MISC section - contents: Q: I did T'VILAT KEILIM for a metal pot with
plastic handles. I later noticed a sticker on a handle. Do I have to tovel
the pot again? There are two reasons to suggest that the handle
does not need to be tovelled. First, a plastic K'LI (utensil) does not
require T'VILA. Additionally, the handle does not come in contact with the
food, and only a K'LI SE’UDA (a utensil used in connection with a meal - see
Avoda Zara 75b) requires T'VILA. On the latter point, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh
Deah 120:12) rules that handles need to be immersed. However, there are
different ways to explain this halacha, which can cause different
conclusions regarding your question. A second possibility is that a handle is a secondary part of the K'LI. Just as one must tovel a K'LI that is part metal and part plastic in its entirety, so must he tovel the K'LI’s handle. Therefore, a CHATZITZA would be a problem on the handle as anywhere else. A third possibility assumes that the handle itself does not require T'VILA. However, if one let it stick out of the mikveh, we would say that the K'LI was not totally surrounded by water. How- ever, if the handle is immersed, even with a CHATZITZA, it is encompassed by water. Regarding the CHATZITZA, realize that the main part of the K'LI is unaffected by the CHATZITZA. After all, the water touches the entire surface except the place where the handle is connected to it. (The fact that the handle itself is not a CHATZITZA even if it is made out of a material that requires T'VILA is almost unanimously agreed upon; its rationale is beyond is beyond our present scope.) According to this approach, the sticker would not raise a problem. On this third point, there may be a MACHLOKET among recent POSKIM. There are appliances that hold and heat up a food or liquid, where the heating element is housed separately from the part that holds the food but is connected to it. Rav Feinstein (Igrot Moshe, YD I, 57-8) rules that one need immerse the appliance only up to the point that the receptacle reaches and can leave the electrical section protruding from the water. Minchat Yitzchak II, 72 argues, saying that this is not considered immersing the K'LI. Rav Feinstein apparently cannot accept the third possibility, for if the handle were considered a separate appendage, the Shulchan Aruch would not have required T'VILA. The Minchat Yitzchak can accept the third approach (whether he does is beyond our scope). Darkei Teshuva (120:96) addresses your case explicitly and requires removing the CHATZITZA before T'VILA. Several present-day works accept that opinion (Chelkat Binyamin 120:109; Hechsher Kelim (Edre’i) 7:2; T'vilat Keilim (Cohen) 5:5), and we found no one who argues. This is apparently in line with the second approach that the handle is like any other part of the K'LI. In truth, the Beit Yosef’s (YD 120) explanation for the need to tovel handles seems to concur. Although he does not discuss the case of a plastic handle, it is likely that he would agree with the Darkei Teshuva. Thus, although one could make the argument that a CHATZITZA on a plastic handle is not a problem, the consensus is that another T'VILA after removing the sticker is needed. [Ed. note: It is debatable whether a bracha is required for the reimmersion.] 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 (for the English
version) or Subscribe/Hebrew (for the hebrew version). Please leave the
subject blank. Ask the Vebbe Rebbe is partially funded by the Jewish Agency
for Israel In this context it is most important to realize that it is not the conventional understanding of a miracle which is of importance here. While nobody will deny that the splitting of the Red Sea was a violation of the laws of nature, this is not the source of its religious power or message. The most important quality of a miracle is not that it is supernatural, or super-historical, but that it is a moment which, even when it can be argued away in terms of science and brought into the nexus of nature and normal history, remains miraculous in the eyes of the person to whom it occurred. The real power of a miracle is that it is an astonishing experience of an event in which the current system of cause and effect becomes, as it were, transparent, permitting a glimpse of the sphere in which another unrestricted Power is at work. As such it destroys the security of all knowledge and undoes the normalcy of all that is ordinary. It is the abiding astonishment which is crucial. The religious person stands in wonder; no knowledge or cognition can weaken his astonishment. Any natural explanation will only deepen his wonder. It sin this sense that a historical miracle becomes a root experience and allows later generations to have access to it through its own experience. (If) it is possible for later generations to relive the experience, not because of what happened, but through the way it was perceived. The establishment of the State of Israel was no doubt an epoch-making event. It is again the completely astonishing nature of this event which stands out - the transformation of the earthliness of the Jewish people into a radically different situation. While miracles no doubt took place to enable it to happen, the most important religious dimension is again the abiding astonishment with this event in terms that could be expected especially after the events of the Holocaust. Only when the establishment of the State of Israel is seen in the light of the miracle at the Red Sea will its fascination continue. And this is exactly where the greatest danger towards Israel's continued existence lies. Just as we are informed that the miracle at the Red Sea lost its religious impact on the Israelites and normalcy became the call of the day, whereby the Israelites complained that God had left them, so we see a similar component at work in today's Israeli society and leadership. Just as the complaints concerning food and water took on a new impetus after the great miracle at the Sea, so we see a mentality of psychological denial and existential dullness in the State of Israel in which many people, but most of all its leadership, no longer understand the wonder of the State's very existence. And just as the Israelites in the desert paid a heavy price, so will Israeli society if it does not force itself once again to look through the clouds, see the miracle and rejuvenate itself through it. Rabbi Dr. Nathan Lopes Cardozo, Jerusalem His relatives, though, tried to dissuade him from becoming involved, because he might himself get into trouble if he went to the authorities. "Listen," said R' Chaim. "That it is a mitzva to
ransom captives is a definite fact - a vadai. It is a fact, too - a vadai,
that the woman is in great distress. As far as my getting into trouble, that
is a matter of doubt - a safek. And are we not told that a safek has no
status when it stands against a vadai?" 2) Why does G-d say BEHOLD I SHALL RAIN DOWN FOR YOU BREAD FROM HEAVEN, in second person, and then switch to third person stating AND THE NATION SHALL GO OUT AND GATHER? (16:4) 3) What prompted Moshe to send Yehoshua,
specifically, to be the one to lead the soldiers into battle with Amalek?
