Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators, wiki-admin, wiki-controller, wiki-editor, wiki-reader
1,231
edits
Tefisat Yedey Adam: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Proofs
(→Proofs) |
|||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
=== Proofs that it is a problem === | === Proofs that it is a problem === | ||
* | * The Mishna Mikvaot 2:6 establishes that drawing mud with water out of the mikveh invalidates the water. That is because of tefisat yad adam. | ||
* | * The Tosefta Mikvaot 3:2 quotes Rabbi Yosi who says that water that is sprinkled by a person into a mikveh is invalid. That is because of tefisat yad adam. | ||
* | * The Tosefta Mikvaot 3:2 writes that if someone squeezes 3 lugin of water out of his hair into the mikveh, the mikveh is invalid. Raavad 3:4 quotes this as a proof for tefisat yad adam. | ||
=== Proofs that it isn't an issue === | === Proofs that it isn't an issue === | ||
* The Mishna Mikvaot 2: | * The Mishna Mikvaot 2:7-9 says that it is permitted to turn over a kli that has non-sheuvim water in it to go into the mikveh. Why isn't that ba al yedey adam? Maharam Shik 196 presents three answers to this question: | ||
** Rash says that it is hamshacha which only according to the opinion that hamshacha works for a mikveh that's completely sheuvim. | ** Rash says that it is hamshacha, which only according to the opinion that hamshacha works for a mikveh that's completely sheuvim. | ||
** Rosh would answer that hamshacha for ba al yedey adam works even if it is hamshacha on everything. It isn't the same as sheuvim. | ** Rosh would answer that hamshacha for ba al yedey adam works even if it is hamshacha on everything. It isn't the same as sheuvim. | ||
** Rambam would answer that ba al yedey adam is only a problem if it comes directly from a person's hand and not if it comes from his koach (movement). | ** Rambam would answer that ba al yedey adam is only a problem if it comes directly from a person's hand and not if it comes from his koach (movement). | ||
** Chazon Ish (Mikvaot Tinyana 3: | ** Chazon Ish (Mikvaot Tinyana 3:17) answers that tefisat yad adam is only a problem if he picks up the water and then pours it into the mikveh but not if he just pushes water into the mikveh. Similarly, pushing a kli over so that its water spills into the mikveh isn't tefisat yad adam. | ||
* | * The Mishna Mikvaot 5:5 discusses a person having water run over his hand into a mikveh and only raises the issue of havaya al yedey dvar hamekabel tumah. Why isn't that ba al yedey adam? | ||
* 3 | ** Chazon Ish (Mikvaot Tinyana 3:17) answers that tefisat yad adam is only a problem if he picks up the water and then pours it into the mikveh but not if he just aids water to flow into the mikveh. | ||
* The Mishna Mikvaot 6:3 allows three people to be tovel in three pits whose water join together because of the water displacement of the three people. Why isn't that ba al yedey adam? | |||
** Maharam Shik YD 196 answers that ba al yedey adam is only a problem if it comes directly from a person's hand and not if it come from his koach. | |||
* The Mishna Mikvaot 7:7 allows pushing water from inside a mikveh onto a stair upon which is a needle in order to purify the needle. Why isn't that ba al yedey adam? | |||
** Tosfot Yom Tov answers that the water is always attached to the mikveh so it doesn't become invalidated because of ba al yedey adam. Shach 201:123 rejects this answer because Rosh allows pushing water onto the stair to purify the needle even if the water detaches from the mikveh as long as there's 40 seah in the water that detached. | |||
** Maharam Shik YD 196 answers that ba al yedey adam is only a problem if it comes directly from a person's hand and not if it come from his koach. | |||
*The Tosefta Mikvaot 3:2 writes that if a person has 3 lugin of water in his hair and he goes into an incomplete mikveh, the mikveh is valid. Why isn't that ba al yedey adam? | |||
**Rash (Mikvaot 2:6) answers that the mikveh is complete with 40 seah when the water from his hair went in. Therefore, the mikveh remains kosher. | |||
**According to Raavad 3:4, who holds that water that is moved by a person unintentionally isn't considered tefisat yad adam, this Tosefta can be explained that the water was there unintentionally. | |||
*The Tosefta Mikvaot 3:3 establishes that if an army walks through puddles and cause water to splash into a pit and create a mikveh it is valid. Why isn't that al yedey adam? | |||
