Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators, wiki-admin, wiki-controller, wiki-editor, wiki-reader
1,210
edits
Tefisat Yedey Adam: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Unintentional and Non-Beneficial
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
==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>Rosh Mikvaot n. 5 holds that water drawn by a person is only invalid if it is drawn intentionally. Also, 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.</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. 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. </ref> | #Some rishonim hold that water drawn by a person is valid if it is unintentionally drawn into the mikveh.<ref>Rosh Mikvaot n. 5 holds that water drawn by a person is only invalid if it is drawn intentionally. Also, 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.</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. Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 201:39 imply this as well. 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. </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.</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.</ref> | ||
