MISC section - contents: Q May I give my baby a rattle to play with on Shabbat? The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 338:1) forbids use of musical instruments on Shabbat. The Rama (ad loc.) claims that this prohibition applies to all instruments that are intended for making noise, not necessarily music. The Biur Halacha (ad loc.) accepts this more stringent opinion and brings those who explain that this type of noise making is prohibited because it is a weekday-like activity. Clearly, according to all opinions, any prohibition in this matter is at most rabbinic. Is it permitted to let babies perform rabbinic prohibitions? Certainly, it is permitted to allow a baby, who is too young to understand the significance of his actions, to violate Shabbat or other prohibitions. (Regarding older children, see Orach Chayim 343). However, it is forbidden to "feed" prohibited things to children of any age (Yevamot 114a), and this is likely forbidden even from the Torah (see Beit Yosef, Orach Chayim 343). This applies to all types of Torah prohibitions, whether or not related to food, and it is forbidden even to tell children to perform prohibitions, even without actually feeding (Mishna Berura 343:1,5). However,the Ran (on the Rif, Yoma 1a) says that it is permitted to give children things which are prohibited only rabbinically when it is done for the welfare of the child. For that reason, he explains, the gemara (Yoma 78b) permits washing a child on Yom Kippur. Thus, as many babies enjoy and, thus, benefit from a rattle, the Ran would permit giving it to them on Shabbat. However, it is not altogether clear to what extent we accept the opinion of the Ran, as the Shulchan Aruch appears not to, and the matter may depend on how acute or mitzva-related the need is (see Biur Halacha, 343:1). Usually, rattles are not needed so acutely by babies, except those who are significantly calmed by them. However, if we put the two issues that we have discussed together, it is logical to be lenient. After all, we saw that a rattle used to make noise, not music, is permitted even for adults according to the Shulchan Aruch. Even if it is for- bidden, it is likely only because it is a mundane activity, a category of prohibition which likely does not apply to the activities of an infant. For this reason, the Shemirat Shabbat K'hilchata (16:3) permits giving a rattle to a baby (see also Shema Beni, siman 34). On the other hand, he does not allow the adult to shake the rattle for the infant unless the baby is very upset and the rattle calms him, in which case he permits shaking in an unusual manner (ibid. and footnote 11). The adult should hand it to the baby gently without shaking it (faint scratching sounds inside the rattle are not considered noise making). We should note that some do prohibit giving a rattle to a baby on Shabbat (see Tiltulei Shabbat, pg. 26, who forbids and implies in footnote 29 that Rav Moshe Feinstein was of that opinion). Even if one is to be strict on the matter, the rattle is not muktzeh, as it serves the baby, who certainly may independently use the rattle (ibid., footnote 28 in the name of Rav Feinstein). All should also agree that it is permitted to put the rattle in a place where he expects the child to find and use it (based on the story of R. Pedat, Yevamot 114a). Ask the Rabbi Q&A is part of Hemdat Yamim, the weekly parsha
sheet published by Eretz Hemdah. You can read this section or the entire Hemdat
Yamim at www.ou.org or www.eretzhemdah.org. And/or you can receive Hemdat Yamim
by email weekly, by sending an email to info@eretzhemdah.org with the message:
Subscribe/English (fortheEnglishversion)orSubscribe/Hebrew(for the hebrew
version). Please leave the subject blank. Ask the Vebbe Rebbe is partially
funded by the Jewish Agency for Israel "Rabbi," she said through her tears, "this is my only child, and
he is very ill." The woman went to the rabbi, R' Yitzchak Landau, and gave him the cloth. When the rabbi unwrapped it, he did not find any note. All that there was inside was a gold coin. He didn't understand what R' Shmelki meant by this. Until it dawned on him - there was a famous children's doctor, a professor of the university, in the city, who charged a gold coin for consultations. He told the woman: "Take the coin and go to the professor." SBH writes... First of all, Avraham's suggestion that a person who has a
persistent sore throat lasting several days should have a throat culture taken
to be sure that it is not strep is good advice. I am not very well acquainted
with Dr. Ben Asher personally, but having read his articles, he shows himself to
be a very knowledgeable and caring medical doctor. Therefore, I feel sure that
Dr Ben Asher would give this same advice to someone whose sore throat did not
respond to the treatment he was suggesting in his article. The reality is that
when one follows the advice of the Rambam, of blessed memory, they will find
that almost without exception the sore throat disappears within a day. I could give countless examples of people whose health was destroyed, many prematurely dying, through relying on radical surgery and drugs. While the advice of the Rambam as Dr. Ben Asher has shared it with us is gentle and sensitive - working with the laws of HaShem according to the way He has created us. Any illness is bound to improve if not disappear completely. There is no possibility whatsoever for someone to "harm themselves irreparably" through following Dr. Ben Asher's advice which he has drawn from the timeless wisdom of the Rambam. TT has for 11+ years offered us a great service in sharing with
us about every aspect of Jewish life, whether as it relates to the Halacha, our
davening, the calendar, our way of speaking, politics or rhinoceroses. In all
that you have shared with us, the source and foundation has been the Torah and
the wisdom of our Sages. In printing the very enlightening and helpful articles
of Dr Ben Asher you are continuing in your traditional faithful service to us.
Thank you. This Midrash is difficult. Yosef could, indeed, say that he was from the "land of the Hebrews." But Moshe could not make such a statement. He was an "Egyptian man". He traveled on an Egyptian passport. He had never set foot in the "land of the Hebrews". Moshe could perhaps have said that he was a Hebrew, but not that he was from the land of the Hebrews. Why then was he denied entry into the Land? In the eyes of R. Levi, to declare you are a Jew is equivalent to acknowledging the Land of Israel as your land. The connection between the Jewish people and the Land is an intrinsic, essential one. Therefore, had Moshe said, "I am a Jew," his declaration would have been an acknowledgment of the Land of Israel as his land. This he could very well have said, even though he traveled on an Egyptian passport. His failure to make such a statement reflected a weakness in Moshe' connection to the land. R. Nachman of Breslav said: "Wherever I go, I am going to Eretz Yisrael." Prof. Yehuda Gelman, Jerusalem For the new Pharoah who did not know Yosef - and preferred to ignore the critical contribution of the Jew to Egypt's survival (Sota 11a) - expresses the all-too-familiar paranoia of the anti-Semite: "Behold… the Children of Israel are more numerous and stronger than we." However, Par'o's ultimate pernicious intent is craftily disguised as he argues that while the Jews are too dangerous to keep, they are too important to lose. Like latter-day tyrants, Par'o forced the wretched slaves to show their "patriotism" by building cities to safeguard the country's wealth. And anticipating future oppression, the Jewish captives were forced to work in inhuman conditions that would become increasingly intolerable. Degradation was the goal as the marsh lands' soil caused monuments to sink and crumble over and over again (ibid). Like Hitler, Par'o proceeded in stages towards his aim of
extermination, from labor tax to orders to secretly kill babies to house
searches (Ramban). Now, as the true face of anti-Semitism rears its ugly head in
our times we might do well to remember these stark and bitter lessons. [The Parshat Sh'mot Homepage]
|
