Podcasts about summary one

Maran writes in Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 4) that one must ensure not to touch a vat of beer in the morning before washing Netilat Yadayim, as doing so could cause one to lose the beer. The Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan, 1839-1933) explains that since there is Tum'a (impurity) on one's hands when he wakes up in the morning, touching food can cause it to become Tameh, which can have detrimental effects. One must therefore avoid touching food before washing his hands in the morning. The Halachic authorities write that if one did touch food before washing his hands in the morning, he should put it under water three times, and then it may be eaten. This applies even to vegetables that one normally peels, like cucumbers. Despite the fact that one touched only the peel, which in any event will be removed, the vegetable must be rinsed three times before it is eaten. Some writers raised the question of why this method of eliminating Tum'a does not work in the case of garlic that was left without its peel overnight. The garlic in this case should not be eaten, as it contracts Tum'a overnight, and the Poskim do not offer the solution of rinsing the garlic the three times. The work Arsot Haim explains that one cannot compare different forms of Tum'a and evil spirits. A method that is effective for eliminating one kind of Tum'a is not necessarily effective with regard to a different kind, and thus although a food that has been touched before Netilat Yadayim may be rinsed and eaten, this solution cannot be used in the case of garlic that had been left overnight without its peel. The Mishna Berura writes that one should also refrain from smelling tobacco snuff before washing Netilat Yadayim in the morning, for two reasons: 1) he causes the snuff to become Tameh by touching it; 2) smelling snuff involves touching the nostril, and it is forbidden to touch the openings of one's body before washing Netilat Yadayim. Summary: One should ensure not to touch any food or drink before washing his hands in the morning. If he did touch food before washing his hands, he should wash it three times and it may then be eaten.

It is customary to remain awake throughout the night of Shabuot and immerse oneself in Torah study. According to Sephardic practice, one who remains awake the entire night does not wash Netilat Yadayim with a Beracha the next morning. One may thus continue learning even after Amud Ha'shahar (daybreak) on Shabuot morning, and one does not have to stop to wash his hands. There is no requirement to interrupt one's learning to wash his hands at Amud Ha'shahar. However, it is proper to stop at Amud Ha'shahar to recite Birkat Ha'Torah. According to some authorities, the recitation of Birkat Ha'Torah in the morning covers a person's Torah study only until Amud Ha'shahar the next morning, even if he does not go to sleep. Therefore, those who remain awake throughout the night on Shabuot should stop at Amud Ha'shahar to recite Birkat Ha'Torah, and then return to their studies. One should recite Keri'at Shema Al Ha'mita – the bedtime Shema – even if he remains awake all night. Therefore, on Shabuot night, one should ensure to recite the bedtime Shema before Hasot (midnight as defined by Halacha). Our custom in any event is not to recite the Beracha of "Ha'mapil" on any night, but the rest of the text of Keri'at Shema Al Ha'mita should be recited before Hasot even on the night of Shabuot. Summary: One who remains awake on Shabuot night should nevertheless recite Keri'at Shema Al Ha'mita before Hasot, without the Beracha of "Ha'mapil" (which in any event is never recited according to our custom). At Amud Ha'shahar, one should stop to recite Birkat Ha'Torah. One does not have to wash Netilat Yadayim at Amud Ha'shahar.

The Hid"a (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806), in his work Abodat Ha'kodesh (listen to audio recording for precise citation), writes that one must make a special effort on Shabuot morning, after staying awake through the night, to pray properly. Many people tend to doze during the prayer service on Shabuot morning, such that they do not recite the words properly, skip sections of the service, and certainly do not concentrate on the meaning of the words. The Hid"a writes that "Yasa Secharam Be'hefsedam" – these people lose their reward for learning throughout the night by failing to pray properly in the morning. After staying awake studying Torah throughout the night, one must make an effort to remain fully awake and alert during the prayer service on Shabuot morning so he can pray properly. It should be noted that the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) viewed the period of Sefirat Ha'omer as an extended Tikkun ("repair" of spiritual imperfections in the upper worlds) that begins on the second night of Pesah and reaches its culmination in the Musaf prayer on the first day of Shabuot. Accordingly, the Shaharit and Musaf prayers on Shabuot morning are laden with spiritual significance, and it is critical for one to recite these prayers properly. One who sleeps through these prayers, or does not recite them as he should, runs the risk of forfeiting the spiritual achievements of the entire Omer period. Therefore, it is critical after staying awake on Shabuot morning to muster all one's strength to pray properly on Shabuot morning. One who suspects that he will be unable to remain awake and alert through the end of the Musaf prayer should recite Shema and then take a nap. It is preferable to complete the prayer service later, after sleeping and rejuvenating oneself, than to risk dozing during the Tefila. When is the earliest time for reciting Shaharit on Shabuot morning? Generally speaking, one should not recite the Amida prayer of Shaharit before sunrise (Netz Ha'hama). On Shabuot morning, however, some authorities permit congregations to begin the Amida before sunrise. Since it is very difficult for people to pray properly after remaining awake throughout the night, there were some who held that the prayer may be recited earlier to help ensure that everyone will be able to properly pray the entire service. This is the ruling of the Peri Megadim (492) and the Mishna Berura (89:1, and in Sha'ar Ha'siyun 5). There are many congregations that nevertheless ensure to wait until sunrise before beginning the Amida on Shabuot morning, and though this is certainly an admirable custom, those who pray the Amida before sunrise certainly have authorities on whom to rely. Indeed, the practice of Hacham Baruch Ben Haim was to pray the Amida before sunrise on Shabuot morning, and, as mentioned, this practice is perfectly acceptable. This is the ruling of Rabbi Karp in his work Hilchot Hag Be'hag (p. 132; listen to audio recording for precise citation). It should be noted that congregations that recite the Amida before sunrise on Shabuot morning must ensure not to recite Shema before the earliest time for Shema, which occurs approximately 10-15 minutes after dawn. (Generally, however, by the time these congregations reach the Shema prayer, that time has already passed.) Summary: One must make a special effort to remain awake and alert throughout the prayer service on Shabuot morning after remaining awake through the night. If one suspects that he will be unable to remain awake and pray properly throughout the service, it is preferable to recite Shema, take a nap, and then complete the prayer service properly. Although the Amida of Shaharit generally should not be recited before sunrise, some congregations have the custom of reciting the Amida on Shabuot morning before sunrise in consideration of the difficulty entailed in remaining awake and alert throughout the prayer service. This is certainly an acceptable practice.

It is customary to remain awake throughout the night of Shabuot and immerse oneself in Torah learning. The Shela (Rabbi Yeshaya Horowitz, 1565-1630) records a famous incident that occurred during the times of Maran (Rabbi Yosef Karo, author of the Shulhan Aruch, 1488-1575) that underscores the importance and inestimable value of this custom. He and several colleagues remained awake throughout the night of Shabuot studying Torah, and in the middle of the night, a heavenly voice announced to them that their learning was bringing indescribable delight and enjoyment to the heavens. However, the voice added, if they had a Minyan studying together, then they would bring even greater joy to the heavens, and their learning would attain an even higher level. Maran related this incident to the people the next day, and on the second night, they assembled a Minyan and again remained awake throughout the night. And that night, too, a voice burst forth from the heavens emphasizing the immense joy they brought to the Almighty. This incident demonstrates the unique importance and significance of this practice, and the profound impact it has upon the upper worlds. The custom is to read the special "Tikkun" which appears in Keri'eh Mo'ed. One should not belittle the importance of this reading. Even though it consists of simple verses and passages, this is a time-honored custom that should be respected and followed. The "Tikkun" generally takes approximately 2-3 hours (depending, of course, on the speed at which it is read), and after one completes the reading, he is certainly allowed and encouraged to study Gemara or any other area of Torah that he wishes to learn. Everyone should make a point of observing this ancient custom, and it is advisable to rest on Ereb Shabuot so that one will be able to remain awake throughout the night. It must be noted, however, that this custom which has been observed for generations certainly did not entail remaining awake throughout the night and then sleeping the entire next day. This accomplishes nothing other than reversing night and day, which has no value whatsoever. Undoubtedly, the custom was – and should be – to remain awake throughout the night, sleep a few hours after Shaharit to regain one's strength, and then learn Torah during the day. This is, without question, the way the custom was practiced, and this should be our practice, as well, each year on Shabuot. Summary: One should make every effort to observe the time-honored tradition to remain awake studying Torah on the first night of Shabuot, and to rest before the onset of Yom Tob to help him remain awake during the night. One should read the traditional "Tikkun" and then spend the remaining hours studying whichever area of Torah he chooses. One should not sleep the entire next day; he should instead sleep for several hours to regain his strength and then continue studying Torah.

**Today's Halacha is dedicated f or the refuah and haslacha of Ronnie, Sharon, Eli and all the children of CARE** How does traveling affect the Misva of Sefirat Ha'omer, and what are the procedures for counting when traveling? Needless to say, if one travels within the same time zone, his counting is unaffected. He should count during the nighttime, as usual, either in his place of origin, at his destination, or in the plane. There is no requirement to count the Omer specifically in the synagogue or at home. Similarly, if one travels from New York to California, for example, his flight should not affect his count. If he leaves in the late afternoon, then he counts the Omer that night in California. A slightly more complicated situation arises when one flies from New York to the Far East during the period of the Omer, such that he loses a day. Let us consider the example of a person who takes a Monday night flight that arrives in Hong Kong on Wednesday. On Monday night, of course, he counts as usual with a Beracha. If that night is the 32nd day of the Omer, for example, then he recites the Beracha and counts the 32nd day as usual. If he is aware when the flight crosses the International Date Line, and he sees that it is nighttime, such that it is Tuesday night at his current location, then he may count the 33rd day with a Beracha. If this is too difficult for the traveler, as he cannot precisely determine when he crossed the Date Line, or he is unsure whether it is during the night when this occurs, then he should delay the counting until he arrives in Hong Kong on Wednesday during the day. He should then count the 33rd day without a Beracha, just as one does whenever he misses a counting at night but then counts during the following day. He may then resume counting with a Beracha the next night – the 34th day of the Omer – since he did not miss an entire day of counting. Thus, when one travels to the Far East and crosses the International Date Line, he has the option of either counting with a Beracha during the flight, at nighttime, after he crosses the Date Line , or waiting until he arrives at his destination during the day and counting without a Beracha. Either way, he resumes counting the next night with a Beracha. When one returns from the Far East, then he simply counts in the Far East the night he leaves, and then counts again the next night when he returns home. Needless to say, if, as a result of crossing the Date Line, he returns home on the same day on which he had counted the Omer, he does not count again, and instead waits until the next night. Summary: One who travels to the Far East during the period of the Omer has the option of either counting the Omer with a Beracha during the flight, at night, after crossing the International Date Line, or waiting until arriving at his destination, during the day, in which case he counts without a Beracha. In either case, he counts as usual with a Beracha henceforth.

