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
→Nafka minah
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
**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. | **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. | ||
=== | == Creating a Mikveh by Drawing Water == | ||
#Drawing water into a mikveh using a vessel that isn’t susceptible to tumah is nonetheless tefisat yadey adam and invalid.<ref>Rashba (Meyuchasot 231) quotes the Raavad as holding that tefisat yadey adam is an issue even with a vessel that is punctured and doesn’t hold water. Shach 201:46 and Taz 201:27 agree. However, the Meiri Mikvaot 7:3 quotes some rishonim who hold that tefisat yadey adam doesn’t apply with drawing water with a punctured vessel. The Meiri writes that this approach is incorrect because of the Mishna Mikvaot 2:6. Zichron Yosef YD 13 is also strict.</ref> | |||
#Drawing water into a mikveh using a vessel that isn’t susceptible to tumah is nonetheless tefisat yadey adam.<ref>Rashba (Meyuchasot 231) quotes the Raavad as holding that tefisat yadey adam is an issue even with a vessel that is punctured and doesn’t hold water. Shach 201:46 and Taz 201:27 agree. However, the Meiri Mikvaot 7:3 quotes some rishonim who hold that tefisat yadey adam doesn’t apply with drawing water with a punctured vessel. The Meiri writes that this approach is incorrect because of the Mishna Mikvaot 2:6. Zichron Yosef YD 13 is also strict.</ref> | |||
==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 (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> | #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 with Shach. 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> | ||
==Connected to the Mikveh== | ==Connected to the Mikveh== | ||
| Line 67: | Line 66: | ||
==Kocho and Grama== | ==Kocho and Grama== | ||
#Some achronim think that some rishonim hold anything which doesn't come from a person's hand directly isn't ba al yedey adam, even though it comes because of his movement.<ref>Maharam Shik YD 196 proves this from Rambam, but shows that it isn't the opinion of Rosh, Rashba, Raavad, Tur, and Shulchan Aruch.</ref> However, the halacha is that water that comes because of a person's movement is called ba al yedey adam and is invalid.<ref>Shach 201:46, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=37194&st=&pgnum=260 Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Drush Vechiddush Ketavim)]</ref> | #Some achronim think that some rishonim hold anything which doesn't come from a person's hand directly isn't ba al yedey adam, even though it comes because of his movement.<ref>Maharam Shik YD 196 proves this from Rambam, but shows that it isn't the opinion of Rosh, Rashba, Raavad, Tur, and Shulchan Aruch.</ref> However, the halacha is that water that comes because of a person's movement is called ba al yedey adam and is invalid.<ref>Shach 201:46, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=37194&st=&pgnum=260 Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Drush Vechiddush Ketavim)], Chazon Ish (Mikvaot Tinyana 3:17)</ref> | ||
#Many achronim hold that removing a spigot or something else that was preventing the water from entering the mikveh isn't considered tefisat yad adam and is not sheuvim or havaya al yedey dvar hamekabel tumah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 214 s.v. umay, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1428&st=&pgnum=150 Maharash Engel 1:52], Taharat Mayim siman 24 quoting Darkei Teshuva 195, and Emek Sheylah YD 48, 57</ref> | #Many achronim hold that removing a spigot or something else that was preventing the water from entering the mikveh isn't considered tefisat yad adam and is not sheuvim or havaya al yedey dvar hamekabel tumah.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 214 s.v. umay, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1428&st=&pgnum=150 Maharash Engel 1:52], Chazon Ish (Mikvaot Tinyana 3:17), Taharat Mayim siman 24 quoting Darkei Teshuva 195, and Emek Sheylah YD 48, 57. Chatom Sofer says it is grama. Chazon Ish says it isn't an issue because he didn't pick up the water.</ref> | ||
