category=0,234643 Shiur Series by Rabbi Dovid Cohen of the CRC]
* Article on [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-2%20Pat%20Akum%201.htm Pat Akum] by Rabbi Chaim Jachter
* [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/volume_5_Issue_15.pdf Halachically Speaking Volume 5 Issue 15] and [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/Volume_5_Issue_16.pdf Volume 5 Issue 16]: "Pas Akum, Pas Paltur, & Pas Yisroel" Parts I & II

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

Pat Akum

2015-09-18T16:18:26Z

Sbmb: /* Who Baked the Bread */

==Background: The Gezairah==
# The Chachomim enacted a gezairah forbidding bread that was baked by a non-Jew<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. It's clear from the Gemara Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b that this prohibition is mi'derabanan. This prohibition is independent from that of bishul akum; see Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b "ve'hapas" regarding which gezairah was made first. Ramban ibid. also notes that there are more leniencies for pas akum than for bishul akum, because everyone needs bread to live. The Aruch Hashulchan 113:2 suggests that since bishul akum was also prohibited because of the possibility of the non-Jew mixing in non-kosher besides for the fear of intermarriage, we are more strict regarding bishul akum than pas akum.</ref> so as to avoid intermingling with them too much, which could lead to intermarriage<ref>cf. Rashi Avodah Zarah 35b "shelakos" and Rambam Peirush Hamishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. However, from the Gemara on daf 17b and 36b it seems like the real concern was actually idolatry, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim on page 4. Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b, Rabbeinu Yonah ad. loc., and Shach Y.D. 112:3 note that there is no reason to be concerned for other issues of kashrus. It should be pointed out though that today one still cannot buy bread without a hechsher, see Iggros Moshe Y.D. 2:33</ref>. However, the bread of a non-Jew is prohibited even in a case where there's no possibility of intermarriage,<ref>Such as where the non-Jewish baker doesn't have daughters. Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba.</ref> and doesn't depend on whether or not the non-Jew is an idolater<ref>Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4</ref>
# It is permitted to derive benefit from bread baked by a non-Jew without eating it.<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:3-6</ref>
# While the Bavli's conclusion is somewhat ambiguous, most Rishonim understand that the prohibition of eating pas akum was revoked to some degree.<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b quotes from R. Meir Halevi who believed that the prohibition was not revoked at all, but the Ritva himself, his teachers, Tosfos, Rash miShantz, Rabbeinu Yonah, Ramban, Ra"ah, Rashba, Ran, Nimukei Yosef, and the Rosh in their comments to the aforementioned Gemara all beleive that the decree was limited by later Chachamim. See below regarding the opinion of the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch.</ref> According to some<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b. Such a position is also implied by Tosafos 35b "michlal", as well as by the Rosh's opinion recorded in Tur 112 and the Mordechai according to Shach 112:8</ref>, the prohibition was revoked by the sages entirely. Another opinion, which is followed by Ashkenazim, is that the rabbis allowed bread baked only by a non-Jewish baker ("pas paltar"),<ref>Yerushalami Avodah Zarah 2:8, Rama YD 112:2 based on Tosafot Avoda Zara 35b "michlal", Mordechai, and Issur VeHeter Klal 44, Chochmat Adam 65:2. This also appears to be the position of Rashba and Ran. See below regarding the definition of a 'baker' for this halakha.</ref> whether or not there is bread baked by a Jew available.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Rama in Sefer Toras Chatas 75, Gra Y.D. 112:7-8, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1</ref> The third, and most stringent opinion, is that bread of a baker was permitted only in cases where bread baked by a Jew is not available.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Maachalos Asuros 17:12, Ramban, Ran and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b</ref> This appears to be the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch.<ref>Cf. Y.D. 112:2 and 112:8. Thus, it would appear that this should be the practice for Sefardim, though see Ben Ish Chai II Chukas 2 who follows the lenient opinion. According to the second opinion, which is that of the Rama, in a case where no Jewish-baked bread is available, even "pas baal habayis" is permitted (Rama Y.D. 112:8, see also Rashba Avodah Zarah 35b in his explanation of the Rif)</ref>
# Although Ashkenazi practice is to usually follow the Rama, several poskim indicate that it is still proper to be stringent in this manner and not eat pas paltar where pas yisroel is available.<ref>Shach 112:8, Aruch Hashulchan 112:9, 112:17, Chochmas Adam 65:2 and Chelkes Binyomin 112:23.</ref> Others are not concerned with this for most of the year.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1. The Orthodox Union, as do most Kashrus organizations, certify ''pas paltar'' foods as kosher.</ref> Someone who used to be careful not to eat ''pas paltar'' and wants to change his practice must be ''mattir neder''.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 112:94</ref>
# The Tur writes that even those who are not careful about pas paltar during the year are careful to only eat pas yisrael during Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.<ref>Raavyah Rosh Hashana siman 529, Rosh to Rosh Hashanah 4:14, Tur Orach Chaim 603, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 603:1 and Mishnah Berurah there, Shach Y.D. 112:9. However, the Tashbetz quoted by the Beis Yosef there O.C. 603 doesn't approve of changing one's practice during the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.</ref> Several reasons are given for this custom.<ref>The Chayei Adam 143:1 and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 130:2 write that because God is more merciful than 'necessary' during this time period, we should respond by keeping stringencies which we wouldn't normally consider to be necessary. Levush O.C. 603:1 writes that extra stringencies will remind us to be in a state of teshuvah. Rabbi Netanel Wiederblank [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/838739/Rabbi_Netanel_Wiederblank/Pas_Akum_Part_1 suggested], based on Ramban, that being careful about pas yisrael was a custom of talmidei chachamim.</ref> Some say that this is true of Shabbos and Yom Tov as well, as part of kavod shabbos.<ref>Magen Avraham O.C. 242:4. From the Rama it appears as though this only matters for the bread that one is actually using for the bracha to begin the meals, but the Shaar Tziyun 242:18 writes that even throughout the meal, because of the honor of Shabbos or Yom Tov, one should be careful about ''pas yisroel''</ref>

==Who Baked the Bread==
# A "non-Jewish baker" (''paltar'') in this context is anyone who baked bread with the intent to sell it, and not someone who happens to sell bread for a living.<ref>This is the opinion of the Rama 112:2 based on the Beis Yosef and Rashba (see Gra 112:9), although the Tur's language suggests that he might believe that it depends upon whether or not the non-Jew is baking the bread en masse or not. Shach 112:11 writes that even the bread that a professional commercial baker baked for himself would be included in the prohibition.</ref> Thus, if a baker invited a Jew to partake of his bread, it wouldn't be considered "pas paltar" and would be prohibited.<ref>Rama 112:3 quoting Ra"ah in Bedek HaBayis. However, the Shach 112:12 points out that the Rashba disagrees, and if the Shulchan Aruch is consistent in believing that the prohibition depends on the status of the bread when it was baked, and not when it is sold, then this case should be permitted. Nekudos HaKesef, however, points out that perhaps even if normally the prohibition depends on the time when the bread was baked, this case is too similar to the case of a non-Jew baking the bread for himself.</ref> Bread that was baked with the intention to give to guests is like bread that was meant to be sold, and has the status of "pas paltar".<ref>Kaf Hachayim 112:46</ref>
# As mentioned above, all non-Jews are included in this prohibition.<ref>Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba, Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Pri Tohar on Shulchan Aruch 112:3, Darchei Teshuva 112:4. See Rav Chaim Kanievsky's commentary to Maseches Geirim 1:5, that according to Rabbi Akiva, even a convert cannot eat his own bread that he baked before converting.</ref>
# It is a machlokes haposkim as to whether or not bread baked by an irreligious Jew would be prohibited.<ref>Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 112:1 quoting Tiferes LeMoshe is lenient because one would be allowed to marry his daughter as is Iggeros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, but the Pri Chodosh 112:2, Pri Megadim, and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 72:2 all write that a Jew who does not keep Shabbos is considered like a non-Jew in this regard. See Maharam Shik O.C. 281, Darchei Teshuva 112:5, Avnei Nezer Y.D. 92 (who suggests that it might be prohibited to marry someone not-religious), Shut Yehudah Yaaleh 12, Minchas Yitzchak 3:72, Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 112:11, Mishneh Halachos 11:111, Shut M’Bais Levi 8:page 23:footnote 2, Titz Eliezer 9:41, Yabia Omer Y.D. 5:10, and Chelkes Binyomin 112:4. Also refer to Bishul Yisroel pages 412-413. Rav Shternbach in Halachos Ve'Hanhagos 1:470 writes that even though one must be stringent, in a sha'as hadechak one can eat the bread of someone who is merely a ''tinok shenishbah'', which he applies to anyone who was raised in a non-religious environment. Rav Schachter in OU document A-133 and Rav Asher Weiss in Minchas Asher Devarim no. 5 write that the custom has always been to be lenient.</ref>
# Some poskim have thought that because one would never recognize who baked his bread that was baked industrially in a factory, all commercially sold factory-made bread would not be categorized as "pas akum".<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1 pg. 95 and Rivevos Ephraim 5:596 both quote such a position in the name of R. Moshe Feinstein z"l</ref> However, in practice few poskim would rely on this on its own.<ref>Rivevos Ephraim 5:596, Minchas Yitzchak 3:26:6, Yabea Omer Y.D. 5:9:5, and Shevet Halevi 6:108:6 quotes that the Chazon Ish refused to accept such a possibility at all. See also Chelkes Binyamin 113:4</ref>
# The Shulchan Aruch paskens that the prohibition depends on who baked the bread, and not on who sold the bread.<ref>This is a dispute between the Rashba and Ra'ah in Toras Habayis and Bedek Habayis 3:7, quoted by the Beis Yosef Y.D. 112, and the Shulchan Aruch 112:7 paskens like the Rashba, cf. Shach 112:12.</ref> Therefore, a ''baal habayis'' who sells bread baked by a baker has the status of ''pas paltar'', and vice versa.
# If a Jew owned the dough, then most poskim assume that in such a case the bread would become prohibited even if baked by a baker, instead of having the status of ''pas paltar''.<ref>Perishah Yoreh De'ah 112:10, Shach Y.D. 112:1, Taz 112:7.</ref> However, some are lenient, especially for a large factory owned by a Jew.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:29, Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45</ref>

==When Pas Yisroel is Unavailable==
# When there is no pas yisroel available, the Shulchan Aruch quotes two opinions<ref>Yoreh De'ah 112:2 and 112:8</ref> as to whether or not one would be allowed to eat only ''pas paltar'' or even ''pas ba'al habayis''.<ref>The second opinion is that of the Ra"ah. Because the Shulchan Aruch does not seem to hold like his opinion through the rest of the siman, and because of a general rule to follow the first opinion quoted by the Shulchan Aruch instead of an opinion which he prefaces by "there are those who say", those who follow the Shulchan Aruch should be stringent in this regard, unless there is a very serious need, such as in a case where a person hasn't had bread for three days. Kaf Hachayim 112:49-50 and Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 112:3-4.</ref> The Rama<ref>Y.D. 112:8, Shach 112:8 and Matteh Yonasan there. This is also clearly the opinion of the Rosh as quoted by the Tur, see above</ref> writes that the custom is to follow the lenient opinion. Thus, the following rules in determining "lack of availability" permits either ''pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch, but ''pas baal habayis'' according to the Rama.<ref>This is clear from Shu"t Rama 132:8, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 58</ref>
# ''Pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch and ''pas ba'al habayis'' according to the Rama is permitted only as long as there is no Jewish baker, and then becomes prohibited until the Jewish baker runs out of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:4</ref> If someone already bought the ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'' while it was permitted, and then a Jewish baker came to town, there's a machlokes as to whether the bread already bought becomes prohibited<ref>Between the Rashba Toras Ha-Bayis and Ra"ah in Bedek Habayis, page 185</ref>, but most poskim are lenient.<ref>Shach 112:13 and Chelkas Binhyamin 112:40, as long as the bread was bought while it was permitted</ref>
# Even if there is ''pas yisroel'' bread, but it is a different kind of bread or a lower quality than the ''pas paltar'', then one is allowed to consider it as if there is no ''pas yisroel'' available if he wants the other type of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:5 quoting the Rashba in Toras Habayis and Shach 112:9. Based on the language of the Bach and Shulchan Aruch, Chelkas Binyamin 112:51 and 112:18 says that if the ''pas yisroel'' is merely more expensive but is the same quality, it would not be permissible to buy the ''pas paltar''. Footnote 2 of the Meiri to Avodah Zarah 35b "mah she-hutar" leaves the question open.</ref>
# The availability of ''pas yisroel'' depends on whether or not it is obtainable in one's own city, and so even if there's a place to get ''pas yisroel'' just outside the city, one is not required to do so.<ref>Meiri 35b "ve'hinei". Chelkas Binyamin 112:18 indicates that if one lives in a big city and would have to travel four [[mil]] or more to obtain ''pas yisrael'' he might not have to travel that far.</ref>
# Someone who is on the road without ''pas yisroel'' would have to travel a distance<ref>See Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 59 who discusses whether this is measured by distance or by travel time, and see Aruch Hashulchan 112:18, who writes ד' מילין הוא אם צריך לילך לשם אבל כשאין לו דרך לשם או שצריך לחזור לאחוריו אין כאן שיעור ד' מילין [פר"ח סקכ"ח] ומיהו שיעור מיל צריך להמתין [חכ"א] ואין חילוק בכל זה בין דרך טובה לדרך רעועה ובין נוסע בעגלה או רוכב על הסוס או הולך רגלי דחכמים השוו מדותיהם</ref> as far as four [[mil]] before he would be allowed to eat ''pas paltar'' (according to the Shulchan Aruch),<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:16 and Mishnah Berurah Orach Chayim 603:1</ref> and one does not have to travel in the opposite direction in order to get to ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Pri Chadash 112:28, Darchei Teshuva 112:95</ref>

