Bots, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators, wiki-admin, wiki-controller, wiki-editor, wiki-reader
1,208
edits
Tefisat Yedey Adam: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Why is Tefisat Yadey Adam invalid?
| (8 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==Why is Tefisat Yadey Adam invalid?== | ==Why is Tefisat Yadey Adam invalid?== | ||
*The [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8785&pgnum=116 Raavad Baalei Hanefesh p. 116] (Bookwald 3:4 p. 147) quotes an opinion who explains that water drawn by a person is a form of sheuvim. He explains that in the Torah it never says that drawn water is invalid if it is placed in a vessel, it is invalid anytime it isn’t natural like a spring, whether the water is drawn with a vessel or by a person. From the last versions of Raavad it is clear that originally he treated the water completely like sheuvim that invalidate a mikveh with 3 lugin. However, in his conclusion he held that it is only invalid if majority of the mikveh is from this water, and it isn't completely like sheuvim. The Rash (Mikvaot 2:6) writes that the water a person draws is like sheuvim. Rashba (Torat Habayit Shaar Hamayim 5, p. 494), Rosh (Mikvaot 2:6), Rambam (Pirush Mishnayot 2:6), Trumat Hadeshen 254, Bet Yosef 201:15(4) agree that tefisat yedey adam | *The [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8785&pgnum=116 Raavad Baalei Hanefesh p. 116] (Bookwald 3:4 p. 147) quotes an opinion who explains that water drawn by a person is a form of sheuvim. He explains that in the Torah it never says that drawn water is invalid if it is placed in a vessel, it is invalid anytime it isn’t natural like a spring, whether the water is drawn with a vessel or by a person. From the last versions of Raavad it is clear that originally he treated the water completely like sheuvim that invalidate a mikveh with 3 lugin. However, in his conclusion he held that it is only invalid if majority of the mikveh is from this water, and it isn't completely like sheuvim. The Rash (Mikvaot 2:6) writes that the water a person draws is like sheuvim. Rashba (Torat Habayit Shaar Hamayim 5, p. 494, Teshuvot Meyuchasot Lramban 231), Rosh (Mikvaot 2:6), Rambam (Pirush Mishnayot 2:6), Trumat Hadeshen 254, and Bet Yosef 201:15(4) agree that tefisat yedey adam makes the water sheuvim. The translation of the Rambam in the Mechon Hameor edition of Rambam p. 564 fnt. 15 this point is even clearer. This is also the opinon of Mishnah Achronah 2:6, Tiferet Yisrael (Boaz 2:5), Aruch Hashulchan 201:120, Chelkat Binyamin 201:270, and Chazon Ish YD 130:9 explaining the Ramban, Rash, Rosh, and Rashba. | ||
*The Raavad himself says he doesn't think it is sheuvim but nonetheless invalid if you have intention to draw the water into the mikveh. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Bookwald edition p. 149) thinks this is a deoritta invalidation, while the fuller text seems to indicate that is only rabbinic (p. 149 fnt. 18). | *The Raavad himself says he doesn't think it is sheuvim, but nonetheless invalid if you have intention to draw the water into the mikveh. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Bookwald edition p. 149) thinks this is a deoritta invalidation, while the fuller text seems to indicate that is only rabbinic (p. 149 fnt. 18). | ||
*Zichron Yosef YD 13 explains that water that is drawn by a person is considered havaya al yadey dvar hamekabel tumah since a person is mekabel tumah. The invalidation is a derivation in Zevachim 25b. He explains that it is considered havaya al yadey dvar hamekabel tumah even if you’re not touching the water. His proof is that the Rosh Mikvaot 5:5 codified by Shulchan Aruch 201:48 writes that a person holding a board on which the water flows into the mikveh is havaya al yadey dvar hamekabel tumah. Taz 201:58 agrees that a person is mekabel tumah and would create this invalidation. This is evident in Mishna Parah 6:4. However, according to the rishonim and achronim above this isn't the only invalidation of tefisat yedey adam. | *Zichron Yosef YD 13 explains that water that is drawn by a person is considered havaya al yadey dvar hamekabel tumah since a person is mekabel tumah. The invalidation is a derivation in Zevachim 25b. He explains that it is considered havaya al yadey dvar hamekabel tumah even if you’re not touching the water. His proof is that the Rosh Mikvaot 5:5 codified by Shulchan Aruch 201:48 writes that a person holding a board on which the water flows into the mikveh is havaya al yadey dvar hamekabel tumah. Taz 201:58 agrees that a person is mekabel tumah and would create this invalidation. This is evident in Mishna Parah 6:4. However, according to the rishonim and achronim above this isn't the only invalidation of tefisat yedey adam. | ||
**Yet, according to the Rambam (Mikvaot 6:2 as pointed out by the Bet Yosef YD 201:48) this invalidation of havaya al yedey dvar hamekabel tumah is only true for mayim chayim and not a mikveh. | **Yet, according to the Rambam (Mikvaot 6:2 as pointed out by the Bet Yosef YD 201:48) this invalidation of havaya al yedey dvar hamekabel tumah is only true for mayim chayim and not a mikveh. | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
=== Proofs that it isn't an issue === | === Proofs that it isn't an issue === | ||
* The Mishna Mikvaot 2:7-9 says that it is permitted to turn over a kli that has non-sheuvim water in it to go into the mikveh. Why isn't that | * The Mishna Mikvaot 2:7-9 says that it is permitted to turn over a kli that has non-sheuvim water in it to go into the mikveh. Why isn't that tefisat yad adam? Maharam Shik 196 presents three answers to this question: | ||
