Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators, wiki-admin, wiki-controller, wiki-editor, wiki-reader
1,210
edits
Klalei Halacha: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Safek Safeka
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
## For example, if 3 lugin of sheuvim water fell into one of two mikvaot that are incomplete both are invalid since there's no reason to assume it fell into one of them more than the other one.<ref>Mishna Mikvaot 2:3, Rambam Mikvaot 10:2, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 201:68, Shach 201:142</ref> After the fact, if someone used one of these two mikvaot it is effective after the fact.<ref>Shach 201:148</ref> Some disagree.<ref>Chazon Ish Mikvaot Tinyana 10:2</ref> | ## For example, if 3 lugin of sheuvim water fell into one of two mikvaot that are incomplete both are invalid since there's no reason to assume it fell into one of them more than the other one.<ref>Mishna Mikvaot 2:3, Rambam Mikvaot 10:2, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 201:68, Shach 201:142</ref> After the fact, if someone used one of these two mikvaot it is effective after the fact.<ref>Shach 201:148</ref> Some disagree.<ref>Chazon Ish Mikvaot Tinyana 10:2</ref> | ||
## For example, if something asur midrabbanan fell into one of two pots and it is unknown which it fell into, both are forbidden.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 111:6</ref> | ## For example, if something asur midrabbanan fell into one of two pots and it is unknown which it fell into, both are forbidden.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 111:6</ref> | ||
==Safek Derabbanan Lkula when one didn't do anything== | |||
# Mishna Lmelech<ref>Bechorot ch. 4</ref> writes that safek derabbanan lkula only applies if he did something to permit the rabbinic prohibition. However, if he did nothing (dvar hamatiro) and there just is a safek, it is forbidden. However, Shaar Hamelech<ref>Mikvaot 10:6:1 and 7</ref> argues. Here are his proofs: | |||
## Gemara Brachot 21a states that if Shema is only derabbanan and there's a safek if someone said Shema he doesn't need to repeat it. That indicates that safek derabbanan lkula is applied even though it is possible that no action was taken. However, it is possible to answer for Mishna Lmelech that a rabbinic mitzvah is more lenient and this type of safek is sufficient. | |||
## Taz YD 69:24 writes that if someone doesn't remember if they salted a piece of meat before cooking it, it is permitted based on safek derabbanan lkula. Knesset Hagedola (Hagahot Bet Yosef 69:31) agrees. This implies that even though it is possible that no action was taken safek derabbanan lkula applies. | |||
## Gemara Pesachim 9a is clear that fruit which were untithed in the possession of a religious person who passed away and it isn't clear if the owner tithed them before he passed away are permitted. This is an application of safek derabbanan lkula even though it is possible that nothing was done to permit the prohibition. See Shaar Hamelech how he deflects this proof. | |||
## Ran and Rashba (Chullin Elu Terefot) write that food which is muchzak to be infested with bugs is forbidden even if it is cooked and perhaps the bugs dissolved. Seemingly, that indicates that safek derabbanan lkula does not apply if nothing was done to permit the prohibition. However, this can be because of the reason that safek cannot change a vaday or safek derabbanan does not apply if there's a chezkat isur. | |||
==Safek Safeka== | ==Safek Safeka== | ||