**Today's Halacha is dedicated f or the refuah and haslacha of Ronnie, Sharon, Eli and all the children of CARE** The Rishonim (Medieval Halachic authorities) debate the question of whether a person can fulfill his obligation of Sefirat Ha'omer by listening to the Hazan's counting. The famous Halachic principle of "Shome'a Ke'one" establishes that a person can fulfill his obligation to recite a certain text by listening to its recitation by somebody else. So long as both parties – the person reciting the text and the listener – have in mind that the listener fulfills his obligation by hearing the recitation, he indeed fulfills the requirement in this fashion. Seemingly, then, if the Hazan has in mind when he counts the Omer that his recitation should fulfill the obligation for those listening, those in the congregation who wish to fulfill the Misva by listening to the Hazan's counting should be able to do so. Some Rishonim, however, claimed that Sefirat Ha'omer marks an exception to the rule of "Shome'a Ke'one." The Torah presents the obligation to count the Omer with the expression, "U'sfartem Lachem" ("You shall count for yourselves" – Vayikra 23:15), which suggests that it refers to a personal obligation, like the Misva of Lulab on Sukkot. If so, then one would be required to count personally, just as one must take the Lulab personally. The word "Lachem" ("for yourselves") in this verse emphasizes that each individual must count for himself, rather than hear the counting from somebody else. Other Rishonim, however, counter that the word "Lachem" means something else entirely. One might have thought that the obligation of Sefirat Ha'omer is cast solely upon Bet Din, who should count the days until Shabuot on behalf of the rest of the nation. The word "Lachem" was therefore added to instruct that each individual bears this obligation. This is not to say, however, that the standard principle of "Shome'a Ke'one" does not apply. In light of this debate, it is proper for each individual to personally count the Omer, rather than simply listen to the Hazan's counting. It must be emphasized that the Hazan customarily counts aloud before the congregation not so that the congregation fulfills its obligation through his counting, but rather to inform everybody of which number day they must count that night. Interestingly enough, the custom in Egypt was, at one point, for the congregation to count before the Hazan, in order to avoid the misconception that one can fulfill his obligation through the Hazan's counting. The Egyptian communities changed their practice, however, because people frequently counted the wrong day. In any event, one must ensure to count the Omer himself, rather than rely on the Hazan's counting. Summary: One must count the Omer personally; the Hazan customarily counts the Omer aloud before the congregation only to inform them of which number day to count, and not for them to fulfill their obligation by listening to his counting.

The "Ke'ara" is the plate which we keep on the table throughout the Seder, and it contains all the special foods eaten at the Seder. One should ensure that the plate contains all the foods throughout the Seder. Meaning, after one partakes of the Karpas, for example, he should keep some leftover Karpas on the Ke'ara. Even though one has already passed that stage of the Seder, it is important that the Ke'ara has on it all the foods, even the Karpas. The salt water, into which one dips the Karpas, does not have to be on the Ke'ara. The custom in our community is to eat specifically celery, which is the food denoted by the word "Karpas." This is the custom that one should follow, as the word "Karpas" alludes to the "Perech Samech" – the backbreaking labor endured by the 600,000 Israelite men in Egypt. Furthermore, Rav Haim Vital (1543-1620) taught that the according to Kabbalah, the numerical value of the word "Karpas" (360) is very significant and alludes to different Names of the Almighty. Before eating the Karpas, we wash our hands the way we do before eating bread. That is, we pour water three times on the right hand and then three times on the left hand. The only difference is that no Beracha is recited upon this washing. It should be noted that the requirement to wash before Karpas relates to a general Halacha that is not connected specifically to Pesah. All year round, before one eats a fruit or vegetable that is moistened with a liquid, he must first wash his hands, without a Beracha. For example, people generally wash grapes and apples before eating them. Assuming the fruit is still wet when one eats it, he must first perform Netilat Yadayim, without a Beracha, before eating. We therefore wash our hands before eating the Karpas which is dipped in salt water. The Kaf Ha'haim laments the fact that most people are unaware of this Halacha, and they wash Netilat Yadayim before Karpas but not before eating wet foods other times during the year. We dip the Karpas in salt water in order to do something unusual that will arouse the children's curiosity at the Seder. Normally, at that point in the meal we eat bread. When they see that we instead dip celery in salt water, they will find this unusual and ask questions. There are also many Kabbalistic concepts underlying the dipping of Karpas, so one must ensure to properly observe this and all customs at the Seder in accordance with tradition. Several works mention the importance of saying or singing the names of the various stages of the Seder (Kadesh, U'rhatz, Karpas, Yahatz, etc.). Before one begins each stage, he should say or sing all the stages starting from Kadesh, and then stop upon reaching the current stage. Before Karpas, for example, one would recite, "Kadesh, U'rhatz, Karpas." The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) expounded upon the Kabbalistic significance of each of these words. One must not belittle or neglect these or other traditional customs, as they are all based upon profound, underlying meaning and wisdom. Summary: One washes Netilat Yadayim without a Beracha before Karpas and anytime he prepares to eat a food that is wet. One should use specifically celery for Karpas. After eating the Karpas, one should still make sure that some Karpas remains on the Seder plate. It is proper before each stage of the Seder to state all the stages from Kadesh until the current stage.

There is a widespread custom to eat a hardboiled egg at the Pesah Seder, in order to commemorate the Korban Hagiga (the "festival sacrifice"). During the times of the Bet Ha'mikdash, the Hagiga offering was brought together with the Korban Pesah (paschal offering) on Erev Pesah, and one would partake of its meat prior to eating the meat of the Korban Pesah. We commemorate this practice by eating an egg, the traditional food of mourning, in order to express our sorrow over the absence of the Mikdash, on account of which we are unable to fulfill the Misvot of the holiday as we should. An interesting question arises regarding this Halacha in a case where Erev Pesah occurs on Shabbat, such that the Seder is held on Mosa'e Shabbat. During the times of the Mikdash, when Erev Pesah fell on Shabbat the Korban Hagiga was not offered on that day. Although the offering of the Korban Pesah overrides the Shabbat restrictions, this is not true of the Korban Hagigah, and thus when Erev Pesah fell on Shabbat the Korban Hagigah was not brought together with the Korban Pesah. Perhaps, then, in such a case we should not partake of an egg at the Seder in commemoration of the Hagiga sacrifice. Tosefot address this question in Masechet Pesahim, and they conclude that one must, in fact, eat an egg at the Seder even on Mosa'e Shabbat. They cite Rabbenu Peretz (France, 13th century) as explaining that if we would not eat an egg in this case, we would give the impression that in other years we actually partake of the Hagiga sacrifice, rather than a symbolic commemoration. This impression was especially likely in communities that would eat meat – rather than an egg – to commemorate the Korban Hagiga. In order to avoid giving this impression, we eat the egg at the Seder even in situations where the Korban Hagiga would not be offered, thus making it clear that the egg serves merely as a symbolic commemoration. The Rosh (Rabbi Asher Ben Yehiel, Germany-Spain, 1250-1327) cites a different theory in the name of Rabbi Yishak of Courbeil (the "Samak," France, 13th century). He suggested that one should eat an egg at the Seder even on Mosa'e Shabbat because when Erev Pesah occurred on Shabbat the Hagiga was offered on Friday. Since the Hagiga was brought even in years when Erev Pesah fell on Shabbat – albeit on the previous day – it is appropriate to include a commemoration of this sacrifice at the Seder. The Rosh, however, rejects this theory, noting that when the Hagiga was brought on Friday, its meat would no longer be permissible for consumption on Mosa'e Shabbat. Seemingly, then, there should be no reason to commemorate the Hagiga at the Seder on Mosa'e Shabbat. In any event, in light of the comments of Tosefot cited above, Halacha requires partaking of a hardboiled egg at the Seder even on Mosa'e Shabbat. This is indeed the ruling of the Ben Ish Hai (Rabbi Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), the Kaf Hahayim, and the Mishna Berura (commentary to the Shulhan Aruch by Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan, 1839-1933). Summary: One should eat a hardboiled egg at the Seder to commemorate the Hagiga sacrifice, even when the Seder is held on Mosa'e Shabbat.

If a person keeps a charity box in his home and occasionally places money in the box on behalf of a charitable institution, may he borrow money that had been placed in the box and then return it later? It occasionally happens that a deliveryman comes and a person needs small change for a tip. Is it permissible to take some money from the Sedaka box and then repay the money at a later point? Some authorities allow taking money from the Sedaka box if one immediately writes a check for that amount to the institution on whose behalf he keeps the box in his home. In this way, he is not considered borrowing Sedaka, since he right away gives the same amount as he takes. Others, however, disagree, arguing that a check is not equivalent to cash, and therefore in such a case one does, indeed, take money from charity even if he writes a check right away. The Pitchei Teshuva (commentary to the Shulchan Aruch that cites rulings of later authorities), in Hilchot Sedaka (259), cites the work "Chamudei Daniel" as permitting one to borrow money from a charity box. The Chamudei Daniel explains that since this has become accepted, there is a presumed condition that the money placed in the box does not transfer ownership until it reaches the intended recipient. What more, it is common for people who borrow money from a charity box to return more than they took, and the Shulchan Aruch explicitly allows investing charity money if it will likely yield a profit on behalf of the needy recipients. Thus, by allowing people to borrow money from the charity box we increase the amount of charity distributed to the needy and to charitable institutions, and it should therefore be permissible. Nevertheless, the work "Sedaka U'mishpat" recommends that one stipulate when he begins placing money in the charity box that the money does not attain the formal status of Sedaka money until it reaches the intended recipient. In this way, there is no concern at all if one wishes to borrow money from the box and repay it in the future. Some authorities have noted, however, that if one makes such a stipulation then he does not fulfill the Misva of Sedaka immediately when placing the money in the box; since the money becomes Sedaka money only upon reaching the intended recipient, one fulfills the Misva only at that point. Some authorities claim that one can overcome this problem by stipulating that the money indeed becomes Sedaka money when it is placed in the box, but that it does not enter the ownership of the recipient until the money actually reaches him. In any event, according to strict Halacha, it is permissible to borrow money from a Sedaka box even if one had not made such a stipulation. It should be noted that according to all views, one may exchange bills and larger coins for small coins in a Tzedaka box. Since one gives the precise equivalent of what he takes, this is entirely permissible according to all opinions. Therefore, one may, for example, place a dollar bill in a Tzedaka box and take four quarters. Summary: One may borrow money that had been placed in a charity box and then repay the money at a later point. Some authorities advise making a stipulation when one first begins placing money in a Tzedaka box that the money becomes Tzedaka money only when it reaches the intended recipient. According to all authorities, one who needs small change may exchange bills and large coins for the equivalent in small coins taken from a Tzedaka box.