==What Breads and Foods are Included==
# Only bread made from "[[Wheat and Grain Products|The Five Grains]]" is included in the laws of ''pas akum''; anything else falls under the category of [[Bishul Akum]].<ref>As implied by Brachos 37a. Rosh (Teshuvos) 19:21, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 112:1</ref>
# When a food is a combination of bread and something else, such as egg, then we follow the ''ikkar''<ref>Tosafos and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b, Avnei Nezer 94:1-2, R' Belsky in OU Document A-65</ref>, but if the egg is still visible as a separate entity, such as in the case of French Toast, then the food as a whole will be subject to the rule of [[Bishul Akum]] as well.<ref>Rama 112:6 and Aruch Hashulchan 112:21, though see Pri Megadim there who implies that only if the egg is mixed in afterwords would there be a problem of [[Bishul Akum]], and not if they were cooked together. Regarding French toast in particular, Rav Belsky paskened in OU Document A-63 that the eggs are certainly separate enough to be considered "be'en", even though the OU is lenient regarding white bread, which has an egg-glaze, because the glaze is so thin that it is barely recognizable at all.</ref>
# Regarding a food that contains only a little bit of bread mixed into it, such as Babylonian "kutach" or borscht, the bit of bread is considered nullified.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7 and Tur 112 quoted in the Shulchan Aruch 112:14. The Rama there writes that this is is true even if there's solid being mixed into a liquid, and the Shach 112:23 adds that even if the bread would normally be considered a "davar chashuv". All this is as long as someone didn't mix the bread into a food specifically in order to permit it (Rama).</ref>
# Included in foods that are bread for the purpose of ''bishul akum'' is anything that would have the bracha of [[Hamotzi]] if eaten as a meal.<ref>Rabbi Yechiel of Paris as quoted in Tosfos Beitza 16b and Darkei Moshe Y.D. 112 (against the Shaarei Dura 69, who believes that as long as the food is cooked and not baked it shouldn't be considered bread), Pri Chadash and Beis Meir to Rama 112:6, Avnei Nezer 93:3. See [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> However, some say that this is true only if the dough used was thick like bread dough, instead of like cake batter, and the food looks like bread.<ref>Shach 112:18, though see Chelkas Binyamin 112:64 that most poskim seem to disagree. There appears to be a contradiction in the Toras Chatas regarding this issue between 69:4 and 75:12. See next halacha, however, that this is only true of baked products.</ref> Based on this, cakes, wafers, and crackers are subject to ''Pas Akum''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:8, see [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> The same would be true of foods such as pancakes and waffles.<ref>Assuming that pancakes are the ''terisin'' discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, then there is a machlokes between the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham 168:41 as to whether or not one would make [[Hamotzi]] on such foods if one were to eat them as a meal. There also appears to be contradiction in the Mishnah Berurah between 168:38 where he paskens like the Shulchan Aruch, and 168:90 where he says that we should be stringent and try to avoid eating too much of these foods at a time. Thus, based on Rama Y.D. 113:11 who says that we can follow the lenient opinion when it comes to disagreements, Rabbi Genack suggested in OU Document A-63 that we can consider these foods to be bread instead of [[Bishul Akum]]. However, very thin waffles as described by Shaar HaTziyun 168:36 are not bread at all, and would be subject to the rules of [[Bishul Akum]].</ref>
# A dough-food that was deep fried is, according to some poskim, included in ''pas akum'' instead of [[Bishul Akum]]<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:31 based upon Tashbetz 3:11 and Rivash 28, although they all say that 'sufganin', which are also kept thin and deep fried, are [[Shehakol]] and not ''pas''.</ref> but others reject this opinion.<ref>OU Document A-105 shows that the Aruch Hashulchan's sources rely on the rejected opinion of Rabbeinu Tam quoted in Tosafos Pesachim 37b who holds that fried dough is subject to [[Challah]], which is not how we pasken in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13 and Y.D. 329. Therefore, OU policy (OU Document A-105 and M-7) is to consider doughnuts as if they are not bread, and consider small doughnuts made of yeast to be "fit for a king's table" and require ''bishul yisrael'', though most doughnuts do not.</ref> The proper ''bracha'' on doughnuts is itself a matter of dispute.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13, Aruch Hashulchan 168:42, Mishnah Berurah 168:67-73 and 168:85, Sefer V'Zos HaBeracha pg. 496 footnote 3</ref>
# Bagels are included in ''pas akum'' and not in [[Bishul Akum]] because even though they are boiled before being baked, they are not made edible by the boiling.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:31, Iggerot Moshe YD 2:33 </ref>
# Breakfast cereals which are [[Mezonot|''Mezonos'']] would be subject to ''Pas Akum'' only if they have ''tzuras hapas'', because otherwise one would never make [[Hamotzi]] on them<ref>Rama O.C. 168:13, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, Mishnah Berurah 168:3</ref>. Some poskim think that cereals such as Cheerios should be considered to have ''tzuras hapas''<ref>Rav Scheinberg zt"l, as quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 192 </ref> while others disagree.<ref>R. Schachter, R. Belsky, and R. Genack in OU Document A-94 all assume that cereals such as Cheerios and Corn Flakes are permitted to be eaten when made by a non-Jew, because they lack ''tzuras hapas'' and are also not fit for a king's table, and this is the OU's policy.</ref>
# Pretzels should be considered ''pas'', because they are generally made from bread-dough and have the same general form of bread. However, thin, hard pretzels might lack ''tzuras hapas'' and therefore not be prohibited under ''pas akum''.<ref>This is the opinion of R. Schachter as quoted in OU Document M-7, footnote 97, where he also notes that there's no prohibition of [[Bishul Akum]] either because hard pretzels are not served to kings.</ref>
# Although there is a leniency applicable to [[Bishul Akum]], that if the food is "not fit for a king's table" it would be permissible, most poskim<ref>with the exception of Avnei Nezer YD 1:92</ref> believe that this is not applicable to bread, and so even low-quality breads are included in the prohibition. <ref>Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav 112:3 and see the sources quoted by Chelkas Binyamin 112:12 in the biurim</ref>

==Involvement of a Jew in the Baking==
# The Gemara states that as long as the Jew lit the fire or performed the actual baking, the bread is considered ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Avodah Zarah 38b. The opinion of the Ran and Rashba there, that all of these actions are required only if the Jew doesn't actually own the bread, is rejected by the Shulchan Aruch and Rama; see Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 and Shach 112:1. In fact, as noted above, the Shach in 112:7 is more stringent for bread owned by a Jew than for bread owned by a non-Jew, saying that the former has the status of [[Bishul Akum]] if baked by a non-Jew.</ref>
# The Geonim allowed bread baked by a non-Jew even if the Jew merely added to the fire by throwing in extra kindling<ref>Sefer Minhagim She-Bein Bavel V'Eretz Yisrael pg. 60, quoted by Tosfos Avodah Zarah 38b and Rosh Avodah Zarah 2:33. This can be explained based on the Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 who writes that really all one needs to do is some perfunctory act to show that ''pas akum'' is generally prohibited.</ref> and the custom is in accordance with this opinion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:9, Chochmas Adom 65:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:2, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:26. The Rama Y.D. 113:7, Taz 113:8, and Shach 113:10 say that the Jew doesn't need to have intent to raise the fire in order to have a Jew be involved in the baking, but the Kaf HaChayim Y.D. 112:52 disagrees.</ref>
# Poskim disagree about modern cooking appliances, such as glow plugs<ref>Rabbi Moshe Heinemann, and thus the Star-K, considers this device to add significant heat to the ovens, and therefore if a Jew were to turn on a glow plug that runs through the ovens, the food would be permitted (Star-K Kashrus Kurrents 36:2, Spring 2014). However, many poskim do not agree with this assessment, and the OU does not make use of glow plugs.</ref> and pilot lights or light bulbs.<ref>Refer to OU Document A-54</ref>

==Links==
* [http://www.yutorah.org/search/?s=cohen+crc&category=0,234643 Shiur Series by Rabbi Dovid Cohen of the CRC]
* Article on [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-2%20Pat%20Akum%201.htm Pat Akum] by Rabbi Chaim Jachter
* [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/volume_5_Issue_15.pdf Halachically Speaking Volume 5 Issue 15] and [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/Volume_5_Issue_16.pdf Volume 5 Issue 16]: "Pas Akum, Pas Paltur, & Pas Yisroel" Parts I & II

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

Pat Akum

2015-09-18T14:03:58Z

Sbmb: /* What Breads and Foods are Included */

==Background: The Gezairah==
# The Chachomim enacted a gezairah forbidding bread that was baked by a non-Jew<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. It's clear from the Gemara Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b that this prohibition is mi'derabanan. This prohibition is independent from that of bishul akum; see Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b "ve'hapas" regarding which gezairah was made first. Ramban ibid. also notes that there are more leniencies for pas akum than for bishul akum, because everyone needs bread to live. The Aruch Hashulchan 113:2 suggests that since bishul akum was also prohibited because of the possibility of the non-Jew mixing in non-kosher besides for the fear of intermarriage, we are more strict regarding bishul akum than pas akum.</ref> so as to avoid intermingling with them too much, which could lead to intermarriage<ref>cf. Rashi Avodah Zarah 35b "shelakos" and Rambam Peirush Hamishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. However, from the Gemara on daf 17b and 36b it seems like the real concern was actually idolatry, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim on page 4. Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b, Rabbeinu Yonah ad. loc., and Shach Y.D. 112:3 note that there is no reason to be concerned for other issues of kashrus. It should be pointed out though that today one still cannot buy bread without a hechsher, see Iggros Moshe Y.D. 2:33</ref>. However, the bread of a non-Jew is prohibited even in a case where there's no possibility of intermarriage,<ref>Such as where the non-Jewish baker doesn't have daughters. Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba.</ref> and doesn't depend on whether or not the non-Jew is an idolater<ref>Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4</ref>
# It is permitted to derive benefit from bread baked by a non-Jew without eating it.<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:3-6</ref>
# While the Bavli's conclusion is somewhat ambiguous, most Rishonim understand that the prohibition of eating pas akum was revoked to some degree.<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b quotes from R. Meir Halevi who believed that the prohibition was not revoked at all, but the Ritva himself, his teachers, Tosfos, Rash miShantz, Rabbeinu Yonah, Ramban, Ra"ah, Rashba, Ran, Nimukei Yosef, and the Rosh in their comments to the aforementioned Gemara all beleive that the decree was limited by later Chachamim. See below regarding the opinion of the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch.</ref> According to some<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b. Such a position is also implied by Tosafos 35b "michlal", as well as by the Rosh's opinion recorded in Tur 112 and the Mordechai according to Shach 112:8</ref>, the prohibition was revoked by the sages entirely. Another opinion, which is followed by Ashkenazim, is that the rabbis allowed bread baked only by a non-Jewish baker ("pas paltar"),<ref>Yerushalami Avodah Zarah 2:8, Rama YD 112:2 based on Tosafot Avoda Zara 35b "michlal", Mordechai, and Issur VeHeter Klal 44, Chochmat Adam 65:2. This also appears to be the position of Rashba and Ran. See below regarding the definition of a 'baker' for this halakha.</ref> whether or not there is bread baked by a Jew available.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Rama in Sefer Toras Chatas 75, Gra Y.D. 112:7-8, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1</ref> The third, and most stringent opinion, is that bread of a baker was permitted only in cases where bread baked by a Jew is not available.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Maachalos Asuros 17:12, Ramban, Ran and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b</ref> This appears to be the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch.<ref>Cf. Y.D. 112:2 and 112:8. Thus, it would appear that this should be the practice for Sefardim, though see Ben Ish Chai II Chukas 2 who follows the lenient opinion. According to the second opinion, which is that of the Rama, in a case where no Jewish-baked bread is available, even "pas baal habayis" is permitted (Rama Y.D. 112:8, see also Rashba Avodah Zarah 35b in his explanation of the Rif)</ref>
# Although Ashkenazi practice is to usually follow the Rama, several poskim indicate that it is still proper to be stringent in this manner and not eat pas paltar where pas yisroel is available.<ref>Shach 112:8, Aruch Hashulchan 112:9, 112:17, Chochmas Adam 65:2 and Chelkes Binyomin 112:23.</ref> Others are not concerned with this for most of the year.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1. The Orthodox Union, as do most Kashrus organizations, certify ''pas paltar'' foods as kosher.</ref> Someone who used to be careful not to eat ''pas paltar'' and wants to change his practice must be ''mattir neder''.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 112:94</ref>
# The Tur writes that even those who are not careful about pas paltar during the year are careful to only eat pas yisrael during Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.<ref>Raavyah Rosh Hashana siman 529, Rosh to Rosh Hashanah 4:14, Tur Orach Chaim 603, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 603:1 and Mishnah Berurah there, Shach Y.D. 112:9. However, the Tashbetz quoted by the Beis Yosef there O.C. 603 doesn't approve of changing one's practice during the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.</ref> Several reasons are given for this custom.<ref>The Chayei Adam 143:1 and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 130:2 write that because God is more merciful than 'necessary' during this time period, we should respond by keeping stringencies which we wouldn't normally consider to be necessary. Levush O.C. 603:1 writes that extra stringencies will remind us to be in a state of teshuvah. Rabbi Netanel Wiederblank [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/838739/Rabbi_Netanel_Wiederblank/Pas_Akum_Part_1 suggested], based on Ramban, that being careful about pas yisrael was a custom of talmidei chachamim.</ref> Some say that this is true of Shabbos and Yom Tov as well, as part of kavod shabbos.<ref>Magen Avraham O.C. 242:4. From the Rama it appears as though this only matters for the bread that one is actually using for the bracha to begin the meals, but the Shaar Tziyun 242:18 writes that even throughout the meal, because of the honor of Shabbos or Yom Tov, one should be careful about ''pas yisroel''</ref>

