Harchakot of Niddah: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Eating at the Same Table
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
*The Rambam writes that it is forbidden for a man to eat on the same place as his wife when she is a niddah. However, the Raavad ([http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8785&st=&pgnum=8 Shaar Haperisha no. 1]) argues that it is forbidden even on the same table. Ramban (Hilchot Niddah 8:3), Tur and Shulchan Aruch YD 195:3 follow the Raavad. | *The Rambam writes that it is forbidden for a man to eat on the same place as his wife when she is a niddah. However, the Raavad ([http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8785&st=&pgnum=8 Shaar Haperisha no. 1]) argues that it is forbidden even on the same table. Ramban (Hilchot Niddah 8:3), Tur and Shulchan Aruch YD 195:3 follow the Raavad. | ||
*Does Heker Work? The Ravyah (Niddah no. 173) writes that it is forbidden for a man to eat with his wife when she is a niddah even if there is something unusual on the table to remind them. He writes that the rabbis of Narvona agreed with him. The Hagahot Mordechai (Shabbat no. 452) cites this opinion. The Gra YD 195:8 and 88:2 discusses these opinions and their proof from Shabbat 13a. However, the Raavad ([http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8785&st=&pgnum=8 Shaar Haperisha no. 1]) holds that it is permitted for a husband to eat at the same table with a niddah as long as there is something to remind them such as only one eating on the tablecloth. The Rashba ([http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9381&st=&pgnum=346 Torat Habayit 3b]), Tur and Shulchan Aruch 195:3 agree. See the Ramban (Hilchot Niddah 8:3) who allows using something unusual only if there's no other table available. | *Does Heker Work? The Ravyah (Niddah no. 173) writes that it is forbidden for a man to eat with his wife when she is a niddah even if there is something unusual on the table to remind them. He writes that the rabbis of Narvona agreed with him. The Hagahot Mordechai (Shabbat no. 452) cites this opinion. The Gra YD 195:8 and 88:2 discusses these opinions and their proof from Shabbat 13a. However, the Raavad ([http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8785&st=&pgnum=8 Shaar Haperisha no. 1]) holds that it is permitted for a husband to eat at the same table with a niddah as long as there is something to remind them such as only one eating on the tablecloth. The Rashba ([http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9381&st=&pgnum=346 Torat Habayit 3b]), Tur and Shulchan Aruch 195:3 agree. See the Ramban (Hilchot Niddah 8:3) who allows using something unusual only if there's no other table available. | ||
*What this dispute might be based on? The Sidrei Tahara 195:7 explains that there's two concerns of eating at the same table. The first is that merely eating together is a symbol of endearment. The second is that by eating together at the table they might come to share food on the same plate as we find by eating milk and meat at the same table. He tries to show that this was a dispute between the Raah and Rashba and that the Rosh was concerned for both approaches. According to the first approach, the Sidrei Tahara concludes, that having something unusual on the table is ineffective since either way their eating together will still cause endearment. But according to the second approach as long as there is something unusual on the table they will remember not to share food.</ref> eating on separate place-mats (if they do not regularly do so) and the changing of seats if if they typically have designated places.<ref>The Rabbenu Yerucham (cited by Bet Yosef 195:3) rules that it is permitted to eat at the same table while seated different from where they typically sit. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 153:6 and Taharat Habayit (vol. 2, pg. 119) hold like Rabbenu Yerucham. See Badei Hashulchan (195:37) however who writes that some are strict not to rely on this leniency.</ref> Sitting far apart from each other on a long table also serves as a sufficient reminder.<ref>Taharat Habayit (vol. 2, pg. 110), The Laws of Niddah (Rabbi Nacson, pg. 33)</ref> | *What this dispute might be based on? The Sidrei Tahara 195:7 explains that there's two concerns of eating at the same table. The first is that merely eating together is a symbol of endearment. The second is that by eating together at the table they might come to share food on the same plate as we find by eating milk and meat at the same table. He tries to show that this was a dispute between the Raah and Rashba and that the Rosh was concerned for both approaches. According to the first approach, the Sidrei Tahara concludes, that having something unusual on the table is ineffective since either way their eating together will still cause endearment. But according to the second approach as long as there is something unusual on the table they will remember not to share food.</ref> eating on separate place-mats (if they do not regularly do so)<ref>Yesod Hatahara p. 12</ref> and the changing of seats if if they typically have designated places.<ref>The Rabbenu Yerucham (cited by Bet Yosef 195:3) rules that it is permitted to eat at the same table while seated different from where they typically sit. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 153:6 and Taharat Habayit (vol. 2, pg. 119) hold like Rabbenu Yerucham. See Badei Hashulchan (195:37) however who writes that some are strict not to rely on this leniency.</ref> Sitting far apart from each other on a long table also serves as a sufficient reminder.<ref>Taharat Habayit (vol. 2, pg. 110), The Laws of Niddah (Rabbi Nacson, pg. 33)</ref> | ||
#According to some authorities, this requirement is not needed when dining accompanied by other adults or with children old enough to be embarrassed by intimate behavior.<ref>Masat Binyamin (112, quoted by the Pitchei Teshuva 195:3) considers the presence of others as a heker. Shiurei Bracha (195:11), Taharat Habayit (vol. 2, pg. 110), Darkei Tahara (pg. 44) rule this way as well. Rabbi Mordechai Willig ([http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/877146/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig/niddah-shiur-125-eating-at-the-same-table/ Niddah Shiur 125]) is lenient regarding this as well. | #According to some authorities, this requirement is not needed when dining accompanied by other adults or with children old enough to be embarrassed by intimate behavior.<ref>Masat Binyamin (112, quoted by the Pitchei Teshuva 195:3) considers the presence of others as a heker. Shiurei Bracha (195:11), Taharat Habayit (vol. 2, pg. 110), Darkei Tahara (pg. 44) rule this way as well. Rabbi Mordechai Willig ([http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/877146/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig/niddah-shiur-125-eating-at-the-same-table/ Niddah Shiur 125]) is lenient regarding this as well. | ||
Badei Hashulchan (195:34) however | Badei Hashulchan (195:34) however cites the Rashba ([http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9381&st=&pgnum=346 Mishmeret Habayit 3b]) who held that the presence of others does not help, and the Raah ([http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9381&st=&pgnum=346 Bedek Habayit 3b]) also only permitted if someone sat in between the husband and wife. He does however agree that this is room to be lenient Halachically. </ref> | ||
#According to some authorities, drinking or noshing on a small snack does not mandate a reminder.<ref>Responsa Tzitz Eliezer (vol. 18, no. 23), The Laws of Niddah (Rabbi Nacson, pg. 33)</ref> | #According to some authorities, drinking or noshing on a small snack does not mandate a reminder.<ref>Responsa Tzitz Eliezer (vol. 18, no. 23), The Laws of Niddah (Rabbi Nacson, pg. 33)</ref> | ||
#A sefer or siddur should not be used as a reminder as this constitutes irreverent usage of Holy Books. (See [[Respecting Holy Books]]).<ref>Ohel Yakov Kavod U'Kedushat Sefarim (pg. 1) quoting Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky</ref> | #A sefer or siddur should not be used as a reminder as this constitutes irreverent usage of Holy Books. (See [[Respecting Holy Books]]).<ref>Ohel Yakov Kavod U'Kedushat Sefarim (pg. 1) quoting Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky</ref> | ||