If a minor or gentile immerses one's new utensil in a Mikveh, does this immersion suffice to render the utensil permissible for use with food? According to all authorities, an adult may allow a Jewish minor who has reached the age of Torah education (seven or eight years of age) to immerse a utensil under the adult's supervision. In such a case, the minor may even recite the Beracha before the immersion. If, however, a minor claims to have immersed a utensil without adult supervision, then, according to the Ben Ish Chai (Rabbi Yosef Chayim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), the child is not trusted and the utensil still requires immersion. Chacham Ovadia Yosef, however, distinguishes in this regard between metal and glass utensils. With regard to metal utensils, which require immersion on the level of Torah obligation, one should not trust a minor who claims he immersed it. Glass utensils, however, require immersion only by force of Rabbinic enactment, and one may therefore trust the child's claim and the utensil need not be immersed before use. As for gentiles, one should preferably not allow a gentile to immerse one's utensil on his behalf, because he would thereby forfeit the recitation of the Beracha. One cannot recite the Beracha over the immersion if a gentile immerses the utensil. Therefore, in order not to forfeit the opportunity to recite the Beracha, one should preferably immerse the utensil oneself. However, if a gentile did immerse one's new utensil in a Mikveh in front of the Jew, and even if the utensil fell into the Mikveh by itself, the immersion is effective and the utensil may then be used without an additional immersion. Summary: One may allow a child who has reached the age of Torah education (7-8 years of age) to immerse a new utensil under adult supervision, and the child may recite the Beracha. If a child claims he immersed a metal utensil privately, the utensil still requires immersion; if he claims to have immersed a glass utensil, it does not require immersion. One should preferably not allow a gentile to immerse one's utensil, but if a gentile did immerse the utensil in front of the Jew, it does not require another immersion. See Halichot Olam, Helek 7, pages 262-263

If a Jew spends Shabbat in a hotel, may he partake of the freshly-brewed coffee that the non-Jewish hotel staff prepared on Shabbat? The authorities who address this question make reference to a ruling of the Shulhan Aruch regarding food that a gentile prepared on Shabbat for other gentiles. In such a case, the Shulhan Aruch rules, a Jew may partake of the food only in situations of a special need. Generally, however, one should not partake of the food, even though the gentile had prepared it for other gentiles, and not for the Jew. Accordingly, the Ben Ish Hai (Rabbi Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in Parashat Teruma, rules that a Jewish hotel guest may not drink the coffee that the hotel staff prepared, even if he can assume that most of the hotel guests are not Jewish. Others, however, including the Zera Emet (Rabbi Yishmael of Modona, Italy, 18th century) and the Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806), distinguish between the Shulhan Aruch's ruling and the case under discussion. The Shulhan Aruch spoke of bread which gentiles prepared on Shabbat. The flour used in preparing this bread was inedible when Shabbat began, and thus had the status of Mukse. For this reason, these authorities contend, the Shulhan Aruch did not allow partaking of the bread on Shabbat. Since the flour was Mukse when Shabbat began, it is forbidden for consumption throughout Shabbat even once it is made into bread. In the case of coffee, however, the water was suitable for consumption when Shabbat began, and thus did not have the status of Mukse. Regarding coffee, then, it is likely that the Shulhan Aruch would allow drinking coffee that was prepared on Shabbat by a gentile – provided, of course, that it was not prepared specifically for a Jew. Accordingly, Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in his Halichot Olam commentary to the Ben Ish Hai, rules that those who wish to be lenient and partake of the coffee in such a situation certainly have authorities on whom to rely. (He adds that the work Gedulat Elisha similarly rules leniently in this regard.) Hacham Ovadia notes, however, that one should not stand near the gentile making the coffee, as the gentile may then add more coffee specifically for the Jew. One may partake of the coffee only if it had already been prepared before the Jew arrived in the dining hall or wherever the coffee is served. It should be noted that one may not drink cappuccino prepared in a hotel on Shabbat, as cappuccino is generally prepared for each guest individually, and not collectively for all guests in the hotel. Finally, it goes without saying that the Jew must ascertain that all the ingredients in the coffee are strictly kosher. Summary: One who stays in a hotel on Shabbat may drink the coffee that was prepared by a gentile for the hotel guests on Shabbat, provided that most of the guests are not Jewish and that the coffee was not prepared specifically for him (or any other Jew). He should not stand near the gentile preparing the coffee, and should instead arrive at the area only after the coffee is prepared. Obviously, he must also ensure that the coffee is strictly kosher.

The Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933), in Siman 242 (Se'if Katan 9), writes that if somebody receives from another person some food for Shabbat, he should not eat that food on a weekday. Since the food was sent specifically in honor of Shabbat, it should be eaten on Shabbat. The Halachic authorities debate the question of whether this ruling was intended as strict Halacha, or as a Middat Hasidut (additional measure of piety). Either way, the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Israel, 1870-1939) writes (in Se'if Katan 18, citing the Sefer Hasidim) that if one has no need for this food, such as if he already has enough food for Shabbat, and if he leaves it until the next Shabbat it would go spoiled, or if he is not accustomed to eating this kind of food on Shabbat, then he may eat it on a weekday. Certainly, it is permissible to taste the food on Friday in fulfillment of the Misva of "To'ameha Haim Zachu" (tasting food on Ereb Shabbat to ensure its quality). The work Piskeh Teshubot notes that this Halacha mentioned by the Mishna Berura applies only to food that one received from somebody else. If this food was earmarked for Shabbat, then it should not be eaten on a weekday. If, however, a person himself purchased food for Shabbat, he may change his mind and use it during the week. Proof may be drawn from the Gemara's famous description of Shammai, who would sometimes find a higher quality portion of food after making his purchases for Shabbat, and in such cases he would use the first portion during the week and designate the second, higher quality portion for Shabbat. This proves that one who purchased a piece of food for Shabbat may change his mind and use it during the week. And although in the case of Shammai he changed his mind only after finding a higher quality piece of food, it stands to reason that this applies even generally, and thus one who purchased some food for Shabbat is allowed to change his mind and eat it on a weekday. Summary: One who purchased a food for Shabbat may change his mind and eat it on a weekday. However, if somebody was sent food from another person specifically for Shabbat, he should not eat it on a weekday unless he does not need it for Shabbat and it would go spoiled if it is saved until the next Shabbat.

The Talmud (Berachot 54b) teaches us that four people must say the HaGomel blessing, i.e., those who travel through the desert, those who travels overseas, those who are released from prison, and those who were sick and feel better. Sometime, on Shabbat, there are many people who need to say HaGomel. Can one person say HaGomel for the other people in the congregation? Does each person need to make his own blessing? R. Ovadia Yosef, in Hilchot Tu Bishvat (Hazon Ovadia, Hilchot TuBishvat page 354) cites the Hatam Sofer (OH 51) who explains that the Birkat HaGomel does not follow the Korban Todah, i.e. the thanksgiving korban. Had it been modeled after the Korban Todah, each and every person would have to say the blessing. However, since it is not based upon the Korban Todah, one person may say the blessing for the entire congregation, even if they have different reasons from say the HaGomel blessing. Summary: One person, who is himself obligated to say the Birkat HaGomel, may say it for the entire congregation, regardless of their reasons for saying the blessing.

There are three conditions that must be met for one to be allowed to separate on Shabbat: 1) He must separate the Ochel (desirable food) from the Pesolet (undesirable substance), and not the other way around; 2) this must be done by hand, and not with a utensil; 3) this must be done just before the food is to be eaten, and not for later use. The reason why Borer is permitted for immediate use is because it is then considered part of the process of eating. Just as chewing is obviously allowed on Shabbat, and does not violate the prohibition of Tohen (grinding), similarly, separating the desirable food from the undesirable substance is permitted as part of the process of eating. It is therefore allowed immediately before eating, but not earlier. How soon before the meal must this be done? When do we consider the Borer (separation) as taking place "immediately" before the meal such that it is permissible? This issue is subject to debate among the Halachic authorities. The Bet Yosef (commentary to the Tur by Maran Rav Yosef Karo, author of the Shulhan Aruch), in Siman 319, cites the Mordechi (Rav Mordechai Ben Hillel, Germany, 1250-1398) as saying that as long as the separating is done within an hour of the meal, this suffices to allow Borer. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in Parashat Beshalah (1), takes this ruling literally, and permits separating food up to an hour before the food is to be served. Others, however, explained the Mordechi differently, claiming that he did not actually refer to a full hour before the meal. The Shebet Halevi (Rav Shemuel Wosner, contemporary) claimed that the Mordechi meant a half-hour before the meal, and thus one may separate only until a half-hour before the food is going to be served. Others rule even more stringently. Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001), in his work Menuhat Ahaba (vol. 2), notes that from the beginning of the Mordechi's comments, it appears that he requires the separating to be done immediately before the food is served. This is the ruling accepted by Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in Hazon Ovadia (p. 180, Halacha 5; listen to audio recording for precise citation), where he writes that Borer is allowed only if it is done within a few minutes of the meal. Hacham Ovadia notes that this was the position of the Hazon Ish (Rav Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz, 1878-1953), who ruled that separating may be done no earlier than five minutes before the meal. He adds that in a situation where one is preparing a very large meal for a large number of people, and many foods need to be prepared, then one may begin the preparations already a half-hour before the meal is scheduled to be served. In an ordinary case, however, when a woman is preparing a meal for her family and simply needs to peel some fruits or vegetables, and perhaps separate the leaves of lettuce from the spoiled leaves, this should be done only within a few minutes of the meal, and no earlier. This means that a woman should not do separating in preparation for Shabbat lunch before she goes to the synagogue on Shabbat morning. Of course, other preparations are permitted early in the morning, but preparations involving Borer may not be done earlier than a few minutes prior to the meal, or within a half-hour if many guests will be attending, as discussed. Summary: One is allowed to separate desirable food from an undesirable substance on Shabbat if this is done by hand and within a few minutes of the meal when it will be served. If one needs to prepare for a large meal with many guests, then the separating may be done within a half-hour of the meal, but no earlier.

If a person eats on Shabbat a salad that contains, for example, lettuce, tomatoes and onions, and he does not like onions, he may not remove the onions from the salad. Halacha forbids removing on Shabbat Pesolet (an undesirable substance) from Ochel (a desirable substance), and this applies even to a "relative Pesolet," a food which is perfectly edible but one does not want to eat. Therefore, the person in this case would have to take the lettuce and tomatoes from the salad, rather than removing the onions. However, if there is somebody else at the table who enjoys eating onions, one may remove the onions from his salad to give them to that other person. Since he removes the onions not to discard them, but rather for somebody else to eat, this is considered separating Ochel from Ochel, which is entirely permissible on Shabbat. This is the ruling of Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in Hazon Ovadia – Shabbat (vol. 4, p. 188, in the annotation). If some pieces of lettuce in the salad are spoiled, one may not remove them from the salad, as this would constitute separating Pesolet from Ochel. This is the ruling of the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in Parashat Beshalah (2:6; listen to audio recording for precise citation). However, the Ben Ish Hai adds, if one is taking leaves from a head of lettuce, and the outer leaves are spoiled, he may remove them in order to access the fresh leaves underneath them. Just as one may remove a peel of a fruit in order to access the edible part of the fruit, similarly, one may remove the spoiled lettuce in order to access the desirable leaves. Since this is done in order to facilitate eating, it is permissible and does not violate the prohibition of Borer. Hacham Ovadia Yosef (ibid. p. 191) rules that it is permissible on Shabbat to check leaves of lettuce for bugs, and if one finds a large bug, he may remove it. Since the bug is not mixed with the lettuce, but rather constitutes an independent entity, removing it from the leaf is not considered "separating." Nor is this forbidden on the grounds of Mukseh, because it is permissible to remove an item normally considered Mukseh if this is necessary to access food. Hacham Ovadia notes in this context the Halacha permitting removing a bug from a cup of wine on Shabbat (under certain circumstances). The Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles of Cracow, 1525-1572) writes (302:1) that it is permissible on Shabbat to remove feathers from one's garment, as this does not constitute "separating." Similarly, if pieces of food fall onto one's beard as he eats, he is permitted to remove them from his beard, as this is not regarded as "separating." Summary: One who is eating a salad may not remove the vegetables that he does not want to eat, unless he does so to give them to somebody else who wants to eat them. One may not remove spoiled pieces of lettuce from a salad on Shabbat, but one may remove spoiled leaves from a head of lettuce if this is necessary to access fresh leaves. It is permissible to check leaves of lettuce for bugs on Shabbat, and to remove bugs that are found.