**Rosh (Hilchot Mikvaot n. 2) understands that the Tosefta is only discussing animals splashing the water and not people. There's no issue of tefisat yad adam with animals according to Rosh. | |||
**Rash (Mikvaot 2:9) understands that there's hamshacha of the water that splashed onto ground before it fell into the mikveh. Bet Yosef 201:39 writes that this only accords with the opinion that hamshacha works for a complete mikveh. | |||
**Raavad (Baalei Hanefesh 3:4, Buchwald edition p. 150) understands that there's no tefisat yad adam since the was collected unintentionally. | |||
**Rambam (Hilchot Mikvaot 5:8 based on Kesef Mishna, as explained by Maharam Shik YD 196) explains that there's no tefisat yad adam since the water wasn't squeezed directly into the mikveh. It was just pushed or splashed into the mikveh. There's no issue of tefisat yad adam because of the movement of a person. | |||
===Nafka minah=== | ===Nafka minah=== | ||
| Line 44: | Line 57: | ||
==Unintentional and Non-Beneficial== | ==Unintentional and Non-Beneficial== | ||
#Some rishonim hold that water drawn by a person is valid if it is unintentionally drawn into the mikveh.<ref>Raavad in the version of Rabbi Buchwald p. 150 writes explicitly that water drawn by a person unintentionally doesn’t invalidate the mikveh. The proof for Raavad is Tosefta (Mikvaot 3) that the mikveh filled up by the army is kosher. Chelkat Binyamin on seif 15 quotes Chazon Ish in understanding Rambam agrees that drawn by a person unintentionally is kosher.</ref> However, the halacha is that it is invalid.<ref>Rashba (Shaar Hamayim 5) holds that if the water is brought there by the actions of a person it is invalid even if it is unintentional. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 201:39 codifies this opinion. The reason the water that is drawn by a person's foot is valid is because of hamshacha. This implies that it is invalid even though it is unintentional. Shach 201:46 and Taz 21:27 are both strict on water that a person unintentionally drew into a mikveh unlike the Bach 201:21 who is lenient. Chelkat Binyamin 201:250 is strict. Rosh Mikvaot n. 2 implies that he agrees with Rashba since he understands that a mikveh made by water splashing from animals is kosher but not for people, even though splashing the water only drew the water unintentionally. </ref> | #Some rishonim hold that water drawn by a person is valid if it is unintentionally drawn into the mikveh.<ref>Raavad (Baalei Hanefesh 3:4, in the version of Rabbi Buchwald p. 150) writes explicitly that water drawn by a person unintentionally doesn’t invalidate the mikveh. The proof for Raavad is Tosefta (Mikvaot 3:3) that the mikveh filled up by the army is kosher. Rash (in ktav yad Mikvaot 2:9) agrees with Raavad. Chelkat Binyamin on seif 15 quotes Chazon Ish in understanding Rambam agrees that drawn by a person unintentionally is kosher.</ref> However, the halacha is that it is invalid.<ref>Rashba (Shaar Hamayim 5) holds that if the water is brought there by the actions of a person it is invalid even if it is unintentional. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 201:39 codifies this opinion. The reason the water that is drawn by a person's foot is valid is because of hamshacha. This implies that it is invalid even though it is unintentional. Shach 201:46 and Taz 21:27 are both strict on water that a person unintentionally drew into a mikveh unlike the Bach 201:21 who is lenient. Chelkat Binyamin 201:250 is strict. Rosh Mikvaot n. 2 implies that he agrees with Rashba since he understands that a mikveh made by water splashing from animals is kosher but not for people, even though splashing the water only drew the water unintentionally. </ref> | ||
#If you are trying to carry the water out of the mikveh and some of it spills back into the mikveh it isn’t considered tefisat yadey adam since it is non-beneficial to have that water spill back into the mikveh.<ref>Shach 201:46 writes that since the water spilling back into the mikveh isn’t beneficial and isn’t considered tefisat yadey adam. [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8197&st=&pgnum=216 Lechem Vsimla (Simla 201:70)] explains the Shach to mean that it is negative that the water is spilling back. The Lechem Vsimla asks on the Shach and Chazon Ish YD 130:11 disagrees. Rashba (Shaar Hamayim 5) seems to be strict about this that even using a kli that has a hole to clean out a mikveh is considered tefisat yad adam. Shach is based on Shulchan Aruch who allowed that practice.</ref> | #If you are trying to carry the water out of the mikveh and some of it spills back into the mikveh it isn’t considered tefisat yadey adam since it is non-beneficial to have that water spill back into the mikveh.<ref>Shach 201:46 writes that since the water spilling back into the mikveh isn’t beneficial and isn’t considered tefisat yadey adam. [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8197&st=&pgnum=216 Lechem Vsimla (Simla 201:70)] explains the Shach to mean that it is negative that the water is spilling back. The Lechem Vsimla asks on the Shach and Chazon Ish YD 130:11 disagrees. Rashba (Shaar Hamayim 5) seems to be strict about this that even using a kli that has a hole to clean out a mikveh is considered tefisat yad adam. Shach is based on Shulchan Aruch who allowed that practice.</ref> | ||