==Who Baked the Bread==
# A "non-Jewish baker" (''paltar'') in this context is anyone who baked bread with the intent to sell it, and not someone who happens to sell bread for a living.<ref>This is the opinion of the Rama 112:2 based on the Beis Yosef and Rashba (see Gra 112:9), although the Tur's language suggests that he might believe that it depends upon whether or not the non-Jew is baking the bread en masse or not. Shach 112:11 writes that even the bread that a professional commercial baker baked for himself would be included in the prohibition.</ref> Thus, if a baker invited a Jew to partake of his bread, it wouldn't be considered "pas paltar" and would be prohibited.<ref>Rama 112:3 quoting Ra"ah in Bedek HaBayis. However, the Shach 112:12 points out that the Rashba disagrees, and if the Shulchan Aruch is consistent in believing that the prohibition depends on the status of the bread when it was baked, and not when it is sold, then this case should be permitted. Nekudos HaKesef, however, points out that perhaps even if normally the prohibition depends on the time when the bread was baked, this case is too similar to the case of a non-Jew baking the bread for himself.</ref> Bread that was baked with the intention to give to guests is like bread that was meant to be sold, and has the status of "pas paltar".<ref>Kaf Hachayim 112:46</ref>
# As mentioned above, all non-Jews are included in this prohibition.<ref>Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba, Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4</ref>
# It is a machlokes haposkim as to whether or not bread baked by an irreligious Jew would be prohibited.<ref>Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 112:1 quoting Tiferes LeMoshe is lenient because one would be allowed to marry his daughter as is Iggeros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, but the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 72:2 writes that a Jew who does not keep Shabbos is considered like a non-Jew in this regard. See Maharam Shik O.C. 281, Darchei Teshuva 112:5, Avnei Nezer Y.D. 92, Minchas Yitzchak 3:72, Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 112:11, Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, Shut M’Bais Levi 8:page 23:footnote 2, Titz Eliezer 9:41, Yabia Omer Y.D. 5:10, Chelkes Binyomin 112:4, and OU document A-133. Also refer to Bishul Yisroel pages 412-413.</ref>
# Some poskim have thought that because one would never recognize who baked his bread that was baked industrially in a factory, all commercially sold factory-made bread would not be categorized as "pas akum".<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1 pg. 95 and Rivevos Ephraim 5:596 both quote such a position in the name of R. Moshe Feinstein z"l</ref> However, in practice few poskim would rely on this on its own.<ref>Rivevos Ephraim 5:596, Minchas Yitzchak 3:26:6, Yabea Omer Y.D. 5:9:5, and Shevet Halevi 6:108:6 quotes that the Chazon Ish refused to accept such a possibility at all. See also Chelkes Binyamin 113:4</ref>
# The Shulchan Aruch paskens that the prohibition depends on who baked the bread, and not on who sold the bread.<ref>This is a dispute between the Rashba and Ra'ah in Toras Habayis and Bedek Habayis 3:7, quoted by the Beis Yosef Y.D. 112, and the Shulchan Aruch 112:7 paskens like the Rashba, cf. Shach 112:12.</ref> Therefore, a ''baal habayis'' who sells bread baked by a baker has the status of ''pas paltar'', and vice versa.
# If a Jew owned the dough, then most poskim assume that in such a case the bread would become prohibited even if baked by a baker, instead of having the status of ''pas paltar''.<ref>Perishah Yoreh De'ah 112:10, Shach Y.D. 112:1, Taz 112:7.</ref> However, some are lenient, especially for a large factory owned by a Jew.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:29, Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45</ref>

==When Pas Yisroel is Unavailable==
# When there is no pas yisroel available, the Shulchan Aruch quotes two opinions<ref>Yoreh De'ah 112:2 and 112:8</ref> as to whether or not one would be allowed to eat only ''pas paltar'' or even ''pas ba'al habayis''.<ref>The second opinion is that of the Ra"ah. Because the Shulchan Aruch does not seem to hold like his opinion through the rest of the siman, and because of a general rule to follow the first opinion quoted by the Shulchan Aruch instead of an opinion which he prefaces by "there are those who say", those who follow the Shulchan Aruch should be stringent in this regard, unless there is a very serious need, such as in a case where a person hasn't had bread for three days. Kaf Hachayim 112:49-50 and Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 112:3-4.</ref> The Rama<ref>Y.D. 112:8, Shach 112:8 and Matteh Yonasan there. This is also clearly the opinion of the Rosh as quoted by the Tur, see above</ref> writes that the custom is to follow the lenient opinion. Thus, the following rules in determining "lack of availability" permits either ''pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch, but ''pas baal habayis'' according to the Rama.<ref>This is clear from Shu"t Rama 132:8, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 58</ref>
# ''Pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch and ''pas ba'al habayis'' according to the Rama is permitted only as long as there is no Jewish baker, and then becomes prohibited until the Jewish baker runs out of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:4</ref> If someone already bought the ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'' while it was permitted, and then a Jewish baker came to town, there's a machlokes as to whether the bread already bought becomes prohibited<ref>Between the Rashba Toras Ha-Bayis and Ra"ah in Bedek Habayis, page 185</ref>, but most poskim are lenient.<ref>Shach 112:13 and Chelkas Binhyamin 112:40, as long as the bread was bought while it was permitted</ref>
# Even if there is ''pas yisroel'' bread, but it is a different kind of bread or a lower quality than the ''pas paltar'', then one is allowed to consider it as if there is no ''pas yisroel'' available if he wants the other type of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:5 quoting the Rashba in Toras Habayis and Shach 112:9. Based on the language of the Bach and Shulchan Aruch, Chelkas Binyamin 112:51 and 112:18 says that if the ''pas yisroel'' is merely more expensive but is the same quality, it would not be permissible to buy the ''pas paltar''. Footnote 2 of the Meiri to Avodah Zarah 35b "mah she-hutar" leaves the question open.</ref>
# The availability of ''pas yisroel'' depends on whether or not it is obtainable in one's own city, and so even if there's a place to get ''pas yisroel'' just outside the city, one is not required to do so.<ref>Meiri 35b "ve'hinei". Chelkas Binyamin 112:18 indicates that if one lives in a big city and would have to travel four [[mil]] or more to obtain ''pas yisrael'' he might not have to travel that far.</ref>
# Someone who is on the road without ''pas yisroel'' would have to travel a distance<ref>See Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 59 who discusses whether this is measured by distance or by travel time, and see Aruch Hashulchan 112:18, who writes ד' מילין הוא אם צריך לילך לשם אבל כשאין לו דרך לשם או שצריך לחזור לאחוריו אין כאן שיעור ד' מילין [פר"ח סקכ"ח] ומיהו שיעור מיל צריך להמתין [חכ"א] ואין חילוק בכל זה בין דרך טובה לדרך רעועה ובין נוסע בעגלה או רוכב על הסוס או הולך רגלי דחכמים השוו מדותיהם</ref> as far as four [[mil]] before he would be allowed to eat ''pas paltar'' (according to the Shulchan Aruch),<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:16 and Mishnah Berurah Orach Chayim 603:1</ref> and one does not have to travel in the opposite direction in order to get to ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Pri Chadash 112:28, Darchei Teshuva 112:95</ref>

==What Breads and Foods are Included==
# Only bread made from "[[Wheat and Grain Products|The Five Grains]]" is included in the laws of ''pas akum''; anything else falls under the category of [[Bishul Akum]].<ref>As implied by Brachos 37a. Rosh (Teshuvos) 19:21, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 112:1</ref>
# When a food is a combination of bread and something else, such as egg, then we follow the ''ikkar''<ref>Tosafos and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b, Avnei Nezer 94:1-2, R' Belsky in OU Document A-65</ref>, but if the egg is still visible as a separate entity, such as in the case of French Toast, then the food as a whole will be subject to the rule of [[Bishul Akum]] as well.<ref>Rama 112:6 and Aruch Hashulchan 112:21, though see Pri Megadim there who implies that only if the egg is mixed in afterwords would there be a problem of [[Bishul Akum]], and not if they were cooked together. Regarding French toast in particular, Rav Belsky paskened in OU Document A-63 that the eggs are certainly separate enough to be considered "be'en", even though the OU is lenient regarding white bread, which has an egg-glaze, because the glaze is so thin that it is barely recognizable at all.</ref>
# Regarding a food that contains only a little bit of bread mixed into it, such as Babylonian "kutach" or borscht, the bit of bread is considered nullified.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7 and Tur 112 quoted in the Shulchan Aruch 112:14. The Rama there writes that this is is true even if there's solid being mixed into a liquid, and the Shach 112:23 adds that even if the bread would normally be considered a "davar chashuv". All this is as long as someone didn't mix the bread into a food specifically in order to permit it (Rama).</ref>
# Included in foods that are bread for the purpose of ''bishul akum'' is anything that would have the bracha of [[Hamotzi]] if eaten as a meal.<ref>Rabbi Yechiel of Paris as quoted in Tosfos Beitza 16b and Darkei Moshe Y.D. 112 (against the Shaarei Dura 69, who believes that as long as the food is cooked and not baked it shouldn't be considered bread), Pri Chadash and Beis Meir to Rama 112:6, Avnei Nezer 93:3. See [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> However, some say that this is true only if the dough used was thick like bread dough, instead of like cake batter, and the food looks like bread.<ref>Shach 112:18, though see Chelkas Binyamin 112:64 that most poskim seem to disagree. There appears to be a contradiction in the Toras Chatas regarding this issue between 69:4 and 75:12. See next halacha, however, that this is only true of baked products.</ref> Based on this, cakes, wafers, and crackers are subject to ''Pas Akum''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:8, see [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> The same would be true of foods such as pancakes and waffles.<ref>Assuming that pancakes are the ''terisin'' discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, then there is a machlokes between the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham 168:41 as to whether or not one would make [[Hamotzi]] on such foods if one were to eat them as a meal. There also appears to be contradiction in the Mishnah Berurah between 168:38 where he paskens like the Shulchan Aruch, and 168:90 where he says that we should be stringent and try to avoid eating too much of these foods at a time. Thus, based on Rama Y.D. 113:11 who says that we can follow the lenient opinion when it comes to disagreements, Rabbi Genack suggested in OU Document A-63 that we can consider these foods to be bread instead of [[Bishul Akum]]. However, very thin waffles as described by Shaar HaTziyun 168:36 are not bread at all, and would be subject to the rules of [[Bishul Akum]].</ref>
# A dough-food that was deep fried is, according to some poskim, included in ''pas akum'' instead of [[Bishul Akum]]<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:31 based upon Tashbetz 3:11 and Rivash 28, although they all say that 'sufganin', which are also kept thin and deep fried, are [[Shehakol]] and not ''pas''.</ref> but others reject this opinion.<ref>OU Document A-105 shows that the Aruch Hashulchan's sources rely on the rejected opinion of Rabbeinu Tam quoted in Tosafos Pesachim 37b who holds that fried dough is subject to [[Challah]], which is not how we pasken in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13 and Y.D. 329. Therefore, OU policy (OU Document A-105 and M-7) is to consider doughnuts as if they are not bread, and consider small doughnuts made of yeast to be "fit for a king's table" and require ''bishul yisrael'', though most doughnuts do not.</ref> The proper ''bracha'' on doughnuts is itself a matter of dispute.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13, Aruch Hashulchan 168:42, Mishnah Berurah 168:67-73 and 168:85, Sefer V'Zos HaBeracha pg. 496 footnote 3</ref>
# Bagels are included in ''pas akum'' and not in [[Bishul Akum]] because even though they are boiled before being baked, they are not made edible by the boiling.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:31, Iggerot Moshe YD 2:33 </ref>
# Breakfast cereals which are [[Mezonot|''Mezonos'']] would be subject to ''Pas Akum'' only if they have ''tzuras hapas'', because otherwise one would never make [[Hamotzi]] on them<ref>Rama O.C. 168:13, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, Mishnah Berurah 168:3</ref>. Some poskim think that cereals such as Cheerios should be considered to have ''tzuras hapas''<ref>Rav Scheinberg zt"l, as quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 192 </ref> while others disagree.<ref>R. Schachter, R. Belsky, and R. Genack in OU Document A-94 all assume that cereals such as Cheerios and Corn Flakes are permitted to be eaten when made by a non-Jew, because they lack ''tzuras hapas'' and are also not fit for a king's table, and this is the OU's policy.</ref>
# Pretzels should be considered ''pas'', because they are generally made from bread-dough and have the same general form of bread. However, thin, hard pretzels might lack ''tzuras hapas'' and therefore not be prohibited under ''pas akum''.<ref>This is the opinion of R. Schachter as quoted in OU Document M-7, footnote 97, where he also notes that there's no prohibition of [[Bishul Akum]] either because hard pretzels are not served to kings.</ref>
# Although there is a leniency applicable to [[Bishul Akum]], that if the food is "not fit for a king's table" it would be permissible, most poskim<ref>with the exception of Avnei Nezer YD 1:92</ref> believe that this is not applicable to bread, and so even low-quality breads are included in the prohibition. <ref>Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav 112:3 and see the sources quoted by Chelkas Binyamin 112:12 in the biurim</ref>