One of the rules of Borer – separating foods on Shabbat – requires that one remove the Ochel (food) from the Pesolet (undesirable substance), and not the other way around. The question arises as to whether this Halacha applies to two perfectly edible foods, one of which one happens to dislike. If for example, a person has a pile of apples and oranges mixed together, and he likes apples but does not like oranges, must he ensure to remove the apples from the oranges? Must he consider the oranges "Pesolet" because he dislikes them, or are both fruits considered Ochel since they are both perfectly edible, such that he may separate them in whichever manner he chooses? This issue is subject to a dispute among the Rishonim (Medieval Halachic scholars). Tosafot (Talmud commentaries by Medieval French and German scholars), in Masechet Shabbat (74), write that the status of Pesolet is defined in relative terms, and thus even edible food would be considered Pesolet if one dislikes it. Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki of Troyes, France, 1040-1105), however, appears to indicate that the status of Pesolet is defined by an intrinsic quality, and thus edible food cannot be considered Pesolet. Maran, in the Shulhan Aruch (319:3; listen to audio recording for precise citation), rules that if two edible foods are mixed together, one may separate them in whichever manner he chooses. As long as one separates by hand and with the intention of eating immediately, he may either remove the food he likes or the food he dislikes. Maran thus follows the view of Rashi, that an edible food does not have the status of Pesolet even if one happens to dislike it. The Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles of Cracow, 1525-1572), however, in his glosses to the Shulhan Aruch, indicates that in such a case one must remove the food he likes, in accordance with Tosafot's opinion. The Be'ur Halacha (essays on the Shulhan Aruch by Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) discusses this topic at length, noting that the Shulhan Aruch's formulation of this Halacha is based upon the Rambam (Rabbi Moshe Maimoindes, Spain-Egypt, 1135-1204), who likewise indicates that edible food which one dislikes is not considered Pesolet. In this context the Be'ur Halacha cites numerous Halachic authorities who follow this view, and maintain that when two edible foods are mixed together, one may separate them in whichever fashion he chooses, even removing the food he does not like from the food he likes. Nevertheless, the Be'ur Halacha concludes that since this issue involves a potential Torah violation, it is preferable to follow the stringent view and remove the food one likes from the food he does not like, and not the other way around. Even though the majority view among the Halachic authorities does not appear to require separating in this fashion, it is preferable to do so in order to avoid any possible violation of the Torah prohibition of Borer. This is the view taken by Sephardic Chief Rabbi Shelomo Amar, in his responsa Shema Shelomo (Orah Haim 10). Summary: One should follow the laws of Borer even when separating two edible foods, one of which he dislikes. Even though both foods are edible, it is preferable to ensure to remove the food he likes from the food he does not like, and not the other way around.

In Siman 682, The Shulhan Aruch outlines the Halachot of inserting the special Hanukah addition of "Al Hanissim" in the Tefilot and Birkat Hamazon. One issue is whether it is permissible for the Shliah Sibbur to remind the congregation to insert "Al Hanisim" in the middle of Arbit. Does announcing "Al Hanisim", after the Kaddish before the Amidah, constitute a Hefsek (interruption) of the Tefila? In Siman 236:2, Maran rules that it is permissible to do so for "Ya'aleh V'Yavo" on Rosh Hodesh. The Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) there adds that this applies to "Al Hanisim" on Hanukah as well. The Ner Sion, agrees with this, according to the letter of the law, since it is done "L'sorekh Tefila"-for the purpose of prayer, it is not considered a Hefsek (interruption). The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) in Parashat Pekudeh brings down that this was the custom of some communities. However, the accepted custom is not to announce "Al Hanisim," but rather, the first person to reach "Al Hanisim" in the silent Amidah raises his voice to remind the rest of the congregation. If one forgot to insert "Al Hanisim" in the Amidah, he is not required to repeat the Amidah. The Poskim discuss whether it is better to skip "Al Hanisim" in order to complete the Amidah in time to recite the "Nakdishach," which according to some authorities is a fulfillment of the Torah obligation to sanctify God's name. Their conclusion is that one should continue to pray the full text of the Amidah and not skip "AL Hanisim" since that is the Misva that he is currently engaged in. If one inserted the "Al Hanisim in the wrong place, for example he said it in the beracha of "Reseh," where Ya'aleh V'Yavo is usually inserted, he must say it again in the correct place-the Beracha of "Modim." The Sha'ar Ha'siyun (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) in 682:2 rules that the insertion of "Al Hanisim" in the wrong place does not constitute a Hefsek (interruption) that would require him to repeat the entire Amidah. The Hachamim did not institute a Hanukah insertion in Beracha "Me'en Shalosh"-the Beracha after snacks, and there is much discussion as to why that is. There are numerous variant versions of the text of the "Al Hanisim." Hacham Ovadia held that it should begin "V'Al Hanisim," whereas Hacham Bension held that the custom is to say "Al Hanisim." Some have the custom to say "Bimeh Matityah," without a Vav, instead of MatityahU. Some say "Matatyah," as is written in the Siddur "Kol Yaakov." However, our custom is to say "Matityah," which is the prevailing version. Some have the reading "L'Hashkiham," instead of "Le'shakeham." Some say "Toratach," as opposed to those who say, "MiToratach." Some say "Hashmona'ee," as opposed to those who read "Hashmonai." Each person should follow his tradition. SUMMARY One should not announce "Al Hanissim" during the Tefila to remind the congregation. "Al Hanisim" should not be skipped in order to finish the Amida in time to answer Nakdishach. If one inserted "Al Hanisim" in the wrong place, he must say it again in its proper place. There are many variant versions of the text of "AL Hanisim," and everyone should follow their tradition.

The Shulhan Aruch, in Orah Haim (672), writes that the proper time for lighting the Hanukah candles is the "end of sunset," or Set Ha'kochavim – nightfall (listen to audio recording for precise citation). Practically speaking, this means that one should light the Hanukah candles fifteen minutes after sundown. One should make an effort to light the candles no earlier or later than this time. If one cannot light the Hanukah candles at the preferred time, he may light them later during the night. The Magen Abraham (Rabbi Abraham Gombiner, Poland, 1637-1683) was of the opinion that a person who returns home late at night lights the Hanukah candles without the Berachot, unless there is somebody else awake in the home who sees the lighting. Otherwise, according to the Magen Abraham, the Berachot are not recited, since there is no Pirsum Ha'nes (publicizing of a miracle) in such a situation. Other authorities, however, including Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer (Baghdad-Israel, 1870-1939) and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Israel, 1910-1995), in Shalmeh Mo'ed (p. 218), disagreed. In their view, one may recite the Berachot over the candle lighting even if nobody else witnesses the lighting. This is the view accepted by Hacham Ovadia Yosef. Preferably, however, one should wake up one or two members of his household so they can witness the lighting. Many people are unable to light the Hanukah candles at the preferred time because of professional obligations, and therefore end up lighting later, when they return home from work. However, people who must light the candles later for work-related reasons must ensure to light at the proper time on Sundays, or other days when they are not at work. Even if somebody must light later at night on workdays, he must make a point of lighting at the proper time whenever this is possible. It should be noted that the practice in most Yeshivot and Kollelim is that the students leave when the time for candle lighting arrives so they can return home and light at the proper time, and they then return to the Yeshiva or Kollel to resume their studies. One is obligated to place enough oil in the lamp to sustain the flame for at least a half-hour. There is a custom that was famously observed by the Brisker Rav (Rav Yishak Zev Soloveitchik of Brisk, 1889-1960) to add a larger amount of oil to the Hanukah lamps, so that they continue burning late into the night. The Brisker Rav felt that since nowadays there are people walking about outside even until the late hours, it is proper to have the Hanukah candles burn until the late hours of the night to publicize the miracle. However, even he conceded that this is not required according to the strict Halacha, which requires simply providing enough oil for the candles to burn for a half-hour. It is forbidden to begin eating a "Se'udat Keva" ("established meal") before one lights the Hanukah candles. The prohibition begins a half-hour before the preferred time for lighting (assuming one plans on lighting at the preferred time). Thus, for example, if sundown occurs at 4:30 PM, such that the preferred time for lighting is 4:45, it would be forbidden to begin eating a meal from 4:15. A "Se'udat Keva" for the purposes of this Halacha refers to a quantity of a Kabesa (approx. 2 oz.) or more of bread. It is thus permissible to eat a small snack or have a drink before lighting the Hanukah candles, but it would be forbidden to eat a slice of pizza, for example. Halacha also forbids studying Torah before lighting the Hanukah candles. This prohibition, however, begins only once the time for candle lighting arrives; one may learn Torah within a half-hour before the time for candle lighting. Summary: One should endeavor to light the Hanukah candles fifteen minutes after sundown; if this is not possible, one may light later during the night. One must supply enough oil to sustain the flame for a half-hour, though some have the custom to add larger amounts of oil. One should not begin eating a meal within a half-hour before the time for lighting Hanukah candles until he lights, and one should not learn Torah once the time for candle lighting arrives, until he lights.

The custom is to light the Menorah in the Bet Knesset with Berachot. On Friday, it is lit, before Minha, once a Minyan is present. On Mosa'eh Shabbat it is lit during Arbit before the Kaddish Titkabal, before people rush home. This custom was not recorded in the Gemara, but it was accepted by the Shulhan Aruch. The question is whether a Menorah should be lit also at public gatherings, such as parties, restaurants and conferences, outside of a Bet Knesset. Hacham Bension was very strict on this matter. He reasoned that even lighting in a Bet Knesset with a Beracha is a Hidush, and therefore it should not be expanded upon to other contexts. On the other hand, Hacham Ovadia was more lenient. He ruled that the Bet Knesset is only an example of a public gathering, but the custom could be applied to other venues as well. This is especially applicable if some people at the event will not be lighting on their own at home. It can be assumed that at a wedding with hundreds of people, some people will not be lighting at home. In addition, he rules (Yalkut Yosef English Edition) that a Menorah may be lit at a Minyan not taking place in a Bet Knesset, such as a Minha/Arbit Minyan in an office. In this disagreement between Hacham Bension and Hacham Ovadia, one may rely on Hacham Ovadia. SUMMARY One may light a Menorah with Berachot at public gatherings, if there are people there who may not light on their own. Similarly, a Menorah may be lit at a Minyan in an office.

The Shulhan Aruch rules (671:5) that one must light an additional candle, called a Shamash, alongside the other Hanukah candles. This insures that any benefit one may receive from the light of the Menorah, in essence, is derived only from that extra candle, and it is therefore permitted. However, the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) cites the Kab HaYashar who holds that even the Shamash may not be benefitted from. Hacham Ovadia adamantly rejects this and explains that the entire purpose of the Shamash is to benefit from its light. The Be'ur Halacha (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) brings Rashi's explanation that a Shamash is lit for a "HeKera"-to distinguish. That is, it is designed to demonstrate that the candles are lit for the Misva, and the other candle, the Shamash, is for light. Even if he does not need to use the light of a candle, he must show that he has other options if the need would arise. Accordingly, he continues, since the Menorah is no longer lit on the table, but rather by the windows or doors, it is clear that the lighting is for the Misva. Therefore, technically, there would be no need for the Shamash. All the more so today, the use of electric lights shows that the Hanukah lights are only for the Misva and not for light. Nevertheless, he concludes that the prevalent custom is that everyone lights an additional candle. There is a significant difference between the way Ashkenazim and Sepharadim use the Shamash. The Ashkenazim use the Shamash to light the other candles, and since it is used to serve the other candles, it is clearly not one of the Hanukah lights. Sepharadim, on the other hand, use candles to light the Shamash, and therefore it is not evident that the Shamash is not one the Hanukah candles. Therefore, one should put the Shamash higher, lower or off to the side of the other candles to show that the Shamash is not part of the Hanukah candles. The Be'ur Halacha (Siman 673) points out another difference between the Sepharadim and the Ashkenazim. According to the Sepharadim, even though the Shamash is lit, one may not benefit from the candles; he may only use the light of the Shamash. Per the Ashkenazim, the Rama rules that through the lighting of the Shamash, all the candles become permitted to benefit from. In any event, it is best to refrain from benefiting from the Menorah. Benefit refers to practical uses such as reading and counting money, but it is permitted to gaze at the candle to derive aesthetic pleasure. SUMMARY One must light a Shamash, even if he has electric lights. One should refrain from benefiting from the Menorah but may benefit from the Shamash. The Shamash should be placed in a different position than the rest of the candles.

