Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators, wiki-admin, wiki-controller, wiki-editor, wiki-reader
1,208
edits
Chatzitza: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Medical Circumstances
(→Nails) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
# If a woman has an IUD inside it isn’t a chatzitza.<ref> Tzitz Eliezer 10:25:10 writes that a ring placed in the womb isn’t a chatzitza because it is deeper than where the man penetrates and is considered completely inside the body and not just a concealed area. Furthermore, they are left there for a long period of time and should be considered as though she doesn’t care. The Laws of Niddah v. 2 p. 303 quotes this regarding IUD. | # If a woman has an IUD inside it isn’t a chatzitza.<ref> Tzitz Eliezer 10:25:10 writes that a ring placed in the womb isn’t a chatzitza because it is deeper than where the man penetrates and is considered completely inside the body and not just a concealed area. Furthermore, they are left there for a long period of time and should be considered as though she doesn’t care. The Laws of Niddah v. 2 p. 303 quotes this regarding IUD. | ||
* The Pitchei Teshuva 198:16 quotes the Nodeh Beyehuda YD 64 and Zichron Yosef YD 10 who hold that a ring that is inserted deep into the body to protect the womb isn’t a chatzitza since it is considered inside the body and not a concealed area that is sometimes exposed. The Chatom Sofer 192 provides another reason why this ring isn’t a chatzitza. He explains that since it stays there all the time and is only removed for doing the hefsek tahara or giving birth doesn’t make it like she’s concerned to have it removed in the first place as it is just removed to make space.</ref> A rav should be consulted about this shaylah. | * The Pitchei Teshuva 198:16 quotes the Nodeh Beyehuda YD 64 and Zichron Yosef YD 10 who hold that a ring that is inserted deep into the body to protect the womb isn’t a chatzitza since it is considered inside the body and not a concealed area that is sometimes exposed. The Chatom Sofer 192 provides another reason why this ring isn’t a chatzitza. He explains that since it stays there all the time and is only removed for doing the hefsek tahara or giving birth doesn’t make it like she’s concerned to have it removed in the first place as it is just removed to make space.</ref> A rav should be consulted about this shaylah. | ||
# A nuvaring should be removed for hefsek tahara, the first bedika the first night, the bedika on the 7th night of shiva nekiyim, as well as she goes to the mikveh.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1095409 Rav Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 27, min 59)] said that he holds that a nuvaring is a shayla of chatzitza for mikveh and bedikot. She should remove it for two hours a month and it is still effective. She should remove it for hefsek tahara right before sunset and for another bedika that night and that counts as bedika of the first day. Then she should remove it for bedika of the 7th day before sunset as well as when she goes to mikveh.</ref> | |||
===Eyes=== | ===Eyes=== | ||
# Contact lenses should be removed before tevilah. After the fact some poskim write that they aren't a chatzitza, while others hold they are. A rav should be consulted.<ref>Chut Shani p. 279 writes that contacts lenses are a chatzitza whether they're hard or soft and are left in at night since they're not permanently part of the eye. Minchat Yitzchak 6:89 agrees. Shiurei Shevet Halevi 182:7:2 writes it seems that contact lenses aren't a chatzitza after the fact but he says he didn't check out the science to determine if the lenses stick tightly to the eye. Badei Hashulchan 198:296 is unsure if the lenses are tight enough to be a chatzitza. Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 26-7 is lenient after the fact. Igrot Moshe YD 104 is lenient after the fact based on his opinion (in YD 1:98) that the concealed areas of the body can't have something stuck to them but could have something that would prevent water from entering that area. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1093124 Rav Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 19, min 46-50)] quoted Badei Hashulchan and Igrot Moshe.</ref> According to Sephardim, soft lenses that which she wears all the time when she sleeps and showers, and are only removed after a moth or a number of days, can be left in during tevilah.<ref>Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 27, Orot Hatahara p. 344. The Laws of Niddah v. 2 p. 325 quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach that contact lenses that a woman needs to wear after cataract surgery may be worn in the mikveh.</ref> | # Contact lenses should be removed before tevilah. After the fact some poskim write that they aren't a chatzitza, while others hold they are. A rav should be consulted.<ref>Chut Shani p. 279 writes that contacts lenses are a chatzitza whether they're hard or soft and are left in at night since they're not permanently part of the eye. Minchat Yitzchak 6:89 agrees. Shiurei Shevet Halevi 182:7:2 writes it seems that contact lenses aren't a chatzitza after the fact but he says he didn't check out the science to determine if the lenses stick tightly to the eye. Badei Hashulchan 198:296 is unsure if the lenses are tight enough to be a chatzitza. Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 26-7 is lenient after the fact. Igrot Moshe YD 104 is lenient after the fact based on his opinion (in YD 1:98) that the concealed areas of the body can't have something stuck to them but could have something that would prevent water from entering that area. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1093124 Rav Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 19, min 46-50)] quoted Badei Hashulchan and Igrot Moshe.</ref> According to Sephardim, soft lenses that which she wears all the time when she sleeps and showers, and are only removed after a moth or a number of days, can be left in during tevilah.<ref>Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 27, Orot Hatahara p. 344. The Laws of Niddah v. 2 p. 325 quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach that contact lenses that a woman needs to wear after cataract surgery may be worn in the mikveh.</ref> | ||
| Line 45: | Line 46: | ||
* Ben Ish Chai in Rav Poalim 2:27 is strict on the cotton in the ear because she wants it there to be tight. Rather he advises having another person wet their hands and not so tightly cover her ears while she's tovel.</ref> | * Ben Ish Chai in Rav Poalim 2:27 is strict on the cotton in the ear because she wants it there to be tight. Rather he advises having another person wet their hands and not so tightly cover her ears while she's tovel.</ref> | ||
===Teeth=== | ===Teeth=== | ||
# Braces that can't be removed according to some poskim aren't a chatzitza, but according to many poskim they are a chatzitza if they are put in for aesthetic purposes and not if they are to prevent the teeth from falling out.<ref>Shiurei Shevet Halevi 198:24:2 writes that braces that can't be removed aren't a chatzitza. Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 1:96 writes that if the braces are to prevent the teeth from falling out they aren't a chatzitza but if it is just for aesthetic purposes they are a chatzitza. Orot Hatahara p. 349 quotes Rav Elyashiv as agreeing. Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 143 writes that braces aren't a chatzitza if they're needed to unite the teeth and prevent them from loosening.</ref> | # Braces that can't be removed according to some poskim aren't a chatzitza, but according to many poskim they are a chatzitza if they are put in for aesthetic purposes and not if they are to prevent the teeth from falling out.<ref>Shiurei Shevet Halevi 198:24:2 writes that braces that can't be removed aren't a chatzitza. Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 1:96 writes that if the braces are to prevent the teeth from falling out they aren't a chatzitza but if it is just for aesthetic purposes they are a chatzitza. Orot Hatahara p. 349 quotes Rav Elyashiv as agreeing. Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 143 writes that braces aren't a chatzitza if they're needed to unite the teeth and prevent them from loosening. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1095409 Rav Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 27, min 36)] cited some poskim as being lenient. </ref> | ||
# A permanent filling which is fitted correctly isn't a chatzitza.<ref>Chut Shani p. 311, Shiurei Shevet Halevi 198:24:2, Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 137 unlike the Chachmat Adam 119:18</ref> | # A permanent filling which is fitted correctly isn't a chatzitza.<ref>Chut Shani p. 311, Shiurei Shevet Halevi 198:24:2, Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 137 unlike the Chachmat Adam 119:18</ref> | ||
# A temporary filling is according to some poskim a chatzitza,<ref>Chut Shani p. 311 quoting the Chazon Ish that it is a chatzitza since it is going to be removed for medical reasons and isn't nullified to the body. He agrees that if the temporary filling is only put in and removed because it won't last (but isn't removed for dental work) it isn't a chatzitza. </ref> according to some poskim, isn't a chatzitza,<ref>Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 139, Orot Hatahara p. 349. Igrot Moshe 1:97 offers 3 reasons why a temporary filling isn't a chatzitza: 1) It is meant to stay there for a long fixed period of time (like Zichron Yosef). 2) The temporary filling is just put in for a time to close up the area and immediately after it is removed it will be replaced with a permanent filling. If the temporary filling would have lasted she would keep it longer but practically it needs to be replaced with a better filling. That isn't considered a chatzitza as she's not concerned about having the area open ever again. 3) The hole in the tooth is a unnatural hole and perhaps isn't included in the areas that have an issue of chatzitza. He concludes that the first reason is questionable and the third is new so they shouldn't be relied upon. [It is noteworthy that the second reason which is the primary reason of Rav Moshe doesn't apply if the temporary filling is put in so that work can be done there later as he writes in Igrot Moshe YD 2:88.] | # A temporary filling is according to some poskim a chatzitza,<ref>Chut Shani p. 311 quoting the Chazon Ish that it is a chatzitza since it is going to be removed for medical reasons and isn't nullified to the body. He agrees that if the temporary filling is only put in and removed because it won't last (but isn't removed for dental work) it isn't a chatzitza. </ref> according to some poskim, isn't a chatzitza,<ref>Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 139, Orot Hatahara p. 349. Igrot Moshe 1:97 offers 3 reasons why a temporary filling isn't a chatzitza: 1) It is meant to stay there for a long fixed period of time (like Zichron Yosef). 