==Involvement of a Jew in the Baking==
# The Gemara states that as long as the Jew lit the fire or performed the actual baking, the bread is considered ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Avodah Zarah 38b. The opinion of the Ran and Rashba there, that all of these actions are required only if the Jew doesn't actually own the bread, is rejected by the Shulchan Aruch and Rama; see Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 and Shach 112:1. In fact, as noted above, the Shach in 112:7 is more stringent for bread owned by a Jew than for bread owned by a non-Jew, saying that the former has the status of [[Bishul Akum]] if baked by a non-Jew.</ref>
# The Geonim allowed bread baked by a non-Jew even if the Jew merely added to the fire by throwing in extra kindling<ref>Sefer Minhagim She-Bein Bavel V'Eretz Yisrael pg. 60, quoted by Tosfos Avodah Zarah 38b and Rosh Avodah Zarah 2:33. This can be explained based on the Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 who writes that really all one needs to do is some perfunctory act to show that ''pas akum'' is generally prohibited.</ref> and the custom is in accordance with this opinion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:9, Chochmas Adom 65:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:2, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:26. The Rama Y.D. 113:7, Taz 113:8, and Shach 113:10 say that the Jew doesn't need to have intent to raise the fire in order to have a Jew be involved in the baking, but the Kaf HaChayim Y.D. 112:52 disagrees.</ref>
# Poskim disagree about modern cooking appliances, such as glow plugs<ref>Rabbi Moshe Heinemann, and thus the Star-K, considers this device to add significant heat to the ovens, and therefore if a Jew were to turn on a glow plug that runs through the ovens, the food would be permitted (Star-K Kashrus Kurrents 36:2, Spring 2014). However, many poskim do not agree with this assessment, and the OU does not make use of glow plugs.</ref> and pilot lights or light bulbs.<ref>Refer to OU Document A-54</ref>

==Links==
* [http://www.yutorah.org/search/?s=cohen+crc&category=0,234643 Shiur Series by Rabbi Dovid Cohen of the CRC]
* Article on [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-2%20Pat%20Akum%201.htm Pat Akum] by Rabbi Chaim Jachter
* [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/volume_5_Issue_15.pdf Halachically Speaking Volume 5 Issue 15] and [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/Volume_5_Issue_16.pdf Volume 5 Issue 16]: "Pas Akum, Pas Paltur, & Pas Yisroel" Parts I & II

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

Pat Akum

2015-09-18T14:01:47Z

Sbmb: /* What Breads and Foods are Included */

==Background: The Gezairah==
# The Chachomim enacted a gezairah forbidding bread that was baked by a non-Jew<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. It's clear from the Gemara Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b that this prohibition is mi'derabanan. This prohibition is independent from that of bishul akum; see Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b "ve'hapas" regarding which gezairah was made first. Ramban ibid. also notes that there are more leniencies for pas akum than for bishul akum, because everyone needs bread to live. The Aruch Hashulchan 113:2 suggests that since bishul akum was also prohibited because of the possibility of the non-Jew mixing in non-kosher besides for the fear of intermarriage, we are more strict regarding bishul akum than pas akum.</ref> so as to avoid intermingling with them too much, which could lead to intermarriage<ref>cf. Rashi Avodah Zarah 35b "shelakos" and Rambam Peirush Hamishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. However, from the Gemara on daf 17b and 36b it seems like the real concern was actually idolatry, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim on page 4. Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b, Rabbeinu Yonah ad. loc., and Shach Y.D. 112:3 note that there is no reason to be concerned for other issues of kashrus. It should be pointed out though that today one still cannot buy bread without a hechsher, see Iggros Moshe Y.D. 2:33</ref>. However, the bread of a non-Jew is prohibited even in a case where there's no possibility of intermarriage,<ref>Such as where the non-Jewish baker doesn't have daughters. Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba.</ref> and doesn't depend on whether or not the non-Jew is an idolater<ref>Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4</ref>
# It is permitted to derive benefit from bread baked by a non-Jew without eating it.<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:3-6</ref>
# While the Bavli's conclusion is somewhat ambiguous, most Rishonim understand that the prohibition of eating pas akum was revoked to some degree.<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b quotes from R. Meir Halevi who believed that the prohibition was not revoked at all, but the Ritva himself, his teachers, Tosfos, Rash miShantz, Rabbeinu Yonah, Ramban, Ra"ah, Rashba, Ran, Nimukei Yosef, and the Rosh in their comments to the aforementioned Gemara all beleive that the decree was limited by later Chachamim. See below regarding the opinion of the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch.</ref> According to some<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b. Such a position is also implied by Tosafos 35b "michlal", as well as by the Rosh's opinion recorded in Tur 112 and the Mordechai according to Shach 112:8</ref>, the prohibition was revoked by the sages entirely. Another opinion, which is followed by Ashkenazim, is that the rabbis allowed bread baked only by a non-Jewish baker ("pas paltar"),<ref>Yerushalami Avodah Zarah 2:8, Rama YD 112:2 based on Tosafot Avoda Zara 35b "michlal", Mordechai, and Issur VeHeter Klal 44, Chochmat Adam 65:2. This also appears to be the position of Rashba and Ran. See below regarding the definition of a 'baker' for this halakha.</ref> whether or not there is bread baked by a Jew available.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Rama in Sefer Toras Chatas 75, Gra Y.D. 112:7-8, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1</ref> The third, and most stringent opinion, is that bread of a baker was permitted only in cases where bread baked by a Jew is not available.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Maachalos Asuros 17:12, Ramban, Ran and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b</ref> This appears to be the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch.<ref>Cf. Y.D. 112:2 and 112:8. Thus, it would appear that this should be the practice for Sefardim, though see Ben Ish Chai II Chukas 2 who follows the lenient opinion. According to the second opinion, which is that of the Rama, in a case where no Jewish-baked bread is available, even "pas baal habayis" is permitted (Rama Y.D. 112:8, see also Rashba Avodah Zarah 35b in his explanation of the Rif)</ref>
# Although Ashkenazi practice is to usually follow the Rama, several poskim indicate that it is still proper to be stringent in this manner and not eat pas paltar where pas yisroel is available.<ref>Shach 112:8, Aruch Hashulchan 112:9, 112:17, Chochmas Adam 65:2 and Chelkes Binyomin 112:23.</ref> Others are not concerned with this for most of the year.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1. The Orthodox Union, as do most Kashrus organizations, certify ''pas paltar'' foods as kosher.</ref> Someone who used to be careful not to eat ''pas paltar'' and wants to change his practice must be ''mattir neder''.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 112:94</ref>
# The Tur writes that even those who are not careful about pas paltar during the year are careful to only eat pas yisrael during Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.<ref>Raavyah Rosh Hashana siman 529, Rosh to Rosh Hashanah 4:14, Tur Orach Chaim 603, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 603:1 and Mishnah Berurah there, Shach Y.D. 112:9. However, the Tashbetz quoted by the Beis Yosef there O.C. 603 doesn't approve of changing one's practice during the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.</ref> Several reasons are given for this custom.<ref>The Chayei Adam 143:1 and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 130:2 write that because God is more merciful than 'necessary' during this time period, we should respond by keeping stringencies which we wouldn't normally consider to be necessary. Levush O.C. 603:1 writes that extra stringencies will remind us to be in a state of teshuvah. Rabbi Netanel Wiederblank [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/838739/Rabbi_Netanel_Wiederblank/Pas_Akum_Part_1 suggested], based on Ramban, that being careful about pas yisrael was a custom of talmidei chachamim.</ref> Some say that this is true of Shabbos and Yom Tov as well, as part of kavod shabbos.<ref>Magen Avraham O.C. 242:4. From the Rama it appears as though this only matters for the bread that one is actually using for the bracha to begin the meals, but the Shaar Tziyun 242:18 writes that even throughout the meal, because of the honor of Shabbos or Yom Tov, one should be careful about ''pas yisroel''</ref>

==Who Baked the Bread==
# A "non-Jewish baker" (''paltar'') in this context is anyone who baked bread with the intent to sell it, and not someone who happens to sell bread for a living.<ref>This is the opinion of the Rama 112:2 based on the Beis Yosef and Rashba (see Gra 112:9), although the Tur's language suggests that he might believe that it depends upon whether or not the non-Jew is baking the bread en masse or not. Shach 112:11 writes that even the bread that a professional commercial baker baked for himself would be included in the prohibition.</ref> Thus, if a baker invited a Jew to partake of his bread, it wouldn't be considered "pas paltar" and would be prohibited.<ref>Rama 112:3 quoting Ra"ah in Bedek HaBayis. However, the Shach 112:12 points out that the Rashba disagrees, and if the Shulchan Aruch is consistent in believing that the prohibition depends on the status of the bread when it was baked, and not when it is sold, then this case should be permitted. Nekudos HaKesef, however, points out that perhaps even if normally the prohibition depends on the time when the bread was baked, this case is too similar to the case of a non-Jew baking the bread for himself.</ref> Bread that was baked with the intention to give to guests is like bread that was meant to be sold, and has the status of "pas paltar".<ref>Kaf Hachayim 112:46</ref>
# As mentioned above, all non-Jews are included in this prohibition.<ref>Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba, Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4</ref>
# It is a machlokes haposkim as to whether or not bread baked by an irreligious Jew would be prohibited.<ref>Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 112:1 quoting Tiferes LeMoshe is lenient because one would be allowed to marry his daughter as is Iggeros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, but the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 72:2 writes that a Jew who does not keep Shabbos is considered like a non-Jew in this regard. See Maharam Shik O.C. 281, Darchei Teshuva 112:5, Avnei Nezer Y.D. 92, Minchas Yitzchak 3:72, Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 112:11, Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, Shut M’Bais Levi 8:page 23:footnote 2, Titz Eliezer 9:41, Yabia Omer Y.D. 5:10, Chelkes Binyomin 112:4, and OU document A-133. Also refer to Bishul Yisroel pages 412-413.</ref>
# Some poskim have thought that because one would never recognize who baked his bread that was baked industrially in a factory, all commercially sold factory-made bread would not be categorized as "pas akum".<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1 pg. 95 and Rivevos Ephraim 5:596 both quote such a position in the name of R. Moshe Feinstein z"l</ref> However, in practice few poskim would rely on this on its own.<ref>Rivevos Ephraim 5:596, Minchas Yitzchak 3:26:6, Yabea Omer Y.D. 5:9:5, and Shevet Halevi 6:108:6 quotes that the Chazon Ish refused to accept such a possibility at all. See also Chelkes Binyamin 113:4</ref>
# The Shulchan Aruch paskens that the prohibition depends on who baked the bread, and not on who sold the bread.<ref>This is a dispute between the Rashba and Ra'ah in Toras Habayis and Bedek Habayis 3:7, quoted by the Beis Yosef Y.D. 112, and the Shulchan Aruch 112:7 paskens like the Rashba, cf. Shach 112:12.</ref> Therefore, a ''baal habayis'' who sells bread baked by a baker has the status of ''pas paltar'', and vice versa.
# If a Jew owned the dough, then most poskim assume that in such a case the bread would become prohibited even if baked by a baker, instead of having the status of ''pas paltar''.<ref>Perishah Yoreh De'ah 112:10, Shach Y.D. 112:1, Taz 112:7.</ref> However, some are lenient, especially for a large factory owned by a Jew.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:29, Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45</ref>