The Torah introduces the command of Birkat Ha'mazon with the verse, "Ve'achalta Ve'sabata U'berachta" – "You will eat, you will be satiated, and you shall bless" (Debarim 8:10). The Sages understood the word "Ve'sabata" in this verse as referring to drinking – specifically, to drinking wine. On this basis, they established that even one who drank wine during his meal, and is in a state of inebriation, is required to recite Birkat Ha'mazon. Since the Torah speaks in this context of somebody who drank wine, we may deduce that such a person is required to recite Birkat Ha'mazon despite his state of intoxication. When it comes to prayer, one who is inebriated to the point where it would be disrespectful for him to speak to a king, because he cannot pronounce his words clearly, may not pray. With regard to Birkat Ha'mazon, however, the Torah allows – and requires – one to recite this blessing even in a state of inebriation, as long as he is able to recite the words. Summary: One who drank wine during his meal and is inebriated must nevertheless recite Birkat Ha'mazon, as long as he can pronounce the words, even if he cannot speak as clearly as usual.

If a person eats cereal with milk, which Beracha – or Berachot – does he recite? If, for example, the Beracha over the cereal itself is Mezonot, as is often the case, does the person recite only Mezonot, only She'hakol (the Beracha over milk), or both? The Gemara in Berachot establishes that when a person eats two foods together, he recites a Beracha over only the primary food, and this Beracha covers the secondary food, as well. Even though the secondary food independently would require a different Beracha, when it is subordinate to a primary food the Beracha over the primary food covers this secondary food, as well. Our question thus becomes, do we consider the milk subordinate to the cereal, or is the cereal deemed subordinate to the milk? Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (Russia-New York, 1895-1986) addresses this question in his work Iggerot Moshe (2:43), and he concludes that the milk is to be viewed as subordinate to the cereal. Since the milk serves to soften the cereal and make it easier to chew and swallow, as well as to enhance the cereal's taste, it clearly plays a secondary role. Therefore, one who eats a grain cereal with milk recites only the Beracha of Mezonot, which covers both the cereal and the milk. Rabbi Feinstein adds that even if some milk remains after one has eaten all the cereal, and he now wishes to drink the remaining milk, he does not recite She'hakol over the milk. Since the milk had been together with, and subordinate to, the cereal, it was covered by the Beracha recited over the cereal, and therefore it does not require its own Beracha. Similarly, if a person eats apple pie, he recites only the Beracha of Mezonot, which covers both the crust – the primary component of the pie – and the apples. And even if one completes the crust and now eats only apple, he does not recite a Beracha over the apple, because it had been covered by the Beracha of Mezonot recited initially over the crust. Rabbi Feinstein notes one exception to his ruling concerning the Beracha recited over cereal and milk. If a person adds a significant amount of milk to his cereal for medical purposes, such as to increase his daily calcium intake, then the milk now serves a function other than simply enhancing the texture or taste of the cereal, and as such, it requires a separate Beracha. In such a case, therefore, one would recite Mezonot over the cereal and She'hakol over the milk. If a parent adds milk to a child's cereal for health purposes, but the child perceives the milk simply as enhancing the cereal, without any interest in the health benefits, then the child would not recite She'hakol over the milk, since from his perspective the milk is added to enhance the cereal's taste, and not for any intrinsic purpose. If a person adds bananas, raisins, or other fruits to his cereal and milk, does he recite a separate Beracha over the fruit, or does the Mezonot recited over the cereal cover the fruit, as well? Once again, we follow the principle that the Beracha recited over the primary food covers all other foods partaken of together with that food. In this case, then, since the fruit is subordinate to the cereal, the Mezonot recited over the cereal covers even the fruit. It should be noted, however, that if a person decided to add the fruit only after he recited the Beracha of Mezonot, then he must recite a separate Beracha over the fruit. Since he did not intend when he recited Mezonot that this Beracha should apply to the fruit, when he adds the fruit he must recite a separate Beracha. However, if a person regularly adds fruit to his cereal and milk, then we assume that he had the fruit in mind when he recited the Mezonot, and thus even if he added the fruit only after reciting Mezonot he need not recite a separate Beracha over the fruit. Summary: One who eats cereal with milk recites a Beracha over the cereal, and this Beracha covers the milk, as well, including leftover milk that one drinks after finishing the cereal. An exception is a person who adds milk for strictly health purposes, who must recite a separate Beracha of She'hakol over the milk after reciting the Beracha over the cereal. The Beracha recited over cereal also covers fruits that one adds to his cereal, assuming he had those fruits in mind when he recited the Beracha. If one added the fruit only after reciting the Beracha and he does not ordinarily add fruit, then he must recite a separate Beracha over the fruit.

The Shulhan Aruch rules (Orah Haim 206) that if a person recited the Beracha of "Boreh Peri Ha'etz" over a food that requires the Beracha of "Boreh Peri Ha'adama," he has not fulfilled his obligation, and he must then recite "Ha'adama." Something that grows directly from the ground – such as lettuce or other vegetables – cannot be said to have grown on an Etz ("tree"), and thus even after the fact, the recitation of "Ha'etz" does not fulfill the obligation, and the correct Beracha must be recited. In the reverse case, if one recited "Ha'adama" over a fruit which requires "Ha'etz," he has fulfilled his obligation Be'di'abad (after the fact). Since fruits grow on trees which grow from the ground, the Beracha of "Ha'adama" is appropriate for fruits, even though of course one is supposed to recite "Ha'etz" over fruits. Therefore, after the fact, one has fulfilled his obligation if he recited "Ha'adama" over a product requiring "Ha'etz." It is unclear whether a person who recited "Ha'adama" in such a case and then immediately realized his mistake should correct himself, or just eat the fruit. Some contend that since the Beracha of "Ha'adama" suffices after the fact, there is no need for the person in this case to correct himself. Others, however, argue that the person should correct himself in order to recite the Beracha that is supposed to be recited. This question has not been definitively resolved one way or the other. In a case where one mistakenly recited "Ha'adama" over a fruit, the Beracha covers all foods on the table that require "Ha'adama." Thus, for example, if a person recited "Ha'adama" over an apple, and there are vegetables on the table, then he does not have to recite "Ha'adama" a second time over the vegetables. Although his Beracha of "Ha'adama" was recited by mistake, nevertheless, it covers all the vegetables in front of him. This applies also to one who mistakenly recited "She'ha'kol" over a food requiring a different Beracha. The Beracha of "She'ha'kol," after the fact, covers all foods. And so if one mistakenly recited "She'ha'kol" over a fruit, for example, his Beracha covers the fruit as well as any other foods in front of him, such as water. This is mentioned by Yalkut Yosef, citing his father, Hacham Ovadia Yosef. Finally, the Radbaz (Rav David Ben Zimra, Egypt, 1479-1573) ruled that if one mistakenly recited "Ha'adama" over a fruit, and other people at the table listened to his Beracha with the intention of fulfilling their obligation, they fulfill their obligation even though the Beracha was recited mistakenly. This can happen on the night of Rosh Hashanah, when the head of the household customarily recites "Ha'etz" over an apple or date for everyone at the table, who fulfill their obligation by listening to his Beracha. If he mistakenly recited "Ha'adama" over the fruit, both he and they have fulfilled the obligation. This is the Radbaz's ruling, and it was accepted by later Poskim. Summary: One who mistakenly recited "Ha'etz" over a food requiring "Ha'adama" has not fulfilled his obligation, and must then recite "Ha'adama." However, if a person mistakenly recited "Ha'adama" over a food requiring "Ha'etz," he has fulfilled his obligation. (If he realized his mistake immediately after reciting "Ha'adama," it is uncertain whether he should correct himself.) This recitation of "Ha'adama" covers all foods on the table requiring "Ha'adama," and if others intended to fulfill their obligation by listening to this Beracha, they, too, fulfill their requirement, even though the Beracha was not the proper Beracha.

The AJC's Greg Bluestein, Patricia Murphy and Bill Nigut analyze Harris's defeat, Georgia's GOP strategy, and Democratic challenges     Summary:  One week after Election Day, the political landscape in Georgia is shifting, with both parties assessing their next moves. On today's episode of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution's Politically Georgia podcast, hosts Greg Bluestein, Patricia Murphy and Bill Nigut speak with incoming DeKalb County CEO Lorraine Cochran-Johnson. She shares her insights on Vice President Kamala Harris's loss and its impact on Georgia Democrats, along with her goals for DeKalb County's first 100 days under her leadership. Republican strategist Stephen Lawson joins the podcast to discuss Donald Trump's return to the White House and the priorities that Georgia Republicans are likely to push forward in the upcoming legislative session. Finally, we explore the fallout within the Georgia Democratic Party after recent losses, as pressure mounts for leadership changes. We'll examine what these developments mean for Georgia's political future.      Links to today's topics  Incoming DeKalb CEO prepares transition team Georgia Democrats consider "course correction" after losing 2024 presidential race Donald Trump is likely to look to Georgia as he builds out his White House team Have a question or comment for the show? Call the 24-hour Politically Georgia Podcast Hotline at 770-810-5297. We'll play back your question and answer it during the listener mailbag segment on next Friday's episode.     Listen and subscribe to our podcast for free at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also tell your smart speaker to “play Politically Georgia podcast.”     Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

One who plans on eating a Ke'besa – approximately 2 oz. – or more of bread must wash Netilat Yadayim with a Beracha. Within how much time after washing his hands must he eat this quantity of bread in order to justify the Beracha that he recited over the Netilat Yadayim? Normally, when Halacha requires the consumption of a Ke'zayit (half a Ke'besa), it requires that one eat the Ke'zayit within a time-frame known as "Kedeh Achilat Pares," which, according to Hacham Ovadia Yosef, is 7.5 minutes. In the case under discussion, then, when one must eat twice this amount, each Ke'zayit must be eaten within 7.5 minutes. Moreover, there must be less than a 7.5-minute interruption between the consumption of the two Ke'zetim. And thus, for example, if a person eats the first Ke'zayit in six minutes, and then three minutes later he begins eating the second Ke'zayit, which he eats in about four minutes, then he has justified the Beracha he had recited. But if a person eats the first Ke'zayit, and then waits until the end of the meal before eating the second Ke'zayit, he has not eaten a Ke'besa within the required time-frame, and the Beracha he recited over Netilat Yadayim thus becomes illegitimate. It is therefore advisable after washing Netilat Yadayim to eat the full quantity of 2 oz. of bread immediately, without any delay, to ensure that the Beracha he had recited is valid. This Halacha appears in Yalkut Yosef – Berachot, vol. 2, p. 77 (in the footnote). Summary: One recites the Beracha over Netilat Yadayim only if he will be eating 2 oz. of bread, and each ounce will be eaten within 7.5 minutes, without a 7.5-minute interruption between the two ounces. It is therefore advisable to eat 2 oz. of bread immediately when one begins the meal to ensure that the Beracha does not retroactively become a wasted Beracha.