2) The temporary filling is just put in for a time to close up the area and immediately after it is removed it will be replaced with a permanent filling. If the temporary filling would have lasted she would keep it longer but practically it needs to be replaced with a better filling. That isn't considered a chatzitza as she's not concerned about having the area open ever again. 3) The hole in the tooth is a unnatural hole and perhaps isn't included in the areas that have an issue of chatzitza. He concludes that the first reason is questionable and the third is new so they shouldn't be relied upon. [It is noteworthy that the second reason which is the primary reason of Rav Moshe doesn't apply if the temporary filling is put in so that work can be done there later as he writes in Igrot Moshe YD 2:88.] | ||
| Line 59: | Line 60: | ||
* Nonetheless, The Laws of Niddah v. 2 p. 294 writes that makeup must be removed since it is routinely removed and also it would run when the woman goes in the mikveh. The Mishmeret Hatahara (Rabbi Morgenstern, v. 2 p. 371 n. 229) agrees. | * Nonetheless, The Laws of Niddah v. 2 p. 294 writes that makeup must be removed since it is routinely removed and also it would run when the woman goes in the mikveh. The Mishmeret Hatahara (Rabbi Morgenstern, v. 2 p. 371 n. 229) agrees. | ||
* Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 29 writes that makeup should be removed but isn't chatzitza after the fact. He also mentions that tattoos aren't a chatziza.</ref> | * Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 29 writes that makeup should be removed but isn't chatzitza after the fact. He also mentions that tattoos aren't a chatziza.</ref> | ||
==Skin== | ==Skin== | ||
| Line 73: | Line 70: | ||
# If a woman has a dye or a coloration on the skin such as if she was burned it isn't a chatzitza but if she could remove it she should.<ref> The [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1120&st=&pgnum=423&hilite= Bet Dovid YD siman 98] and [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=812&pgnum=133 Ohel Yosef siman 40] hold that a dye on the hands isn't a chatzitza if it doesn't leave any substance above the skin level (based on the Rashba cited in Shulchan Aruch 198:17). For example, they were discussing a woman whose hands were dyed because of peeling nuts and were lenient because it couldn't be removed and it didn't leave any residue. This also seems to be the opinion of the Taz 198:17 citing the Roke'ach. | # If a woman has a dye or a coloration on the skin such as if she was burned it isn't a chatzitza but if she could remove it she should.<ref> The [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1120&st=&pgnum=423&hilite= Bet Dovid YD siman 98] and [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=812&pgnum=133 Ohel Yosef siman 40] hold that a dye on the hands isn't a chatzitza if it doesn't leave any substance above the skin level (based on the Rashba cited in Shulchan Aruch 198:17). For example, they were discussing a woman whose hands were dyed because of peeling nuts and were lenient because it couldn't be removed and it didn't leave any residue. This also seems to be the opinion of the Taz 198:17 citing the Roke'ach. | ||
* Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 28 is lenient on any coloration of the skin since it has no substance above the skin level. Nonetheless, he writes that initially it should be removed.</ref> | * Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 28 is lenient on any coloration of the skin since it has no substance above the skin level. Nonetheless, he writes that initially it should be removed.</ref> | ||
# There is a major dispute if a cast is a chatzitza.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1095409 Rav Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 27, min 29-40)] holds that a woman can go into the mikveh with a cast and even cover the cast with plastic so it doesn't get ruined. Har Tzvi YD 165 is strict and only lenient if the husband can't control his yetzer hara.</ref> | |||
== Face == | |||
# If a woman has makeup she shouldn't go to mikveh with the makeup on. For Friday night some poskim hold that it is forbidden to put on the makeup after the mikveh or even have a non-Jew put on the makeup after going to mikveh.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1094884 Rabbi Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 26, min 47-50)]</ref> | |||
==Hair== | ==Hair== | ||
| Line 82: | Line 84: | ||
# A woman who usually shaves her legs before the mikveh and forgot, after the fact the tevilah is effective.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 198:148 based on Taz 198:21</ref> | # A woman who usually shaves her legs before the mikveh and forgot, after the fact the tevilah is effective.<ref>Badei Hashulchan 198:148 based on Taz 198:21</ref> | ||
# The practice nowadays is that married women don't shave their pubic hair and it isn't considered a chatzitza.<ref>Chida in Shiurei Bracha 198:2, Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 25</ref> | # The practice nowadays is that married women don't shave their pubic hair and it isn't considered a chatzitza.<ref>Chida in Shiurei Bracha 198:2, Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 25</ref> | ||
# Standard conditioner isn't a chatzitza.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1094884 Rabbi Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 26, min 35-37)]</ref> Initially, she shouldn't use conditioner before tevila.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1094884 Rabbi Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 26, min 35-37)] quoting Pitchei Daat</ref> | |||
==Nails== | ==Nails== | ||