==When Pas Yisroel is Unavailable==
# When there is no pas yisroel available, the Shulchan Aruch quotes two opinions<ref>Yoreh De'ah 112:2 and 112:8</ref> as to whether or not one would be allowed to eat only ''pas paltar'' or even ''pas ba'al habayis''.<ref>The second opinion is that of the Ra"ah. Because the Shulchan Aruch does not seem to hold like his opinion through the rest of the siman, and because of a general rule to follow the first opinion quoted by the Shulchan Aruch instead of an opinion which he prefaces by "there are those who say", those who follow the Shulchan Aruch should be stringent in this regard, unless there is a very serious need, such as in a case where a person hasn't had bread for three days. Kaf Hachayim 112:49-50 and Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 112:3-4.</ref> The Rama<ref>Y.D. 112:8, Shach 112:8 and Matteh Yonasan there. This is also clearly the opinion of the Rosh as quoted by the Tur, see above</ref> writes that the custom is to follow the lenient opinion. Thus, the following rules in determining "lack of availability" permits either ''pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch, but ''pas baal habayis'' according to the Rama.<ref>This is clear from Shu"t Rama 132:8, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 58</ref>
# ''Pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch and ''pas ba'al habayis'' according to the Rama is permitted only as long as there is no Jewish baker, and then becomes prohibited until the Jewish baker runs out of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:4</ref> If someone already bought the ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'' while it was permitted, and then a Jewish baker came to town, there's a machlokes as to whether the bread already bought becomes prohibited<ref>Between the Rashba Toras Ha-Bayis and Ra"ah in Bedek Habayis, page 185</ref>, but most poskim are lenient.<ref>Shach 112:13 and Chelkas Binhyamin 112:40, as long as the bread was bought while it was permitted</ref>
# Even if there is ''pas yisroel'' bread, but it is a different kind of bread or a lower quality than the ''pas paltar'', then one is allowed to consider it as if there is no ''pas yisroel'' available if he wants the other type of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:5 quoting the Rashba in Toras Habayis and Shach 112:9. Based on the language of the Bach and Shulchan Aruch, Chelkas Binyamin 112:51 and 112:18 says that if the ''pas yisroel'' is merely more expensive but is the same quality, it would not be permissible to buy the ''pas paltar''. Footnote 2 of the Meiri to Avodah Zarah 35b "mah she-hutar" leaves the question open.</ref>
# The availability of ''pas yisroel'' depends on whether or not it is obtainable in one's own city, and so even if there's a place to get ''pas yisroel'' just outside the city, one is not required to do so.<ref>Meiri 35b "ve'hinei". Chelkas Binyamin 112:18 indicates that if one lives in a big city and would have to travel four [[mil]] or more to obtain ''pas yisrael'' he might not have to travel that far.</ref>
# Someone who is on the road without ''pas yisroel'' would have to travel a distance<ref>See Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 59 who discusses whether this is measured by distance or by travel time, and see Aruch Hashulchan 112:18, who writes ד' מילין הוא אם צריך לילך לשם אבל כשאין לו דרך לשם או שצריך לחזור לאחוריו אין כאן שיעור ד' מילין [פר"ח סקכ"ח] ומיהו שיעור מיל צריך להמתין [חכ"א] ואין חילוק בכל זה בין דרך טובה לדרך רעועה ובין נוסע בעגלה או רוכב על הסוס או הולך רגלי דחכמים השוו מדותיהם</ref> as far as four [[mil]] before he would be allowed to eat ''pas paltar'' (according to the Shulchan Aruch),<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:16 and Mishnah Berurah Orach Chayim 603:1</ref> and one does not have to travel in the opposite direction in order to get to ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Pri Chadash 112:28, Darchei Teshuva 112:95</ref>

==What Breads and Foods are Included==
# Only bread made from "[[Wheat and Grain Products|The Five Grains]]" is included in the laws of ''pas akum''; anything else falls under the category of [[Bishul Akum]].<ref>As implied by Brachos 37a. Rosh (Teshuvos) 19:21, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 112:1</ref>
# When a food is a combination of bread and something else, such as egg, then we follow the ''ikkar''<ref>Tosafos and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b, Avnei Nezer 94:1-2, R' Belsky in OU Document A-65</ref>, but if the egg is still visible as a separate entity, such as in the case of French Toast, then the food as a whole will be subject to the rule of [[Bishul Akum]] as well.<ref>Rama 112:6 and Aruch Hashulchan 112:21, though see Pri Megadim there who implies that only if the egg is mixed in afterwords would there be a problem of [[Bishul Akum]], and not if they were cooked together. Regarding French toast in particular, Rav Belsky paskened in OU Document A-63 that the eggs are certainly separate enough to be considered "be'en", even though the OU is lenient regarding white bread, which has an egg-glaze, because the glaze is so thin that it is barely recognizable at all.</ref>
# Regarding a food that contains only a little bit of bread mixed into it, such as Babylonian "kutach" or borscht, the bit of bread is considered nullified.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7 and Tur 112 quoted in the Shulchan Aruch 112:14. The Rama there writes that this is is true even if there's solid being mixed into a liquid, and the Shach 112:23 adds that even if the bread would normally be considered a "davar chashuv". All this is as long as someone didn't mix the bread into a food specifically in order to permit it (Rama).</ref>
# Included in foods that are bread for the purpose of ''bishul akum'' is anything that would have the bracha of [[Hamotzi]] if eaten as a meal.<ref>Rabbi Yechiel of Paris as quoted in Tosfos Beitza 16b and Darkei Moshe Y.D. 112 (against the Shaarei Dura 69, who believes that as long as the food is cooked and not baked it shouldn't be considered bread), Pri Chadash and Beis Meir to Rama 112:6, Avnei Nezer 93:3. See [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> However, some say that this is true only if the dough used was thick like bread dough, instead of like cake batter, and the food looks like bread.<ref>Shach 112:18, though see Chelkas Binyamin 112:64 that most poskim seem to disagree. There appears to be a contradiction in the Toras Chatas regarding this issue between 69:4 and 75:12. See next halacha, however, that this is only true of baked products.</ref> Based on this, cakes, wafers, and crackers are subject to ''Pas Akum''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:8, see [[Pat Haba Bikisnin]]</ref> The same would be true of foods such as pancakes and waffles.<ref>Assuming that pancakes are the ''terisin'' discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, then there is a machlokes between the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham 168:41 as to whether or not one would make [[Hamotzi]] on such foods if one were to eat them as a meal. There also appears to be contradiction in the Mishnah Berurah between 168:38 where he paskens like the Shulchan Aruch, and 168:90 where he says that we should be stringent and try to avoid eating too much of these foods at a time. Thus, based on Rama Y.D. 113:11 who says that we can follow the lenient opinion when it comes to disagreements, Rabbi Genack suggested in OU Document A-63 that we can consider these foods to be bread instead of [[Bishul Akum]]. However, very thin waffles as described by Shaar HaTziyun 168:36 are not bread at all, and would be subject to the rules of [[Bishul Akum]].</ref>
# A dough-food that was deep fried is, according to some poskim, included in ''pas akum'' instead of [[Bishul Akum]]<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:31 based upon Tashbetz 3:11 and Rivash 28, although they all say that 'sufganin', which are also kept thin and deep fried, are [[Shehakol]] and not ''pas''.</ref>However, others reject this opinion.<ref>OU Document A-105 shows that the Aruch Hashulchan's sources rely on the rejected opinion of Rabbeinu Tam quoted in Tosafos Pesachim 37b who holds that fried dough is subject to [[Challah]], which is not how we pasken in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13 and Y.D. 329. Therefore, OU policy (OU Document A-105 and M-7) is to consider doughnuts as if they are not bread, and consider small doughnuts made of yeast to be "fit for a king's table" and require ''bishul yisrael'', though most doughnuts do not.</ref> The proper ''bracha'' on doughnuts is itself a matter of dispute.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13, Aruch Hashulchan 168:42, Mishnah Berurah 168:67-73 and 168:85, Sefer V'Zos HaBeracha pg. 496 footnote 3</ref>
# Bagels are included in ''pas akum'' and not in [[Bishul Akum]] because even though they are boiled before being baked, they are not made edible by the boiling.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:31, Iggerot Moshe YD 2:33 </ref>
# Breakfast cereals which are [[Mezonot|''Mezonos'']] would be subject to ''Pas Akum'' only if they have ''tzuras hapas'', because otherwise one would never make [[Hamotzi]] on them<ref>Rama O.C. 168:13, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, Mishnah Berurah 168:3</ref>. Some poskim think that cereals such as Cheerios should be considered to have ''tzuras hapas''<ref>Rav Scheinberg zt"l, as quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 192 </ref> while others disagree.<ref>R. Schachter, R. Belsky, and R. Genack in OU Document A-94 all assume that cereals such as Cheerios and Corn Flakes are permitted to be eaten when made by a non-Jew, because they lack ''tzuras hapas'' and are also not fit for a king's table, and this is the OU's policy.</ref>
# Pretzels should be considered ''pas'', because they are generally made from bread-dough and have the same general form of bread. However, thin, hard pretzels might lack ''tzuras hapas'' and therefore not be prohibited under ''pas akum''.<ref>This is the opinion of R. Schachter as quoted in OU Document M-7, footnote 97, where he also notes that there's no prohibition of [[Bishul Akum]] either because hard pretzels are not served to kings.</ref>
# Although there is a leniency applicable to [[Bishul Akum]], that if the food is "not fit for a king's table" it would be permissible, most poskim<ref>with the exception of Avnei Nezer YD 1:92</ref> believe that this is not applicable to bread, and so even low-quality breads are included in the prohibition. <ref>Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav 112:3 and see the sources quoted by Chelkas Binyamin 112:12 in the biurim</ref>

==Involvement of a Jew in the Baking==
# The Gemara states that as long as the Jew lit the fire or performed the actual baking, the bread is considered ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Avodah Zarah 38b. The opinion of the Ran and Rashba there, that all of these actions are required only if the Jew doesn't actually own the bread, is rejected by the Shulchan Aruch and Rama; see Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 and Shach 112:1. In fact, as noted above, the Shach in 112:7 is more stringent for bread owned by a Jew than for bread owned by a non-Jew, saying that the former has the status of [[Bishul Akum]] if baked by a non-Jew.</ref>
# The Geonim allowed bread baked by a non-Jew even if the Jew merely added to the fire by throwing in extra kindling<ref>Sefer Minhagim She-Bein Bavel V'Eretz Yisrael pg. 60, quoted by Tosfos Avodah Zarah 38b and Rosh Avodah Zarah 2:33. This can be explained based on the Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 who writes that really all one needs to do is some perfunctory act to show that ''pas akum'' is generally prohibited.</ref> and the custom is in accordance with this opinion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:9, Chochmas Adom 65:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:2, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:26. The Rama Y.D. 113:7, Taz 113:8, and Shach 113:10 say that the Jew doesn't need to have intent to raise the fire in order to have a Jew be involved in the baking, but the Kaf HaChayim Y.D. 112:52 disagrees.</ref>
# Poskim disagree about modern cooking appliances, such as glow plugs<ref>Rabbi Moshe Heinemann, and thus the Star-K, considers this device to add significant heat to the ovens, and therefore if a Jew were to turn on a glow plug that runs through the ovens, the food would be permitted (Star-K Kashrus Kurrents 36:2, Spring 2014). However, many poskim do not agree with this assessment, and the OU does not make use of glow plugs.</ref> and pilot lights or light bulbs.<ref>Refer to OU Document A-54</ref>

==Links==
* [http://www.yutorah.org/search/?s=cohen+crc&category=0,234643 Shiur Series by Rabbi Dovid Cohen of the CRC]
* Article on [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-2%20Pat%20Akum%201.htm Pat Akum] by Rabbi Chaim Jachter
* [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/volume_5_Issue_15.pdf Halachically Speaking Volume 5 Issue 15] and [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/Volume_5_Issue_16.pdf Volume 5 Issue 16]: "Pas Akum, Pas Paltur, & Pas Yisroel" Parts I & II