If a person eats cereal with milk, the cereal constitutes the "Ikar" – the primary component of the mixture, whereas the milk is "Tafel" – secondary – as it is added merely to enhance the cereal. Therefore, one recites only one Beracha, over the cereal, and this covers both the cereal and the milk. Even if some milk remains in the bowl after one has eaten all the cereal, and one wishes to drink the milk, he does not recite a Beracha over the milk, since the milk had been covered by the Beracha recited over the cereal. If one adds fruit to yogurt, which is very common, then in most instances, the fruit would be considered secondary to the yogurt. Normally, one adds just a few pieces of fruit to enhance the yogurt's flavor, such that the yogurt is considered the primary component, and the fruit, the secondary component. As such, one would recite only "She'ha'kol" over the yogurt, and this Beracha would cover both the yogurt and the fruit. However, if somebody puts a large amount of fruit in the yogurt, such that he eats mainly fruit with some yogurt mixed in, then he would recite only a Beracha over the fruit, and this Beracha would also cover the yogurt. Summary: One who eats cereal with milk recites only a Beracha over the cereal, and this Beracha covers also the milk. Even if some milk is left over, he does not recite a Beracha over the leftover milk. If one adds some fruit to yogurt, he recites only "She'ha'kol" over the yogurt, and this Beracha covers also the fruit, unless he added so much fruit that he essentially eats fruit with some yogurt added, in which case he recites only a Beracha over the fruit, and this Beracha would also cover the yogurt.

The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 114:2) writes that one may not begin reciting "Mashib Ha'ruah" in the Amida prayer until the Hazan announces before Musaf on Shemini Aseret that it should be recited. Therefore, if a person prays at home, such as if he is ill or for some other reason cannot attend the prayers in the synagogue, he should not pray Musaf until the time the congregation prays. He must wait until the time when he can be certain that the Hazan had made the announcement to begin reciting "Mashib Ha'ruah." At that point, even though he did not hear the Hazan make the announcement, he may recite Musaf with "Mashib Ha'ruah," since the announcement was made in the synagogue. Likewise, if a person comes to the synagogue late on Shemini Aseret and sees that the congregation had begun reciting Musaf, he may recite the prayer at that point with "Mashib Ha'ruah," even though he did not hear the Hazan's announcement. Hacham David Yosef, in his Halacha Berura, discusses the case of a person who finds himself in a place without a Minyan on Shemini Aseret. He writes that in this case, one must wait until the time when most congregations have begun reciting Musaf, which is after six hours into the day. Hacham David also addresses the situation of a place with multiple Minyanim, such as if one lives in a city where some people pray very early (at "Netz") while others pray later (as is the case in Brooklyn and most large Orthodox Jewish communities). He writes that if a person prays at home, he may begin Musaf after the time when the early Minyan begins Musaf, even if he does not normally pray at the early Minyan. However, if one is praying in the later Minyan, and wants to pray Musaf on his own before the Minyan reaches Musaf, it is uncertain whether he may rely on the announcement made by the Hazan in the early Minyan. Finally, Hacham David writes that if a person arrives at the synagogue on Shemini Aseret while the congregation recites Musaf, and he begins praying Shaharit at that point, he does not recite "Mashib Ha'ruah" in Shaharit. Even though he is covered by the announcement made in the synagogue, he begins reciting "Mashib Ha'ruah" only during Musaf, and not during Shaharit. Summary: One may not begin reciting "Mashib Ha'ruah" on Shemini Aseret until the Hazan in the synagogue announces before Musaf that it should be recited. Therefore, one who prays at home on Shemini Aseret should not recite Musaf until the time he expects the first Minyan in the town to begin reciting Musaf. If he is in a place without a Minyan, he should not begin Musaf until the end of six hours into the day. If a person arrives in the synagogue after the congregation began reciting Musaf, and he begins praying Shaharit, he does not recite "Mashib Ha'ruah" in Shaharit but does recite it in Musaf.

  SUMMARY: One of the exciting happenings in the world of employee ownership today is the proliferation of different models and methods for bringing employees into the ownership of a company. In this episode we discuss the Direct Stock Ownership model that Chip Cargas, Founder of Cargas Systems, implemented at his company. We also discussed where the model took him, and this next stage of his entrepreneurial journey, with the development of the Tandem Center for Shared Business Success, a nonprofit initiative offering pathways for business success through profit sharing and direct employee ownership. We also talk with Nate Scott, current President and CEO of Cargas Systems and discuss his journey from employee, to employee owner, and finally to his role as a leader of the company. Finally we talk with Drew Mousetis, the Executive Director of the Tandem Center and get the scoop from him on his plans to grow employee ownership using the Direct Stock Ownership model.  Further Material  https://www.tandemcenter.org/  https://cargas.com/    Guest INFO:   Chip Cargas is the Founder & Chair Emeritus at Cargas Systems, an employee-owned software company with nearly 200 employees. They provide software for accounting, operations, sales and marketing. Chip founded the company in 1988 with the purpose of creating a caring environment where people would love to work. He served as CEO from the founding until December 2017, Board Chair until October 2020, and Board Member until March 2022. He was named Chair Emeritus in 2022. Chip continues to nurture the company's purpose of “Shared Success for employees, customers, owners, partners, and community.” Cargas Systems has earned the following national & regional awards for its values and growth  Nate Scott is President and CEO of Cargas Systems, joining in 2005 as a sales consultant. He eventually became manager of the Sales and Marketing team. When Cargas launched a new business unit centered around its proprietary Cargas Energy software, he became VP. During his tenure, the business unit doubled in staff and doubled in revenue. Scott also took advantage of annual career advancement meetings and asked to lead cross-company initiatives. In 2014 he became President, and added CEO four years later.  Drew Mousetis is Executive Director of the Tandem Center for Shared Business Success with a background in business management. Before joining Tandem, Drew was a lead consultant at Cargas, where he embraced the ethos of employee ownership within a dynamic culture of engagement and profit sharing at the employee owned company. Prior to Cargas, Drew was the Director of Finance & Development at The GateHouse.     SUPPORT THE SHOW: We make all episodes of Owners at Work free and never place them behind a paywall. But they take time and money to produce. Consider making a DONATION today to help keep our work going.   WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU: We are always looking for new employee ownership stories to tell. Please contact us with your story at oeoc@kent.edu   ---------------------------------------------------------------------  

How to avoid becoming the victim of an offender? It takes an experienced burglar between 90 seconds and 12 minutes to take everything they need and leave a house. Often break-ins happen when at least one member of the family is at home. In this video, you'll learn what to do if you spot a cookie under your doormat, what white pebbles on your driveway mean and what measures you can take to defend your home. #burglarproof #protecthouse Timestamps: The ploy with a cookie 1:50 What white pebbles left near the house means 3:29 Why you should pay attention to any flyers stuck in a bunch in your entrance door 3:51 One more thing that helps criminals check if a house is empty 4:22 How criminals pass along information to their accomplices 5:06 When you are planning to go away on vacation, be cautious of social media 6:13 Leave the TV and radio on when you're going away 7:45 Make sure somebody comes to pick up the mail 8:23 Music: https://www.youtube.com/audiolibrary/... Summary: - One of the tricks thieves use to gather information about your routine is so simple that you may not even give it a second thought. But the next time you hear a quiet crackle under the sole of your shoe, stop and check what it was. The chances are high that you'll find yourself face to face with a crushed cookie. - Pay attention to any flyers stuck in a bunch in your entrance door. There are 2 reasons why burglars may leave this stuff in your door: they mark your daily routine, and they also mark houses that are empty at the moment. One more thing that helps criminals check if a house or apartment is empty at that moment is something as innocuous as a simple match, a hair, or a piece of thread. Burglars fix these to the door in a way that makes it easy to determine if somebody has entered the house. - Broadcasting your vacation plans may not be the wisest move. Be cautious of social media. You won't believe how many criminals today use it to gather information about their potential victims. - Get to know your neighbors. If you create a community, it will be much harder for thieves to conduct their criminal activity. - There are several things that can discourage burglars from breaking into your home. Use the TV and radio. Leave them on when you're going away. The sound of voices will most likely scare criminals away. Another thing that may help you is to keep some lights on in the house. - One of the most obvious telltale signs that the owners of a house have gone away is a pile of newspapers and mail mounting up at the front door. Ask somebody to stop by regularly and pick up any accumulated correspondence. Before going away, hire somebody to mow your yard regularly and keep the lawn tidy. Subscribe to Bright Side : https://goo.gl/rQTJZz ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Our Social Media: Facebook:   / brightside   Instagram:   / brightgram   5-Minute Crafts Youtube: https://www.goo.gl/8JVmuC ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For more videos and articles visit: http://www.brightside.me/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

One who smells a fragrant plant must recite before smelling either the Beracha of "Boreh Aseh Besamim" or "Boreh Asbeh Besamim." The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) presents a number of guidelines to determine which of these two Berachot one recites (listen to audio recording for precise citation). He writes that one recites "Boreh Aseh Besamim" if all three of the following conditions are met: 1) The plant has a hard, solid stalk. 2) The plant grows by itself each year, and does not have to be replanted. 3) The leaves grow for the stalk, and not directly from the roots of the plant. A common example of such a plant is a rose, or, for that matter, any other flower, such as a gardenia. One who smells fragrant flowers such as these would recite "Boreh Aseh Besamim." Likewise, the Ben Ish Hai writes that the custom is to recite "Boreh Aseh Besamim" before smelling cloves. An example of a fragrant plant that does not satisfy these requirements is mint. Mint leaves are herbs that grow directly from the ground, without a stalk, and therefore one who smells mint leaves would recite the Beracha of "Boreh Asbeh Besamim." It should be noted that liquid produced from a plant has the same status of the plant with respect to this Halacha. Thus, one who smells rosewater would recite the Beracha of "Boreh Aseh Besamim," even though rosewater is liquid, since it is produced from roses. Interestingly, one who mistakenly recited the Beracha of "She'hakol Niheya Bi-dbaro" before smelling a fragrant substance has fulfilled his obligation, and does not recite another Beracha. If several different spices which require different Berachot were collected together into a single bundle, and this collection produced a distinct fragrance such that one cannot discern any individual spice, one should recite the Beracha of "Boreh Mineh Besamim." This is the ruling of the Ben Ish Hai. Of course, if the spices are divided into different groups, then one should recite separate Berachot of "Aseh Besamim" and "Asbeh Besamim" over the different bundles. However, if the different plants are collected together and one cannot discern the fragrance of any particular spice, then one should recite before smelling the bundle the generic Beracha of "Boreh Mineh Besamim." Summary: One who smells a fragrant plant with a stalk – such as flowers or cloves – recites the Beracha of "Boreh Aseh Besamim," whereas before smelling herbs that grow directly from the ground – such as mint leaves – one recites "Boreh Asbeh Besamim." If different kinds of spices were bundled together and produced a distinct fragrance, one recites the generic Beracha of "Boreh Mineh Besamim."