** Rash says that it is hamshacha, which only according to the opinion that hamshacha works for a mikveh that's completely sheuvim. | ** Rash (Mikvaot 2:7) says that it is hamshacha, which only according to the opinion that hamshacha works for a mikveh that's completely sheuvim. | ||
** | ** Rambam (as understood by Maharam Shik YD 196) would answer that tefisat yad adam is only a problem if it comes directly from a person's hand and not if it comes from his koach (movement). | ||
** Chazon Ish (Mikvaot Tinyana 3:17) answers that tefisat yad adam is only a problem if he picks up the water and then pours it into the mikveh but not if he just pushes water into the mikveh. Similarly, pushing a kli over so that its water spills into the mikveh isn't tefisat yad adam. Igrot Moshe YD 1:120:5 agrees. | |||
** Chazon Ish (Mikvaot Tinyana 3:17) answers that tefisat yad adam is only a problem if he picks up the water and then pours it into the mikveh but not if he just pushes water into the mikveh. Similarly, pushing a kli over so that its water spills into the mikveh isn't tefisat yad adam. | * The Mishna Mikvaot 5:5 discusses a person having water run over his hand into a mikveh and only raises the issue of havaya al yedey dvar hamekabel tumah. Why isn't that tefisat yad adam? | ||
* The Mishna Mikvaot 5:5 discusses a person having water run over his hand into a mikveh and only raises the issue of havaya al yedey dvar hamekabel tumah. Why isn't that | |||
** Chazon Ish (Mikvaot Tinyana 3:17) answers that tefisat yad adam is only a problem if he picks up the water and then pours it into the mikveh but not if he just aids water to flow into the mikveh. | ** Chazon Ish (Mikvaot Tinyana 3:17) answers that tefisat yad adam is only a problem if he picks up the water and then pours it into the mikveh but not if he just aids water to flow into the mikveh. | ||
* The Mishna Mikvaot 6:3 allows three people to be tovel in three pits whose water join together because of the water displacement of the three people. Why isn't that | * The Mishna Mikvaot 6:3 allows three people to be tovel in three pits whose water join together because of the water displacement of the three people. Why isn't that tefisat yad adam? | ||
** Maharam Shik YD 196 answers that | ** Maharam Shik YD 196 answers that tefisat yad adam is only a problem if it comes directly from a person's hand and not if it come from his koach. | ||
* The Mishna Mikvaot 7:7 allows pushing water from inside a mikveh onto a stair upon which is a needle in order to purify the needle. Why isn't that | * The Mishna Mikvaot 7:7 allows pushing water from inside a mikveh onto a stair upon which is a needle in order to purify the needle. Why isn't that tefisat yad adam? | ||
** Tosfot Yom Tov answers that the water is always attached to the mikveh so it doesn't become invalidated because of | ** Tosfot Yom Tov answers that the water is always attached to the mikveh so it doesn't become invalidated because of tefisat yad adam. Even though Tosfot Yom Tov writes this with respect to the question of havaya al yedey dvar hamekabel tumah, Ben Ish Chai (Hod Yosef 71) writes this directly about tefisat yad adam. Shach 201:123 rejects this answer because Rosh allows pushing water onto the stair to purify the needle even if the water detaches from the mikveh as long as there's 40 seah in the water that detached. | ||
** Maharam Shik YD 196 answers that | ** Maharam Shik YD 196 answers that tefisat yad adam is only a problem if it comes directly from a person's hand and not if it come from his koach. | ||
*The Tosefta Mikvaot 3:2 writes that if a person has 3 lugin of water in his hair and he goes into an incomplete mikveh, the mikveh is valid. Why isn't that | *The Tosefta Mikvaot 3:2 writes that if a person has 3 lugin of water in his hair and he goes into an incomplete mikveh, the mikveh is valid. Why isn't that tefisat yad adam? | ||
**Rash (Mikvaot 2:6) answers that the mikveh is complete with 40 seah when the water from his hair went in. Therefore, the mikveh remains kosher. | **Rash (Mikvaot 2:6) answers that the mikveh is complete with 40 seah when the water from his hair went in. Therefore, the mikveh remains kosher. | ||
**According to Raavad 3:4, who holds that water that is moved by a person unintentionally isn't considered tefisat yad adam, this Tosefta can be explained that the water was there unintentionally. | **According to Raavad 3:4, who holds that water that is moved by a person unintentionally isn't considered tefisat yad adam, this Tosefta can be explained that the water was there unintentionally. | ||
| Line 51: | Line 50: | ||
**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 65: | ||
==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 | #Some achronim think that some rishonim hold anything which doesn't come from a person's hand directly isn't tefisat yad 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 tefisat yad 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)], Ben Ish Chai (Hod Yosef 71), 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 | #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 tefisat yad 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. Ben Ish Chai (Hod Yosef 71) quotes Dvar Moshe 24 who writes that koach kocho is not an issue for tefisat yad adam. His proof is from a person riding an animal isn't tefisat yad adam (Tosefta 3:3). The reason is that the water moving is koach kocho of the rider. Maharam Shik 196 brings the same proof. However, Ben Ish Chai rejects the proof because animals walk on their own, so the animal moving isn't because of a person. </ref> | |||
#An electric pump according to many poskim is considered tefisat yad adam.<ref>Har Tzvi 177 writes that an electric pump is tefisat yad adam as long as it is pumping and is not grama at all. See Minchat Yitzchak 1:146:16 who writes that using electricity to move water isn't such an issue of tefisat yad adam. Note, that he didn't write this to rule leniently on the issue. </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 | #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 kocho is a discussion by shechita and to avoid the opinion of the Tevuot Shor if it is a koach koach kocho 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> | ||
==Ice Machine== | ==Ice Machine== | ||