#Using certain types of pumps where the water doesn't come immediately is considered grama and not tefisat yadey adam.<ref>Rabbi Akiva Eiger ([https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=37194&st=&pgnum=260 Derush Vchidush Ketamim]) writes that water pumped up by a person isn’t considered tefisat yadey adam since at the time of when one pulls up the pump nothing happens to the water directly. He calls it grama. This is quoted by the [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8197&st=&pgnum=215 Lechem Vsimla (210:145)] and Divrei Yosef p. 147-8. Zichron Yosef YD 13 is lenient regarding using a pump since it is a koach kocho which isn’t considered like a maaseh of a person.</ref> Also, even if the water comes immediately once the first gush of water is ba al yedey adam and the rest is considered grama.<ref>Chazon Ish Mikvaot Tinyana 3:17 writes that the water comes with koach rishon is considered coming because of a person, but water that comes with koach sheni (water that wouldn't come if the | #Using certain types of pumps where the water doesn't come immediately is considered grama and not tefisat yadey adam.<ref>Rabbi Akiva Eiger ([https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=37194&st=&pgnum=260 Derush Vchidush Ketamim]) writes that water pumped up by a person isn’t considered tefisat yadey adam since at the time of when one pulls up the pump nothing happens to the water directly. He calls it grama. This is quoted by the [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8197&st=&pgnum=215 Lechem Vsimla (210:145)] and Divrei Yosef p. 147-8. Zichron Yosef YD 13 is lenient regarding using a pump since it is a koach kocho which isn’t considered like a maaseh of a person.</ref> Also, even if the water comes immediately once the first gush of water is ba al yedey adam and the rest is considered grama.<ref>Taharat Mayim siman 24 quotes this from the Aruch Hashulchan 201:75.</ref> | ||
#A pump powered by wind or water to pump water into a mikveh isn't tefisat yad adam after the first gush of water.<ref>Chazon Ish Mikvaot Tinyana 3:17 writes that the water comes with koach rishon is considered coming because of a person, but water that comes with koach sheni (water that wouldn't come if the pump was opened and closed immediately) is grama.</ref> | |||
#Melting ice with hot metal boards isn’t an issue of tefisat yadey adam since it is grama.<ref>Maharsham 1:200 writes that melting ice with hot metal boards isn’t tefisat yadey adam since it is a grama. Chatom Sofer 1:200, Maharam Shik 196, and Nachal Eshkol 53 agree.</ref> | #Melting ice with hot metal boards isn’t an issue of tefisat yadey adam since it is grama.<ref>Maharsham 1:200 writes that melting ice with hot metal boards isn’t tefisat yadey adam since it is a grama. Chatom Sofer 1:200, Maharam Shik 196, and Nachal Eshkol 53 agree.</ref> | ||
#If the water was drawn into a mikveh using an indirect or delayed reaction according to some poskim it is valid as it wasn’t drawn by a person directly.<ref>See discussion of pump above. Rabbi Akiva Eiger in Drush Vchidush cited by Lechem Vsimla 201:145 and Divrei Yosef p. 147 held that grama doesn’t make tefisat yadey adam. Maharit 17 also writes that anything which is pushed only with a koach sheni it is considered a grama and not an issue of tefisat yadey adam. Therefore, he writes that water that was drawn from a river into a mikveh using a water mill with buckets that had holes in them is kosher. Zichron Yosef 13 also writes that koach kocho doesn’t create tefisat yadey adam. Ben Ish Chai in Hod Yosef 71 writes that koach sheni is a discussion by shechita and to avoid the opinion of the Tevuot Shor if it is a koach shelishi it isn’t considered tefisat yadey adam. Divrei Yosef p. 148 supports this approach by saying that as long as the water isn’t naturally drawn into the mikveh it is invalid.</ref> | #If the water was drawn into a mikveh using an indirect or delayed reaction according to some poskim it is valid as it wasn’t drawn by a person directly.<ref>See discussion of pump above. Rabbi Akiva Eiger in Drush Vchidush cited by Lechem Vsimla 201:145 and Divrei Yosef p. 147 held that grama doesn’t make tefisat yadey adam. Maharit 17 also writes that anything which is pushed only with a koach sheni it is considered a grama and not an issue of tefisat yadey adam. Therefore, he writes that water that was drawn from a river into a mikveh using a water mill with buckets that had holes in them is kosher. Zichron Yosef 13 also writes that koach kocho doesn’t create tefisat yadey adam. Ben Ish Chai in Hod Yosef 71 writes that koach sheni is a discussion by shechita and to avoid the opinion of the Tevuot Shor if it is a koach shelishi it isn’t considered tefisat yadey adam. Divrei Yosef p. 148 supports this approach by saying that as long as the water isn’t naturally drawn into the mikveh it is invalid.</ref> | ||