It is forbidden to bathe with hot water during the week of Tisha B'Ab, from the Shabbat preceding Tisha B'Ab through the day of Tisha B'Ab. This is one of several difficult Halachot that we observe during this period to commemorate the calamity of the Temple's destruction. It is permissible to bathe with cold water, and one may mix in some hot water in order to remove the chill. One may also use soap, shampoo and deodorant as usual during the week of Tisha B'Ab. A woman who needs to immerse in a Mikveh during the week of Tisha B'Ab may bathe with hot water as usual to prepare for her immersion. Bathing in preparation for the Mikveh is necessary for the purpose of a Misva, and is therefore permitted during the week of Tisha B'Ab. The accepted custom is to refrain from recreational swimming during the week of Tisha B'Ab. One who swims for health reasons is allowed to do so during this week. If one's hands became dirty during the week of Tisha B'Ab and he cannot remove the dirt without hot water, then he may use hot water for washing his hands. Otherwise, however, one should refrain from washing with hot water during this week. Summary: One may not bathe in hot water during the week of Tisha B'Ab, except in the case of a woman who must immerse in a Mikveh, or if hot water is needed to remove dirt from one's body. It is customary to also refrain from recreational swimming during this period.

The Sages instruct, "Mi'shenichnas Ab Mema'atin Be'simha" – "When Ab enters, we reduce our joy." This means that with the onset of the month of Ab, we are to avoid certain undertakings that bring us special joy. Thus, for example, one should not have his home freshly painted or wallpapered during the period of the Nine Days from Rosh Hodesh Ab though Tisha B"Ab. Likewise, it is forbidden to make any kind of renovations or purchases for the home that are done for strictly decorative purposes. It is also customary not to make significant purchases that bring a person special excitement, such as a new car. Strictly speaking, such purchases are allowed during the Nine Days, but the accepted custom is not to make major purchases like these, since they bring a person joy which is inappropriate for this period of mourning. Major purchases should therefore be delayed until after Tisha B'Ab. Similarly, during the Nine Days one should not purchase items for a bride and groom in preparation for their marriage, since these are joyous purchases. However, if the wedding is taking place immediately after Tisha B'Ab, and one might not have a time to make the necessary purchases after Tisha B'Ab, then he may buy the items during the Nine Days. Furthermore, if the price for the items will go up after Tisha B'Ab, then one may make the purchases during the Nine Days in order to avoid a financial loss. It is forbidden to eat meat during the Nine Days. However, the custom in our community is to eat meat on Rosh Hodesh Ab, the first of the Nine Days. Summary: One may not have his home freshly papered or wallpapered during the Nine Days. It is preferable to avoid major purchases – such as the purchase of a car – during the Nine Days, as well as purchases for a bride and groom. However, if there may not be enough time before the wedding after Tisha B'Ab, or if the price will be higher after Tisha B'Ab, the one may make the purchases during the Nine Days. Meat is forbidden during the Nine Days, but the custom in our community is to eat meat on Rosh Hodesh Ab.

Is it permissible to move into a new house or apartment during the Nine Days, from Rosh Hodesh Ab through Tisha B'Ab? The Poskim rule that one may move into a new house or apartment during the Nine Days if it will be his primary residence, as opposed to a vacation home and the like. As long as this home will be his place of primary residence, it is permissible. In fact, one who moves into a new home during the Nine Days may conduct a "Hinuch Ha'bayit" celebration, which entails simply reading words of Torah and distributing food, both of which, of course, are entirely permissible during the Nine Days. One should not, however, recite the Beracha of "Shehehiyanu" during the Nine Days, and thus one who moves into a new home should wait until after Tisha B'Ab to recite this Beracha. (Our practice is to purchase a new suit and then recite the Beracha over the suit, having in mind that the Beracha should cover the new home, as well.) Hacham Ovadia Yosef ruled that one may purchase a new car during the Nine Days if this is necessary for professional or commercial purposes, such as for traveling to and from work. If one wishes to buy a car for other purposes, however, this is permissible only if the car will be unavailable after Tisha B'Ab, or if the price will be higher after Tisha B'Ab. Leasing a car is permissible during the Nine Days, as one does not acquire ownership over the car. (Based on Yalkut Yosef, p. 173, Halachot 58 & 60) Summary: One may move into a new residence during the Nine Days if it will be his primary residence, and he may even host a "Hinuch Ha'bayit." One may purchase a car for professional purposes during the Nine Days. Purchasing a car for other purposes is permissible only if the car will be unavailable after Tisha B'Ab, or if the price will be higher after Tisha B'Ab. Leasing a car is permissible during the Nine Days.

The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 263) rules (based on the Rashba) that if a person accepted Shabbat early, before sunset – as one is supposed to do – he is allowed to ask another Jew, who has not accepted Shabbat, to perform Melacha on his behalf. As long as the sun has not yet set, one who has accepted Shabbat may have somebody else perform Melacha for him, even though he himself obviously may not perform Melacha, as he has accepted Shabbat. Since the other person has not yet accepted Shabbat, and the person who had accepted Shabbat would be allowed to perform Melacha were it not for his decision to accept Shabbat early, he may ask somebody else to perform Melacha which he needs to be done. One example of this Halacha is a case where a woman needs to go to the Mikveh on Friday night. She may light the Shabbat candles and accept Shabbat, and then her husband can drive her to the Mikveh. As long as she does not open doors or perform any other action that activates lights or electronic devices, she may have her husband drive her to the Mikveh. Conversely, if the husband accepted Shabbat and the wife has not yet accepted Shabbat, she may drive him to the synagogue. Likewise, if the husband accepted Shabbat and prayed in the synagogue before sundown, as many men do in the summertime, and he comes home before his wife lit candles and accepted Shabbat, he may ask his wife to turn on a light, turn on the air conditioner, or perform other activities involving Melacha. This is the ruling of the Shulhan Aruch, as discussed by Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001) in his Menuhat Ahaba (vol. 1, p. 111; listen to audio recording for precise citation). Summary: One who accepts Shabbat before sundown may ask another Jew who had not yet accepted Shabbat to perform Melacha on his behalf, such as to turn on a light or air conditioner, as long as the sun has not yet set.

Parent's reaction to their children is more important than any consequence that they may give.  It is our reaction that teaches our children.   Summary One of the trickiest things for a parent is when they catch their child in a lie. ...

Parent's reaction to their children is more important than any consequence that they may give.  It is our reaction that teaches our children.   Summary One of the trickiest things for a parent is when they catch their child in a lie.  Do you punish them for lying?  Do you punish the offense?  How do you teach the virtue of honesty when lying seems to come so naturally to them?  Join in our conversation with Jordan Langdon of Families of Character, a ministry that coaches parents to be their best for their families.  In this discussion, we hear Jordan's thoughts on why kids lie, how to create realistic expectations, and why punishing kids for lying only makes things worse.  Hear about the “Honesty Incentive Rule” and how that works for young children and even more importantly as your children become teenagers.   Find more about Jordan and her work at www.familiesofcharacter.org    Key Takeaways Training the will of your child is just as or even more important than training their intellect Most children will lie at some point.  It is a natural part of their development.  It is how you react to them that matters. There are different stages of lying.  The lie of a 3 yr old looks different than that of a 7 yr old.  The Honesty Incentive rule helps children take personal responsibility for their actions. When you find your child lying, allow yourself time to think about how to handle it.  There is no need to react - this is not an emergency! Take time to observe your children's behavior so you can tell when something is going on beneath the surface.    Couple Discussion Questions What is our reaction when our children lie to us now?  How do we handle it?  How do I feel when our kids lie to me?   Do we feel like we take enough time to observe our children's behavior?  Would we know when something was going wrong?    

Is it permissible to recite Birkat Ha'gomel on Shiba Assar Be'Tammuz? If, for example, a person returned from a trip and must recite the Beracha, may he do so on the fast of Shiba Assar Be'Tammuz? The reason why one might raise such a question is a ruling of the Kaf Ha'haim Sofer (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Israel, 1870-1939) that one should not recite Birkat Ha'gomel on Tisha B'Ab morning. The morning of Tisha B'Ab marks the height of the intensity of the mourning for Temple's destruction, and it is therefore not an appropriate occasion for reciting the festive Beracha of Birkat Ha'gomel, in which one gives thanks to the Almighty for rescuing him. The Kaf Ha'haim does, however, allow reciting Birkat Ha'gomel during Minha on Tisha B'Ab, when the intensity of the mourning begins to diminish, and we already begin speaking about consolation ("Nahamu Nahamu"). Hacham Ovadia Yosef argues on this ruling, and maintains that one may recite Birkat Ha'gomel even in the morning of Tisha B'Ab. In his view, Birkat Ha'gomel is no different from the other standard Berachot recited as part of the prayer service, like Birkat Ha'shahar, which give praise to God, and there is no problem at all reciting Berachot on Tisha B'Ab. Hacham Ben Sion Abba Shaul (Israel, 1923-1998), in his work Or Le'sion, adds that it is permissible to recite Birkat Ha'gomel throughout the three weeks from Shiba Assar Be'Tammuz until Tisha B'Ab, without any restriction, and this is, indeed, the Halacha. Summary: One who is obligated to recite Birkat Ha'gomel may recite the Beracha during the three weeks from Shiba Assar Be'Tammuz until Tisha B'Ab, even on the day of Tisha B'Ab.

Halacha follows the opinion that "Misvot Serichot Kavana" – meaning, one who performs a Misva must have this purpose in mind in order to fulfill his obligation. Thus, for example, before one begins reciting Shema, he must pause and think for a moment in his mind that he prepares to fulfill the Torah obligation to recite the daily Shema. This applies to both the daytime and nighttime Shema recitations. In some situations, a person does not have specific intention that he fulfills a Misva, but it is clear from the setting and context that this is his objective. For example, even if a person forgets to specifically think about the Misva before he begins reciting Shema, it is abundantly clear that one who comes to the synagogue, dons Tallit and Tefillin, and recites the prayers from the Siddur has in mind to fulfill the Misva. The Mishna Berura (Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan, 1839-1933) cites a number of Halachic authorities who rule that one fulfills his obligation in such a case. Even though one must Le'chatehila (optimally) have specific intention to fulfill the Misva, he nevertheless fulfills his obligation even without this intent if it is clear from context that he performs the given act for this purpose. (The Mishna Berura proves this conclusion from a number of Talmudic passages.) Other examples where this ruling would apply are eating in a Sukka and shaking a Lulab on Sukkot. Even if a person does not have specific intention to fulfill the Misva, it is obvious that he eats in the Sukka or shakes the Lulab for the purpose of the Misva, and he thus fulfills his obligation even without specific intent. It must be emphasized, however, that this applies only "Be'di'abad" (after the fact). Optimally, one must, indeed, have specific intention before performing a Misva that he performs the given act for the purpose of the Misva. The Be'ur Halacha (supplementary essays accompanying the Mishna Berura) notes that for many people, it would, indeed, be necessary – even "Be'di'abad" – to have specific intention before reciting the nighttime Shema. It is very common during the summer months for congregations to recite Arbit before sunset. Since the Misva of the nighttime Shema takes effect only at nightfall, those who recite Arbit before sunset do not fulfill their Shema obligation at Arbit; they must repeat Shema later, after dark. For such people, then, reciting Shema during the Arbit service in the synagogue is not necessarily done for the purpose of fulfilling the Misva. Since they frequently recite Arbit before sundown, when they cannot fulfill the Shema obligation, it cannot be assumed that they have in mind to fulfill the Misva of Shema when they recite Shema during Arbit. Therefore, if a person who normally recites Arbit before sundown happens on one occasion to recite Arbit after dark, he does not fulfill his obligation of Shema in Arbit unless he has specific intention to fulfill the Misva. Without specific intention, it cannot be assumed that he recites Shema for this purpose, since he normally recites Shema in Arbit without fulfilling the Misva. In this case, then, one who recites Shema without specific intention would have to repeat Shema. Summary: One who performs a Misva must first think in his mind that he performs the given act for the purpose of fulfilling the Misva. However, if he did not have this specific intention, he nevertheless fulfills his obligation if it is clear from the setting and context that this was his purpose in performing the act. Thus, for example, one must think before reciting Shema that he does so for the purpose of the Misva, but if he did not have this intention, he nevertheless fulfills the Misva since it is obvious that he recites Shema for this purpose. The exception to this rule is the case of somebody who normally prays Arbit before sundown, when he cannot fulfill the obligation of the nighttime Arbit. If such a person happens one time to recite Arbit after dark, he does not fulfill his Shema obligation in Arbit unless he has specific intention to this effect.