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

Pat Akum

2015-09-18T13:57:22Z

Sbmb: /* What Breads and Foods are Included */

==Background: The Gezairah==
# The Chachomim enacted a gezairah forbidding bread that was baked by a non-Jew<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. It's clear from the Gemara Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b that this prohibition is mi'derabanan. This prohibition is independent from that of bishul akum; see Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b "ve'hapas" regarding which gezairah was made first. Ramban ibid. also notes that there are more leniencies for pas akum than for bishul akum, because everyone needs bread to live. The Aruch Hashulchan 113:2 suggests that since bishul akum was also prohibited because of the possibility of the non-Jew mixing in non-kosher besides for the fear of intermarriage, we are more strict regarding bishul akum than pas akum.</ref> so as to avoid intermingling with them too much, which could lead to intermarriage<ref>cf. Rashi Avodah Zarah 35b "shelakos" and Rambam Peirush Hamishnah Avodah Zarah 2:6. However, from the Gemara on daf 17b and 36b it seems like the real concern was actually idolatry, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim on page 4. Ramban Avodah Zarah 35b, Rabbeinu Yonah ad. loc., and Shach Y.D. 112:3 note that there is no reason to be concerned for other issues of kashrus. It should be pointed out though that today one still cannot buy bread without a hechsher, see Iggros Moshe Y.D. 2:33</ref>. However, the bread of a non-Jew is prohibited even in a case where there's no possibility of intermarriage,<ref>Such as where the non-Jewish baker doesn't have daughters. Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba.</ref> and doesn't depend on whether or not the non-Jew is an idolater<ref>Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4</ref>
# It is permitted to derive benefit from bread baked by a non-Jew without eating it.<ref>Mishnah Avodah Zarah 2:3-6</ref>
# While the Bavli's conclusion is somewhat ambiguous, most Rishonim understand that the prohibition of eating pas akum was revoked to some degree.<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b quotes from R. Meir Halevi who believed that the prohibition was not revoked at all, but the Ritva himself, his teachers, Tosfos, Rash miShantz, Rabbeinu Yonah, Ramban, Ra"ah, Rashba, Ran, Nimukei Yosef, and the Rosh in their comments to the aforementioned Gemara all beleive that the decree was limited by later Chachamim. See below regarding the opinion of the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch.</ref> According to some<ref>Ritva Avodah Zarah 35b. Such a position is also implied by Tosafos 35b "michlal", as well as by the Rosh's opinion recorded in Tur 112 and the Mordechai according to Shach 112:8</ref>, the prohibition was revoked by the sages entirely. Another opinion, which is followed by Ashkenazim, is that the rabbis allowed bread baked only by a non-Jewish baker ("pas paltar"),<ref>Yerushalami Avodah Zarah 2:8, Rama YD 112:2 based on Tosafot Avoda Zara 35b "michlal", Mordechai, and Issur VeHeter Klal 44, Chochmat Adam 65:2. This also appears to be the position of Rashba and Ran. See below regarding the definition of a 'baker' for this halakha.</ref> whether or not there is bread baked by a Jew available.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Rama in Sefer Toras Chatas 75, Gra Y.D. 112:7-8, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1</ref> The third, and most stringent opinion, is that bread of a baker was permitted only in cases where bread baked by a Jew is not available.<ref>Rambam Hilchos Maachalos Asuros 17:12, Ramban, Ran and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b</ref> This appears to be the opinion of the Shulchan Aruch.<ref>Cf. Y.D. 112:2 and 112:8. Thus, it would appear that this should be the practice for Sefardim, though see Ben Ish Chai II Chukas 2 who follows the lenient opinion. According to the second opinion, which is that of the Rama, in a case where no Jewish-baked bread is available, even "pas baal habayis" is permitted (Rama Y.D. 112:8, see also Rashba Avodah Zarah 35b in his explanation of the Rif)</ref>
# Although Ashkenazi practice is to usually follow the Rama, several poskim indicate that it is still proper to be stringent in this manner and not eat pas paltar where pas yisroel is available.<ref>Shach 112:8, Aruch Hashulchan 112:9, 112:17, Chochmas Adam 65:2 and Chelkes Binyomin 112:23.</ref> Others are not concerned with this for most of the year.<ref>Bach to Tur Y.D. 112, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:1. The Orthodox Union, as do most Kashrus organizations, certify ''pas paltar'' foods as kosher.</ref> Someone who used to be careful not to eat ''pas paltar'' and wants to change his practice must be ''mattir neder''.<ref>Darchei Teshuva 112:94</ref>
# The Tur writes that even those who are not careful about pas paltar during the year are careful to only eat pas yisrael during Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.<ref>Raavyah Rosh Hashana siman 529, Rosh to Rosh Hashanah 4:14, Tur Orach Chaim 603, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 603:1 and Mishnah Berurah there, Shach Y.D. 112:9. However, the Tashbetz quoted by the Beis Yosef there O.C. 603 doesn't approve of changing one's practice during the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.</ref> Several reasons are given for this custom.<ref>The Chayei Adam 143:1 and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 130:2 write that because God is more merciful than 'necessary' during this time period, we should respond by keeping stringencies which we wouldn't normally consider to be necessary. Levush O.C. 603:1 writes that extra stringencies will remind us to be in a state of teshuvah. Rabbi Netanel Wiederblank [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/838739/Rabbi_Netanel_Wiederblank/Pas_Akum_Part_1 suggested], based on Ramban, that being careful about pas yisrael was a custom of talmidei chachamim.</ref> Some say that this is true of Shabbos and Yom Tov as well, as part of kavod shabbos.<ref>Magen Avraham O.C. 242:4. From the Rama it appears as though this only matters for the bread that one is actually using for the bracha to begin the meals, but the Shaar Tziyun 242:18 writes that even throughout the meal, because of the honor of Shabbos or Yom Tov, one should be careful about ''pas yisroel''</ref>

==Who Baked the Bread==
# A "non-Jewish baker" (''paltar'') in this context is anyone who baked bread with the intent to sell it, and not someone who happens to sell bread for a living.<ref>This is the opinion of the Rama 112:2 based on the Beis Yosef and Rashba (see Gra 112:9), although the Tur's language suggests that he might believe that it depends upon whether or not the non-Jew is baking the bread en masse or not. Shach 112:11 writes that even the bread that a professional commercial baker baked for himself would be included in the prohibition.</ref> Thus, if a baker invited a Jew to partake of his bread, it wouldn't be considered "pas paltar" and would be prohibited.<ref>Rama 112:3 quoting Ra"ah in Bedek HaBayis. However, the Shach 112:12 points out that the Rashba disagrees, and if the Shulchan Aruch is consistent in believing that the prohibition depends on the status of the bread when it was baked, and not when it is sold, then this case should be permitted. Nekudos HaKesef, however, points out that perhaps even if normally the prohibition depends on the time when the bread was baked, this case is too similar to the case of a non-Jew baking the bread for himself.</ref> Bread that was baked with the intention to give to guests is like bread that was meant to be sold, and has the status of "pas paltar".<ref>Kaf Hachayim 112:46</ref>
# As mentioned above, all non-Jews are included in this prohibition.<ref>Rama Y.D. 112:1 quoting the Rashba, Pri Megadim Sifsei Daas 112:2, Darchei Teshuva 112:4</ref>
# It is a machlokes haposkim as to whether or not bread baked by an irreligious Jew would be prohibited.<ref>Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 112:1 quoting Tiferes LeMoshe is lenient because one would be allowed to marry his daughter as is Iggeros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, but the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 72:2 writes that a Jew who does not keep Shabbos is considered like a non-Jew in this regard. See Maharam Shik O.C. 281, Darchei Teshuva 112:5, Avnei Nezer Y.D. 92, Minchas Yitzchak 3:72, Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 112:11, Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45, Shut M’Bais Levi 8:page 23:footnote 2, Titz Eliezer 9:41, Yabia Omer Y.D. 5:10, Chelkes Binyomin 112:4, and OU document A-133. Also refer to Bishul Yisroel pages 412-413.</ref>
# Some poskim have thought that because one would never recognize who baked his bread that was baked industrially in a factory, all commercially sold factory-made bread would not be categorized as "pas akum".<ref>Mesorah Journal vol. 1 pg. 95 and Rivevos Ephraim 5:596 both quote such a position in the name of R. Moshe Feinstein z"l</ref> However, in practice few poskim would rely on this on its own.<ref>Rivevos Ephraim 5:596, Minchas Yitzchak 3:26:6, Yabea Omer Y.D. 5:9:5, and Shevet Halevi 6:108:6 quotes that the Chazon Ish refused to accept such a possibility at all. See also Chelkes Binyamin 113:4</ref>
# The Shulchan Aruch paskens that the prohibition depends on who baked the bread, and not on who sold the bread.<ref>This is a dispute between the Rashba and Ra'ah in Toras Habayis and Bedek Habayis 3:7, quoted by the Beis Yosef Y.D. 112, and the Shulchan Aruch 112:7 paskens like the Rashba, cf. Shach 112:12.</ref> Therefore, a ''baal habayis'' who sells bread baked by a baker has the status of ''pas paltar'', and vice versa.
# If a Jew owned the dough, then most poskim assume that in such a case the bread would become prohibited even if baked by a baker, instead of having the status of ''pas paltar''.<ref>Perishah Yoreh De'ah 112:10, Shach Y.D. 112:1, Taz 112:7.</ref> However, some are lenient, especially for a large factory owned by a Jew.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:29, Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:45</ref>

==When Pas Yisroel is Unavailable==
# When there is no pas yisroel available, the Shulchan Aruch quotes two opinions<ref>Yoreh De'ah 112:2 and 112:8</ref> as to whether or not one would be allowed to eat only ''pas paltar'' or even ''pas ba'al habayis''.<ref>The second opinion is that of the Ra"ah. Because the Shulchan Aruch does not seem to hold like his opinion through the rest of the siman, and because of a general rule to follow the first opinion quoted by the Shulchan Aruch instead of an opinion which he prefaces by "there are those who say", those who follow the Shulchan Aruch should be stringent in this regard, unless there is a very serious need, such as in a case where a person hasn't had bread for three days. Kaf Hachayim 112:49-50 and Yalkut Yosef Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 112:3-4.</ref> The Rama<ref>Y.D. 112:8, Shach 112:8 and Matteh Yonasan there. This is also clearly the opinion of the Rosh as quoted by the Tur, see above</ref> writes that the custom is to follow the lenient opinion. Thus, the following rules in determining "lack of availability" permits either ''pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch, but ''pas baal habayis'' according to the Rama.<ref>This is clear from Shu"t Rama 132:8, cf. Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 58</ref>
# ''Pas paltar'' according to the Shulchan Aruch and ''pas ba'al habayis'' according to the Rama is permitted only as long as there is no Jewish baker, and then becomes prohibited until the Jewish baker runs out of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:4</ref> If someone already bought the ''pas paltar'' or ''pas baal habayis'' while it was permitted, and then a Jewish baker came to town, there's a machlokes as to whether the bread already bought becomes prohibited<ref>Between the Rashba Toras Ha-Bayis and Ra"ah in Bedek Habayis, page 185</ref>, but most poskim are lenient.<ref>Shach 112:13 and Chelkas Binhyamin 112:40, as long as the bread was bought while it was permitted</ref>
# Even if there is ''pas yisroel'' bread, but it is a different kind of bread or a lower quality than the ''pas paltar'', then one is allowed to consider it as if there is no ''pas yisroel'' available if he wants the other type of bread.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:5 quoting the Rashba in Toras Habayis and Shach 112:9. Based on the language of the Bach and Shulchan Aruch, Chelkas Binyamin 112:51 and 112:18 says that if the ''pas yisroel'' is merely more expensive but is the same quality, it would not be permissible to buy the ''pas paltar''. Footnote 2 of the Meiri to Avodah Zarah 35b "mah she-hutar" leaves the question open.</ref>
# The availability of ''pas yisroel'' depends on whether or not it is obtainable in one's own city, and so even if there's a place to get ''pas yisroel'' just outside the city, one is not required to do so.<ref>Meiri 35b "ve'hinei". Chelkas Binyamin 112:18 indicates that if one lives in a big city and would have to travel four [[mil]] or more to obtain ''pas yisrael'' he might not have to travel that far.</ref>
# Someone who is on the road without ''pas yisroel'' would have to travel a distance<ref>See Chelkas Binyamin Biurim pg. 59 who discusses whether this is measured by distance or by travel time, and see Aruch Hashulchan 112:18, who writes ד' מילין הוא אם צריך לילך לשם אבל כשאין לו דרך לשם או שצריך לחזור לאחוריו אין כאן שיעור ד' מילין [פר"ח סקכ"ח] ומיהו שיעור מיל צריך להמתין [חכ"א] ואין חילוק בכל זה בין דרך טובה לדרך רעועה ובין נוסע בעגלה או רוכב על הסוס או הולך רגלי דחכמים השוו מדותיהם</ref> as far as four [[mil]] before he would be allowed to eat ''pas paltar'' (according to the Shulchan Aruch),<ref>Shulchan Aruch 112:16 and Mishnah Berurah Orach Chayim 603:1</ref> and one does not have to travel in the opposite direction in order to get to ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Pri Chadash 112:28, Darchei Teshuva 112:95</ref>