(see 17:9) 2) The Beit Yosef answers that G-D is teaching us that the entire world may be maintained for the sake of one or two righteous people like Moshe and Aharon as indicated by the use of second person. As a result, the rest of the world - in third person - will benefit and receive food as well. 3) The Chofetz Chayim explains that the Torah
describes Yehoshua as a person who learned Torah all the time. Our Sages
teach that Amalek attacked the Jewish people because they loosened, they
were lax to some degree in their Torah study. Thus, it was fitting that
Yehoshua, armed with the merit of his devotion to Torah study, be the one to
lead the fight against Amalek. This coming week is TU BiShvat, "the birthday of the trees" and in this week's sedra we also see an interesting episode with a tree. (Sh'mot 15:22-25) The Jewish nation arrived in Mara, a place where the water was bitter, after they had traveled for three days in the desert without any water. The people were very thirsty and complained "to Moshe". They felt he was a bad leader who didn't know the ways of the desert and didn't know how to find water there. When Hashem answered Moshe's prayer for water, He didn't just give the nation drinkable water, instead He gave Moshe a tool, the tree, (or part of it) which he threw in the water and which made the water sweet. In this way the nation would maintain some respect for Moshe and treat him as their leader for the continuation of their journey. What type of tree was this that Moshe threw in the water? In the Mekhilta various Rabbis give their opinion regarding the type of tree; a willow, olive, fig, pomegranate, or oleander. Some say the particular tree was used, because it was sweet and throwing something sweet into the bitter water would sweeten it. The Tanchuma, on the other hand, says no, the tree was actually very bitter and this was a miracle within a miracle. A bitter thing (the tree) was used to get the bitterness out of the water. There is also disagreement about if the tree always had this quality to sweeten bitter water, as even today you can see some desert tribes that sweeten bitter wells by throwing in plants to neutralize the salts. Or did Hashem make a special miracle for this particular place. Ramban learned that this tree always had this quality because the verse says, VA'YO'REIHU - "He taught him" and not VA'YAEEI'HU - "he showed him". Hashem taught Moshe the special qualities of this tree so that he would be able to manage in the desert in other places as well. From this episode we can learn to appreciate Hashem's wisdom in the plants that He created - that they have in their nature to give life or death, to heal or to make someone sick or to make something bitter or sweet. This is one of the lessons of TU BiShvat in our times to appreciate and celebrate the blossoming of Eretz Yisrael, its growth, the uniqueness of the fruits, and nature itself. [Originally Tu B'Shvat, (the time of the year where most of the trees in Israel have blossomed and one can see the beginnings of the fruit), was only the "new year" of the trees. It is the cut off date to count the years of a tree to know to which year a fruit belongs in order to perform certain "mitzvot tied to the land of Israel". The verse in D'varim 14:22 talking about t'rumot umaasrot (tithes) says :ASER T'ASER....SHANA SHANA. The Rabbis learned from this verse that in a certain year you are obligated to give tithes from fruits that were grown that year. How do you count the years of a fruit? Sometimes, TU BiShvat is the cutoff date. But throughout the generations, TU BiShvat has gained other significances as well. It has become a day to celebrate the blossoming of Eretz Yisrael, its growth, the uniqueness of the fruits in the land and nature itself. The ARI HaKadosh decreed that people should eat fruit on TU BiShvat as a symbol that man is participating in the "celebration of the trees." (That's why we don't say Tachanun.) This eating has even become a Seder, with a Hagada (Pri Etz Hadar) where some people even drink 4 cups of wine, eat 50 fruits including one new one for Shehecheyanu.] When celebrating with the trees on TU BiShvat, we should remember the ultimate tree - the Torah, our tree of life. EITZ CHAIM HI LA'MA'CHAZIKIM BAH. This Shabbat most people will be serving fruit for TU BiShvat - include olives, figs, pomegranate as a remembrance of the tree in the desert. People in the Diaspora would try hard to get a
fruit especially from Israel for TU BiShvat. Nowadays people in Israel end
up eating dried fruits that come from the Diaspora. Here is a recipe to make
fruit leather from fresh fruits from Israel so you don't have to buy dried
fruits from Chu"l. It takes about 1-2 days so it might not be ready for
Shabbat, but might be for TU BiShvat. It seems that at the point where the bodies of the Egyptian soldiers laid sprawled at their feet, the Jewish people's faith in G-d was stamped for all time. At that moment, the Mechilta teaches us, even a simple maidservant perceived a higher degree of revelation than that of the prophet Yechezkiel in his heavenly vision. No wonder then that the people sang Shirat HaYam, the "Song of the Sea". The Artscroll commentators depict the Song as harmoniously bringing together the notes, instruments and participants in Hashem's symphony of Creation. The surrealistic and momentous events that preceded Yetzi'at Mitzrayim now merged with the extant miracles associated with the demise of Egypt. The resultant song melded all the apparently unrelated and contradictory phenomena into a coherent and comprehensible whole. Accordingly, the use of the future tense ("Yashir") to describe the singing preempts the time when we, with comparative perception, will play out the last incisive drum beats of the unfinished divine drama. Shabbat Shalom, Menachem Persoff [The Parshat B'shalach Homepage]
|