| Line 95: | Line 98: | ||
# If there's an ingrown toenail that the doctor has instructed that it grow out, it should be cleaned before going to the mikveh and it doesn't need to be cut.<ref>The Laws of Niddah v. 2, p. 313. He is lenient in extenuating circumstances even if it can't be totally cleaned based on the Chamudei Doniel cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 198:10 that today women don't care about how their toenails look. Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 92 based on the Chatom Sofer 195 that since it isn't going to be cut until the healing is finished it isn't a chatzitza now.</ref> | # If there's an ingrown toenail that the doctor has instructed that it grow out, it should be cleaned before going to the mikveh and it doesn't need to be cut.<ref>The Laws of Niddah v. 2, p. 313. He is lenient in extenuating circumstances even if it can't be totally cleaned based on the Chamudei Doniel cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 198:10 that today women don't care about how their toenails look. Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 92 based on the Chatom Sofer 195 that since it isn't going to be cut until the healing is finished it isn't a chatzitza now.</ref> | ||
# A hangnail that is in its minority detached is a chatzitza, but if it is in its majority detached it is a chatzitza.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 198:21</ref> The minhag is to do the tevilah again if she forgot to cut her nails and left a hangnail even if it was a majority detached.<ref>Shach 198:27, Bear Heitev 198:23</ref> If it is Shabbat and a nail is detached in its minority she can ask a non-Jew to cut the nail her nail and then go to the mikveh.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1094161 Rabbi Mordechai Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 23, min 17-19)]</ref> | # A hangnail that is in its minority detached is a chatzitza, but if it is in its majority detached it is a chatzitza.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 198:21</ref> The minhag is to do the tevilah again if she forgot to cut her nails and left a hangnail even if it was a majority detached.<ref>Shach 198:27, Bear Heitev 198:23</ref> If it is Shabbat and a nail is detached in its minority she can ask a non-Jew to cut the nail her nail and then go to the mikveh.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1094161 Rabbi Mordechai Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 23, min 17-19)]</ref> | ||
# Artificial nails should be removed | |||
=== Nail Polish and Artificial Nails === | |||
# Artificial nails should be removed before tevilah. After the fact, if she went to the mikveh with the artificial nails the tevilah is effective.<ref>Chut Shani (198:23 p. 299), The Laws of Niddah v. 2 p. 293, Orot Hatahara p. 355 citing Taharat Habayit p. 101-112</ref> | |||
# Gel nails initially should be removed before going to mikveh.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1094884 Rabbi Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 26, min 52)]</ref> | |||
# Nail polish should be removed before tevilah. If it can't be removed, the nail polish isn't a chatzitza unless it was only partially on the nail or cracked.<ref>The Rashba (Torat Habayit Hakatzar 32b) explains that dyes on the hands are decorative and don't constitute a chatzitza. Many rishonim agree with this and it is quoted in Shulchan Aruch YD 198:17. See above for more details. However, according to Ashkenazim the nail polish has to be removed initially as the Rama 198:1 writes that all chatzitzot should be removed. | |||
*Therefore, The Laws of Niddah v. 2 p. 293 writes that the nail polish should be removed, but if it can't be removed or she was already tovel without removing the polish and it remained intact, the nail polish isn't a chatzitza. This is only true if the nail polish was in a decorative manner such as that she'd be seen publicly like that it isn't a chatzitza but if it is cracked or only on partially it is an issue. [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1094884 Rabbi Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 26, min 45-55)] agreed. Mishmeret Hatahara (v. 2 p. 372) only accepts that it isn't a chatzitza if she always wears nail polish. | |||
*Rav Ovadia Yosef in Taharat Habayit (v. 3 p. 101) writes that the nails should be cut before tevilah, however, if a woman wants to grow them long and polish them and won't be agreeable to cut them, she should be allowed to go to the mikveh, but should be told politely that the minhag is to cut the nails before tevilah.</ref> If it can't be removed and it is cracked or partially removed, she should polish it again so it looks nice and then go to mikveh.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/1094884 Rabbi Willig (Chatzitza Shiur 26, min 53)]</ref> | |||
==Feet== | ==Feet== | ||