==What Breads and Foods are Included==
# Only bread made from "[[Wheat and Grain Products|The Five Grains]]" is included in the laws of ''pas akum''; anything else falls under the category of [[Bishul Akum]].<ref>As implied by Brachos 37a. Rosh (Teshuvos) 19:21, Tur and Shulchan Aruch 112:1</ref>
# When a food is a combination of bread and something else, such as egg, then we follow the ''ikkar''<ref>Tosafos and Rashba to Avodah Zarah 35b, Avnei Nezer 94:1-2, R' Belsky in OU Document A-65</ref>, but if the egg is still visible as a separate entity, such as in the case of French Toast, then the food as a whole will be subject to the rule of [[Bishul Akum]] as well.<ref>Rama 112:6 and Aruch Hashulchan 112:21, though see Pri Megadim there who implies that only if the egg is mixed in afterwords would there be a problem of [[Bishul Akum]], and not if they were cooked together. Regarding French toast in particular, Rav Belsky paskened in OU Document A-63 that the eggs are certainly separate enough to be considered "be'en", even though the OU is lenient regarding white bread, which has an egg-glaze, because the glaze is so thin that it is barely recognizable at all.</ref>
# Regarding a food that contains only a little bit of bread mixed into it, such as Babylonian "kutach" or borscht, the bit of bread is considered nullified.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7 and Tur 112 quoted in the Shulchan Aruch 112:14. The Rama there writes that this is is true even if there's solid being mixed into a liquid, and the Shach 112:23 adds that even if the bread would normally be considered a "davar chashuv". All this is as long as someone didn't mix the bread into a food specifically in order to permit it (Rama).</ref>
# Included in foods that are bread for the purpose of ''bishul akum'' is anything that would have the bracha of [[Hamotzi]] if eaten as a meal.<ref>Rabbi Yechiel of Paris as quoted in Tosfos Beitza 16b and Darkei Moshe Y.D. 112 (against the Shaarei Dura 69, who believes that as long as the food is cooked and not baked it shouldn't be considered bread), Pri Chadash and Beis Meir to Rama 112:6, Avnei Nezer 93:3</ref> However, some say that this is true only if the dough used was thick like bread dough, instead of like cake batter, and the food looks like bread.<ref>Shach 112:18, though see Chelkas Binyamin 112:64 that most poskim seem to disagree. There appears to be a contradiction in the Toras Chatas regarding this issue between 69:4 and 75:12</ref> Based on this, cakes, wafers, and crackers are subject to ''Pas Akum''.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:8</ref> The same would be true of foods such as pancakes and waffles.<ref>Assuming that pancakes are the ''terisin'' discussed in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, then there is a machlokes between the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham 168:41 as to whether or not one would make [[Hamotzi]] on such foods if one were to eat them as a meal. There also appears to be contradiction in the Mishnah Berurah between 168:38 where he paskens like the Shulchan Aruch, and 168:90 where he says that we should be stringent and try to avoid eating too much of these foods at a time. Thus, based on Rama Y.D. 113:11 who says that we can follow the lenient opinion when it comes to disagreements, Rabbi Genack suggested in OU Document A-63 that we can consider these foods to be bread instead of [[Bishul Akum]]. However, very thin waffles as described by Shaar HaTziyun 168:36 are not bread at all, and would be subject to the rules of [[Bishul Akum]].</ref>
# A dough-food that was deep fried is, according to some poskim, included in ''pas akum'' instead of [[Bishul Akum]]<ref>Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:31 based upon Tashbetz 3:11 and Rivash 28, although they all say that 'sufganin', which are also kept thin and deep fried, are [[Shehakol]] and not ''pas''.</ref>However, others reject this opinion.<ref>OU Document A-105 shows that the Aruch Hashulchan's sources rely on the rejected opinion of Rabbeinu Tam quoted in Tosafos Pesachim 37b who holds that fried dough is subject to [[Challah]], which is not how we pasken in Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13 and Y.D. 329. Therefore, OU policy (OU Document A-105 and M-7) is to consider doughnuts as if they are not bread, and consider small doughnuts made of yeast to be "fit for a king's table" and require ''bishul yisrael'', though most doughnuts do not.</ref> The proper ''bracha'' on doughnuts is itself a matter of dispute.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:13, Aruch Hashulchan 168:42, Mishnah Berurah 168:67-73 and 168:85, Sefer V'Zos HaBeracha pg. 496 footnote 3
# Bagels are included in ''pas akum'' and not in [[Bishul Akum]] because even though they are boiled before being baked, they are not made edible by the boiling.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 112:31, Iggerot Moshe YD 2:33 </ref>
# Breakfast cereals which are [[Mezonot|''Mezonos'']] would be subject to ''Pas Akum'' only if they have ''tzuras hapas'', because otherwise one would never make [[Hamotzi]] on them<ref>Rama O.C. 168:13, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 168:15, Mishnah Berurah 168:3</ref>. Some poskim think that cereals such as Cheerios should be considered to have ''tzuras hapas''<ref>Rav Scheinberg zt"l, as quoted in Vezos Ha’beracha page 192 </ref> while others disagree.<ref>R. Schachter, R. Belsky, and R. Genack in OU Document A-94 all assume that cereals such as Cheerios and Corn Flakes are permitted to be eaten when made by a non-Jew, because they lack ''tzuras hapas'' and are also not fit for a king's table, and this is the OU's policy.</ref>
# Pretzels should be considered ''pas'', because they are generally made from bread-dough and have the same general form of bread. However, thin, hard pretzels might lack ''tzuras hapas'' and therefore not be prohibited under ''pas akum''.<ref>This is the opinion of R. Schachter as quoted in OU Document M-7, footnote 97, where he also notes that there's no prohibition of [[Bishul Akum]] either because hard pretzels are not served to kings.</ref>
# Although there is a leniency applicable to [[Bishul Akum]], that if the food is "not fit for a king's table" it would be permissible, most poskim<ref>with the exception of Avnei Nezer YD 1:92</ref> believe that this is not applicable to bread, and so even low-quality breads are included in the prohibition. <ref>Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav 112:3 and see the sources quoted by Chelkas Binyamin 112:12 in the biurim</ref>

==Involvement of a Jew in the Baking==
# The Gemara states that as long as the Jew lit the fire or performed the actual baking, the bread is considered ''pas yisroel''.<ref>Avodah Zarah 38b. The opinion of the Ran and Rashba there, that all of these actions are required only if the Jew doesn't actually own the bread, is rejected by the Shulchan Aruch and Rama; see Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 and Shach 112:1. In fact, as noted above, the Shach in 112:7 is more stringent for bread owned by a Jew than for bread owned by a non-Jew, saying that the former has the status of [[Bishul Akum]] if baked by a non-Jew.</ref>
# The Geonim allowed bread baked by a non-Jew even if the Jew merely added to the fire by throwing in extra kindling<ref>Sefer Minhagim She-Bein Bavel V'Eretz Yisrael pg. 60, quoted by Tosfos Avodah Zarah 38b and Rosh Avodah Zarah 2:33. This can be explained based on the Rambam Maachalos Asuros 17:13 who writes that really all one needs to do is some perfunctory act to show that ''pas akum'' is generally prohibited.</ref> and the custom is in accordance with this opinion.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 112:9, Chochmas Adom 65:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 38:2, Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 112:26. The Rama Y.D. 113:7, Taz 113:8, and Shach 113:10 say that the Jew doesn't need to have intent to raise the fire in order to have a Jew be involved in the baking, but the Kaf HaChayim Y.D. 112:52 disagrees.</ref>
# Poskim disagree about modern cooking appliances, such as glow plugs<ref>Rabbi Moshe Heinemann, and thus the Star-K, considers this device to add significant heat to the ovens, and therefore if a Jew were to turn on a glow plug that runs through the ovens, the food would be permitted (Star-K Kashrus Kurrents 36:2, Spring 2014). However, many poskim do not agree with this assessment, and the OU does not make use of glow plugs.</ref> and pilot lights or light bulbs.<ref>Refer to OU Document A-54</ref>

==Links==
* [http://www.yutorah.org/search/?s=cohen+crc&category=0,234643 Shiur Series by Rabbi Dovid Cohen of the CRC]
* Article on [http://koltorah.org/ravj/14-2%20Pat%20Akum%201.htm Pat Akum] by Rabbi Chaim Jachter
* [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/volume_5_Issue_15.pdf Halachically Speaking Volume 5 Issue 15] and [http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/halacha/Volume_5_Issue_16.pdf Volume 5 Issue 16]: "Pas Akum, Pas Paltur, & Pas Yisroel" Parts I & II

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

Aseret Yimei Teshuva

2015-09-18T13:14:03Z

Sbmb: /* Practices of Aseret Yemei Teshuva */

The period between [[Rosh Hashana]] and [[Yom Kippur]] is a unique time to improve one's character, deeds, and perform [[Teshuva]]. <ref> Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg.209 writes from Rav Chaim Vital in Shaar Hakavanot 90C that each day of the week between Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur can atone for that day of the week for the entire year. For example, a Sunday can make up for all the sins he did on the Sundays throughout the year. Mishna Brura 603:2, Kaf Hachaim 662:14 agree. 
* The Gemara Rosh Hashana 18a writes that when the pasuk says דרשו ה' בהמצאו קראוהו בהיותו קרוב it refers to aseret yimei teshuva</ref>
==Practices of Aseret Yemei Teshuva==
# During aseret yimei teshuva, one should increase his involvement in charity, in good deeds and in learning torah. <ref> Rambam Hilchot Teshuva 3:4, Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 204 </ref>
# Even one who isn't strict regarding bread baked by a non-Jew ([[Pat Akum]]) during the rest of the year should be strict about [[Pat Akum]] even bread baked by a baker during [[Aseret Yemei Teshuva]].<ref>Shulchan Aruch 603:1, Mishna Brurah 603:1, Raavyah Rosh Hashana Siman 529: pg. 208, Or Zarua 2:257. See [[Pat Akum]] page for details regarding these halachot.</ref>
# Some add that taking upon other extra stringencies is also appropriate during Aseres Yemei Teshuvah.<ref>Rabbeinu Manoach Hilchot Chametz UMatzah 1:5, Chayei Adam 143:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 130:2</ref> However, many say that one should only be stringent in things which are not actually prohibited, but not to follow a more stringent opinion for just these ten days, which would indicate that he believes something that is normally done all year is actually prohibited.<ref>Beis Yosef 603 quoting the Tashbetz 117, Aruch Hashulchan 603:2 writes that therefore someone who is not usually makpid on [[Yashan]] or on "Glatt Kosher" should not take that up only for Aseres Yemei Teshuvah. See, however, B'Yitzchak Yikar (Rabbi Avigdor Nebenzahl) to Orach Chaim 603, who appears to disagree</ref>
# If a Jew turns on or raises the fire so that the bread bakes, that bread may be eaten during [[Aseret Yemei Teshuva]].<ref>Mishna Brurah 603:1</ref>

==Changes in Shemona Esreh==
===Hamelech Hakadosh===
# During the [[Aseret Yemei Teshuva]], the conclusion of the Bracha HaEl HaKadosh is switched to HaMelech HaKadosh. <Ref>Rambam Hilchot [[Tefilla]] 10:13, S”A 582:1 based on Gemara [[Berachot]] 12b, Kitzur S”A 129:3, Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 190 </ref> If one forgot to say HaMelech HaKadosh and remembered within [[Toch Kedi Dibbur]] (2-3 seconds), then one should say HaMelech HaKadosh right then. <Ref>S”A 582:2, Kitzur S”A 129:3, Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 62, Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 190 </ref> If one remembered only afterwards one must start from the beginning of [[Shmoneh Esrei]]. <Ref>Rambam Hilchot [[Tefilla]] 10:13, Tur and S”A 582:1, Or Zarua 1:29, Orchot Chaim [[Tefilla]] 104, Rashba and Ritva on [[Berachot]] 12b, Kitzur S”A 129:3, Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 62, Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 190, Sh"t Rav Pealim OC 2:7. Haghot Maimoni on Rambam Tefilla 10:13 writes that this is the ruling of Rashi, the Smag, and the Maharam but adds that the Raavya Berachot Siman 40 disagrees and says that one is yotze bidieved. </ref> This is true if he began the first word of the next beracha <ref> Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 190-192, Mishna Brura 487:1 in the Biur Haacha, Mteh Ephraim 582:9 Kaf Hachaim 582:10 </ref> or even if he just waited for that amount of time without reciting anything.<ref> Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 191-192 unlike the Kaf Hachaim 582:9 </ref>
# If one is unsure if he said Hakel Hakadosh or Hamelech Hakadosh, one should return to the beginning of the [[Shmoneh Esrei]], because we assume that he was used to saying Hakel Hakadosh like he does normally. This is true even if he knows that he added the other additions like zochreinu lechaim and mi kamocha. <ref> Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 63, Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim page 192. Chazon Ovadia quotes some acharonim (Nitei Gavriel ROsh Hashana pg. 59 quoting the Taharat Hashulchan) who disagree and say that if you did mention zochreinu lichayim and mi kamocha then we can assume that you also said hamalech hakadosh. </ref>
# If one recites melech hakadosh instead of hamelech hakadosh, he nevertheless fulfills his obligation. <ref> Sh"t Yabia Omer 2:29:1, Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 63 </ref>
# On Friday night, the words HaKel HaKadosh are changed to HaMelech HaKadosh in the Bracha Mein Sheva that the Sheliach Tzibbur says. <Ref> S”A 582:3 </ref>If he forgets and remembers before the end of the Bracha he goes back to HaEl HaKadosh, if he remembers after concluding the Bracha, he doesn't repeat it. <Ref> Mishna Brurah 582:11 writes that if he remembers before the end of the Bracha he goes back, however, after he finishes the Bracha, there’s a dispute in the achronim. However, the Kitzur S”A 129:4 writes that unless he remembers within [[Toch Kedi Dibbur]] he doesn’t go back. </ref>
===Hamelech Hamishpat===
# The conclusion of the Bracha Melech Ohev [[Tzedaka]] UMishpat is changed to HaMelech HaMishpat. <ref> Gemara [[Berachot]] 12b, Shulchan Aruch 582:2, Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 190 </ref> According to Ashkenazim, if one forgot, one doesn’t go back to the beginning of [[Shemona Esreh]]. <Ref>Rama 118:1, Mishna Brurah 582:9Darchei Moshe 582:3 based on Rabbeinu Yona that since we mention melech even in our regular text, one would not need to go back. Chacham Ovadia Yosef recommends for Ashkenazim that even though the Rama says that you do not need to go back, that one should in fact go back and stipulate: if I'm obligated to repeat [[Shmoneh Esrei]] then I'm praying for my obligation, and if the halacha is that I don't have to repeat, my [[prayer]] should be considered a voluntary [[prayer]]. This is the ruling of the Taz 118:2, Mor Uketzia 118 </ref> According to Sephardim, if one forgot and remembered within [[Toch Kedi Dibbur]] (2-3 seconds) then one should say HaMelech Hamishpat right then. If one remembered afterwards, some say that one should return to the Bracha of Hashiva, however, if one finished [[Shmoneh Esrei]] one must start from the beginning of [[Shmoneh Esrei]]. If one is unsure, it’s the same as if one forgot. <Ref>S”A 582:2. Chazon Ovadyah (Yamim Noraim pg 193), Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 64, Sh"t Yabia Omer 2:8-10. Halichot Olam 2: pg. 251 writes that this is the halacha and we don't say [[Safek Brachot LeHakel]]. However he adds that it is more correct to stipulate: if I'm obligated to repeat [[Shmoneh Esrei]] then I'm praying for my obligation, and if the halacha is that I don't have to repeat, my [[prayer]] should be considered a voluntary [[prayer]]. 
* Rambam Hilchot Tefilla 10:13 rules that one must repeat the amida if he forgot to change to hamalech hamishpat. Or Zarua Hilchot Keriat Shema Siman 29 writes that this was also the ruling of the Rif. see Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 194 for a long list of rishonim who held this way including Rosh, Rif, Rambam, Ramban, Ritva, Maharam MiRutenberg.
* Talmidei Rabbenu Yona Masechet Berachot 7a "u'mihu" quoted in Darkei Moshe 582:3 say that since we mention the word melech in our regular text, one does not need to go back.
</ref> However, some sephardic poskim say that if one remembered after [[Toch Kedi Dibbur]] one need not repeat anything. <ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu in Maamer Mordechai (Aseret Yami [[Teshuva]] #19) based on Ben Ish Chai (Nitsavim #19), Kaf Hachaim 582:8 </ref>

===Other additions===
# Four other additions to [[Shmoneh Esrei]] are the lines of Zochrenu LeChaim, Mi Kamocha, U'chetov lichaim, and UveSefer Chaim. <ref>Chazon Ovadyah (Yamim Noraim pg 205) </ref>
# One may not skip UveSefer Chaim in order to catch [[Kedusha]] with the congregation. <ref>Chazon Ovadyah (Yamim Noraim pg 205), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Shalmei Moed pg. 55 </ref>

==Changes in Kaddish==
# The Ashkenazic minhag during the ten days between [[Rosh Hashana]] and [[Yom Kippur]] ([[Aseret Yemei Teshuva]]) is to say LeElah UleElah MeKol Birchata (in [[Kaddish]]) instead of LeElah Min Kol Birchata. <Ref>Kitzur S”A 129:1 writes to say LeElah LeElah MeKol Birchata. Mishna Brurah 56:2, 582:16 agrees but adds a vav as follows LeElah ULeElah. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu’s footnote on Kitzur S”A 129:1 writes that the Sephardic minhag is not to change this for [[Aseret Yemei Teshuva]]. </ref>
==Other Changes in Tefillah==
===Hashem Hu HaElokim===
# Sephardim recite Hashem Hu Haelokim right before Hashem melech before pesukei dezimra during aseret Yimei [[teshuva]]. <ref> Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 69 , Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 189, Kaf Hachaim 582:13 </ref>
===Shir Hamaalot===
# Some have the custom to recite Shir Hamaalot Mimaamakim (Tehillim 130) during shacharit after Yishtabach before the [[Kaddish]]. <ref> Yalkut Yosef Moadim pg. 69, Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 189. see also Magen Avraham 54:2 </ref>
===Avinu Malkenu===
# After the chazarat hashatz during shacharit and mincha, we add the prayer of avinu malkenu. <ref> Rama 602:1, Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 205, Sh"t Shvut Yaakov 3:42, Rivash 512 </ref> Even a person who prays privately should add this. <ref> Chazon Ovadia Yamim Noraim pg. 205, Sh"t Shvut Yaakov 3:42, Rivash 512, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=1712 DailyHalacha] by Rabbi Eli Mansour </ref>

==Other Practices==
===Weddings===
# Although some poskim mention not to get married during the aseret yimei teshuva because it is a time for teshuva and a time of judgment<ref> Mateh Ephraim 602:5, Kitzur S"A 130:4 </ref>, most poskim do not accept that. Thus, if one wants to get married he should be encouraged to do so, especially if he is past the age of 20 years old. <ref> Sh"t Yechave Daat 1:48, Sh"t Melamed Lihoil EH 1, Sh"t Rav Azriel Hildesheimer OC 157b. see also [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/754143/Rabbi_Aryeh_Lebowitz/Ten_Minute_Halacha_-_Scheduling_a_Wedding_Date Ten Minute Halacha Scheduling a Wedding Date] toward the end by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz where he agrees </ref>

==[[Shabbat]] Shuva==
# The minhag is for the Rabbi of the community to give a Drasha on [[Shabbat]] Shuva about Hilchot [[Yom Kippur]] and [[Sukkot]] as well as inspiration for [[Teshuva]]. <Ref> Mishna Brurah 429:2 </ref>
==Links==
* [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/727962/Rabbi_Zvi_Sobolofsky/Pas_Akum_During_Aseres_Yimei_Teshuva Pas Akum During Aseres Yimei Teshuva] by Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky
* [http://www.torahanytime.com/video/lecture-44-sephardi-laws-of-aseret-yemei-teshuva-and-yom-kippur/ Sephardi Laws of aseret yemei teshuva and yom-kippur] by Rabbi Avraham Kohan
* Article on [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/737421/Rabbi_Josh_Flug/Special_Observances_during_the_Aseret_Yemei_Teshuva Special Observances during the Aseret Yemei Teshuva] by Rabbi Josh Flug

==Sources==
<References/>
[[Category:Holidays]]
[[Category:Prayer]]
[[Category:Yamim Noraim]]

Bishul Akum

2015-09-18T12:39:41Z

Sbmb: /* Reasons */

==The Gezeirah ==
# The Chachomim<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 gezeirah forbidding food that was cooked by a non-Jew.<ref>Meseches Avodah Zarah 35b.</ref> However, it is permitted to derive benefit from the food.<ref>Meseches Avodah Zarah 38b. </ref>

==Reasons ==
# There are a number of reasons for this gezeirah. The opinion of Rashi<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> is that chazal wanted to prevent socializing with non-Jews, which might lead to intermarriage<ref>Devarim 7:3. </ref> (chasnus).<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). There is no difference if the non-Jew bows down to idols or not in regard to this halacha (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> Rashi in Meseches Avodah Zarah<ref>38a “m’d’rabanan.” Refer to Tur 113, Ha’go’es Ashri Meseches Avodah Zarah 2:28, Levush 113:1, Chochmas Adom 66:1. </ref> says that we are concerned that the non-Jew will mix in a non-kosher item into the food.<ref>Refer to Bishul Yisroel page 3:footnote 1 on the two views of Rashi. </ref> Most poskim 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> Chazal were more stringent with 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 gezeirah. 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 halachos of [[bishul]] akum and may be eaten by a Jew l'chatchilah.<ref>Chelkes Binyomin 113:3.</ref>
# A food that can be eaten raw may be cooked by a non-Jew for two reasons. 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 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 issur 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 (see below) (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 for intermarriage.<ref>Rashba Toras Habayis 3:7. </ref> When there is no invitation, we are also not concerned that a non-Jew will mix non-kosher with kosher food.<ref>Chelkes Binyomin 113:3. Refer to [[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>

==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 food raw then one may eat it if a non-Jew cooked it. Even if he personally would not eat this food raw, his da'as is botel to all the other people.<ref>Chelkes Binyomin 113:6, see Biurim “nechal.”</ref>
# A food which can only be eaten raw in difficult circumstances is not considered halachically 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> while others argue and hold it is still considered halachically 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 would be normal to eat corn raw, however, it is just uncommon, however, 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>

==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>

=="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. In addition 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 it for breakfast but would not eat it for supper? Some say that this 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 it refers to anyone of stature, not just a king.<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 l'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 seudas mitzvah.<ref>Shevet Ha’kehusi 6:274:4, see Dinei Machalei Nuchrim pages 18-19. </ref> Harav Yisroel Belsky shlita says 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 the above 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 (this will be discussed in a later issue), 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" according to the Min or Specific 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.
# 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>

==Product Shipped from one Place to Another==
# 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>

==Each Place==
# The opinion of the Chochmas Adam<ref>66:4. </ref> and others<ref>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> is that these categories are based on the current custom and not on previous customs.

==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>

==Important Person==
# There is a discussion in the poskim if a "chashuva" person should go beyond the letter of the law regarding the halachos 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 a chashuva person being lenient even though it is permitted al pi din, the onlooker will potentially be more lenient in a circumstance where it can be forbidden.<ref>Rashi Meseches [[Shabbos]] 51a “odom”, 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>

==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> (this will be discussed in a later issue), or if a food was cooked 1/3 by a Jew<ref>Chochmas Adom 66:9 </ref> (this will be discussed in a later issue), 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 because of a sofek d'rabanan l'kula.<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>

==Jew Watching non-Jew==
# Even according to the view of Rashi that the concern of [[bishul]] akum is also because the non-Jew may mix in non-kosher food, there remains an issur even if the 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>

==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>

==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>

==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 (this will be discussed in a later issue).<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.

==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>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 "machalas asuros."<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 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.

==Rov or Shishim ==
# Most poskim are of the opinion that [[bishul]] akum is botel b'rov (majority)<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>
==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, Shulchan Aruch 113:2, Toras Chatos 75:12, Levush 15, Chochmas Adom 66:6, Aruch Hashulchan 14. See Mishna Brurah 203:11. Some say this is only permitted if the food which is not edible raw is not recognizable in the mixture (Darchei Teshuva 113:22, see Kaf Hachaim 17). 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]].
==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>
==Sephardim==
# According to Sephardim, there is what to rely on 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]].<ref>Rav Ovadyah Yosef in Yachava Daat 5:54 and Yabia Omer YD 9:6</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].

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

Bread of Gentiles

2015-09-18T12:37:58Z

Sbmb: Redirected page to Pat Akum

#REDIRECT [[Pat Akum]]

Bread of non-Jew

2015-09-18T12:37:03Z

Sbmb: Redirected page to Pat Akum

#REDIRECT [[Pat Akum]]

Pas yisroel

2015-09-18T12:34:16Z

Sbmb: Redirected page to Pat Akum

#REDIRECT [[Pat Akum]]