A person does not fulfill the obligation of Kiddush on Shabbat unless he either eats a Kezayit of bread or Mezonot food, or drinks a Rebi'it of wine, after reciting or hearing Kiddush. One is required to partake of the food or wine immediately after Kiddush, without any delay. It is improper to delay eating after hearing Kiddush, since the Kiddush must be recited within the context of a meal. If a person did delay eating or drinking wine, and did not eat or drink immediately after the Kiddush, he has nevertheless fulfilled his obligation and does not have to repeat Kiddush. The exception to this rule is a case where one had in mind when he recited Kiddush that he would eat only 72 minutes or more after Kiddush. If a person from the outset planned on delaying eating for this amount of time, he has not fulfilled the Misva of Kiddush and must recite Kiddush again. But if somebody intended to eat immediately after Kiddush and then something came up and resulted in a delay, he has fulfilled his obligation. Even though one should certainly make an effort to eat or drink immediately after Kiddush, he fulfills his obligation so long as he had not planned from the outset to delay eating or drinking. This is the ruling of Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in his work Halichot Olam (vol. 3, p. 3; listen to audio recording for precise citation). Summary: One must eat a Kezayit of bread or Mezonot food, or drink a Rebi'it of wine, immediately after reciting or hearing Kiddush, without delay. One who delayed eating or drinking has nevertheless fulfilled his obligation of Kiddush, provided that he had not planned from the outset to delay eating or drinking for 72 minutes or more.

Both men and women are obligated to recite (or hear) Kiddush on Friday night. If a person, for whatever reason, did not recite Kiddush on Friday night, then he must recite it on Shabbat morning. This means that instead of reciting the brief Shabbat morning Kiddush, he must recite the Kiddush text that is normally recited on Friday night. Thus, if a person was ill, Heaven forbid, or if he fell asleep before reciting Kiddush or simply forgot to recite Kiddush, he must recite the Friday night Kiddush after Shaharit on Shabbat morning. In such a case, when a person did not recite Kiddush on Friday night and must therefore do so on Shabbat morning, is he allowed to drink before Shaharit that morning? Generally speaking, although it is forbidden to eat before reciting Shaharit in the morning (both on Shabbat and on weekdays), it is permissible to drink water, tea or coffee before Shaharit. This is allowed even on Shabbat morning, despite the fact that one may not drink before reciting Kiddush, because the Kiddush obligation sets in only after one recites Shaharit. The Sages enacted the recitation of Kiddush on Shabbat morning specifically for after the Shaharit service, and therefore the prohibition against eating and drinking before Kiddush does not apply until after Shaharit. Before Shaharit, one is bound only by the restrictions that apply to eating and drinking before praying in the morning, and thus one may drink water, tea or coffee before Shaharit on Shabbat morning, just as he may on weekday mornings. However, in a case where one missed Kiddush on Friday night, he already bears the previous night's obligation to recite Kiddush, and thus, seemingly, he is not allowed to drink anything on Shabbat morning until he recites Kiddush. This is, indeed, the ruling of Rav Shlomo Kluger (1789-1869), in his work Ha'elef Lecha Shelomo. Hacham Ovadia Yosef, however, disagrees, and rules that one may drink water, tea or coffee before Shaharit on Shabbat morning even if he had not recited Kiddush the previous night. There is a Halachic rule called "En Kiddush Ela Be'makom Se'uda," which means that one fulfills the obligation of Kiddush only if he recites Kiddush in the context of a meal. Before Shaharit, Halacha forbids eating a meal, and it is therefore impossible to fulfill the Kiddush obligation on Shabbat morning until after one prays Shaharit. Thus, even if one bears the previous night's obligation of Kiddush, nevertheless, since he is incapable of fulfilling this obligation until after he recites Shaharit, it is permissible for him to drink before reciting Shaharit. In all cases, then, one may drink water, tea or coffee before Shaharit on Shabbat morning. Summary: One who did not, for whatever reason, recite Kiddush on Friday night must recite the Friday night Kiddush after Shaharit on Shabbat morning. One is allowed to drink water, tea or coffee before Shaharit on Shabbat morning, even if he did not recite Kiddush on Friday night.

Our parents made us sisters, but God made us friends.     Summary One of the greatest blessings of Alicia's life is that God gave her 9 brothers and sisters to laugh, play, fight, create, and pray with most of her life! This conversation is from a girls getaway weekend with the five Doman sisters.  Now, because all the Doman siblings are practicing Catholics  in good relationship with each other and their parents, people may put them in a category of “the perfect Catholic family”.  But that is far from true.  As you will hear, each one of these sisters has lived through tragedies and difficulties that were completely unexpected and not chosen by them at all. It is by God's grace that each one of them has grown into the woman God is calling her to be and it is through that relationship with Christ, as well as the accident of birth, that we are able to have true sisterhood together.  Listen in as we talk about God's faithfulness through the difficulties of life and how true sisterhood with those in your family and friends are essential to our survival.     Key Takeaways Life is not always easy, but God is near We can learn from those who God gives us, even when they are different from us.  Don't get frustrated by differences, embrace them! When we are joined together by common faith in Christ, we can develop true friendships   Couple Discussion Questions What relationships can we invest more in to develop sisterhood and brotherhood?  Are we happy with our relationships with our siblings?  Why or why not? What can we change about this?  How does sharing values with others change us? 

Our parents made us sisters, but God made us friends.     Summary One of the greatest blessings of Alicia's life is that God gave her 9 brothers and sisters to laugh, play, fight, create, and pray with most of her life! This...

The obligation of Mezuza requires a person to affix Mezuzot on the residence in which he lives. The Gemara describes this obligation as "Hobat Ha'dar" (literally, "an obligation of the resident"), which means that the Misva applies only to the resident. If a person purchases a property but it remains vacant for a period of time, it does not require Mezuzot. It is only when a person moves into a residence that he must affix Mezuzot. This Halacha led Rabbi Akiva Eiger (1761-1837) to an interesting discussion in one of his published responsa (Siman 9; listen to audio recording for precise citation). If a person leaves his home for an extended period of time, such as for summer vacation or an extended business trip, and his family travels with him, such that the house is empty, the obligation of Mezuza seemingly does not apply to the home during that period. Since nobody resides in the house, there is no obligation of Mezuza. The Misva resurfaces when the family returns and once again takes residence in the house. It would thus appear, Rabbi Akiva Eiger notes, that one must recite a Beracha, "Al Misvat Mezuza," when he returns from an extended absence. This situation should be no different than the case of a person who leaves his Sukka for the day on Sukkot, who must recite a Beracha when he returns to the Sukka to eat dinner. The Misva ended, so-to-speak, when he left the Sukka, and he then fulfilled it again upon his return, thus warranting a new Beracha. Likewise, when a person leaves his home for an extended period, the Misva of Mezuza does not obtain, and he then fulfills it again when he returns home, and must therefore recite a Beracha. However, as Rabbi Akiva Eiger notes, the Hid"a (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806), in his Birkeh Yosef (Orah Haim 9), writes that the Sages instituted the Beracha of Mezuza to be recited only when one affixes the Mezuza. Thus, according to this reasoning, one would not recite a Beracha on the Mezuza when he returns from an extended absence. Rabbi Akiva Eiger leaves this as an open question, but other authorities ruled definitively that one should not recite a Beracha when he returns home. Rabbenu Yehonatan, one of the Rishonim (Medieval Halachic scholars), noted that the obligation of Mezuza applies even to residences where a person lives on an occasional basis. Even though he does not live in the residence most of the time, it nevertheless requires Mezuzot since he uses it from time to time. Certainly, then, the obligation of Mezuza continues to apply to one's primary residence even during trips and vacations when he is not actually in the home. Hence, one does not recite a new Beracha when he returns home after an extended absence. This is the ruling of Hacham Yishak Yosef, in his work Yalkut Yosef. Summary: One recites the Beracha over the Mezuza only when he affixes it to the doorframe. The Beracha is not recited when a person returns home after being away for an extended period.

If a person set the light in his dining room on a timer before Shabbat, and during the meal he realizes that he will need the light in the room for longer than he had expected, may he adjust the timer so that the lights will turn off later than initially scheduled? Conversely, if a timer is set to turn lights off in a room at a certain time, and a person wishes to go to sleep before that time, may he adjust the timer so that the lights will be turned off sooner? Chacham Ovadia Yosef rules that one may adjust a timer on Shabbat to extend the current status. We do not consider the timer Muktzeh, and thus forbidden to be handled on Shabbat, because of the basic rule that says, "Ein Muktzeh Be'mechubar" – something attached to the ground cannot obtain the status of Muktzeh. Since the timer is attached to the wall of one's house, it is deemed "Mechubar" ("attached" to the ground) and therefore cannot become Muktzeh. Furthermore, one could overcome the issue of Muktzeh by verbally stipulating once each year that he does not deem the timer Muktzeh on Shabbat, and he wishes to use it on Shabbat for the purpose of adjusting the time. This condition is effective in avoiding the prohibition of Muktzeh. Hence, one may extend the timer so that the lights in the room will remain lit for a longer period than for which it had initially been set. In the converse situation, however, it is forbidden to adjust a timer so that the current status will end sooner, as this would constitute "Geram Kibuy" (indirect extinguishing). Thus, one may not adjust a timer to have the light in his room turn off sooner than the time for which it had originally been set. However, Chacham Ovadia makes an exception in cases involving a sick patient for whom the presence of light causes discomfort. In such a case, one may indirectly turn off the lights by switching the timer to an earlier time than for which it had originally been set. This rule applies as well to cases where the lights are turned off and one wishes to adjust the timer to have the lights turn on earlier or later than the currently set time. Here, too, it would be permissible to adjust the timer to extend the current status, meaning, to have the lights turn on at a later time, while Halacha would forbid adjusting a timer to have the lights turn on sooner than the originally set time. Where, however, the lights are needed for the purpose of a Mitzva, such as if somebody wishes to use the room for Torah learning, then he may adjust the timer to have the lights go on sooner. Summary: One may adjust a timer on Shabbat to extend the current status, meaning, to have the light turned on or off later than initially scheduled. One may not, however, adjust a timer on Shabbat to have the light turn on or off earlier than initially planned, except when this is necessary for the fulfillment of a Mitzva or for somebody who is ill. See Halichot Olam, Helek 4, pages 71-72

Is it permissible to fill an urn with cold water just before the onset of Shabbat, such that the water will be heated on Shabbat? Halacha imposes certain restrictions on placing raw or partially cooked food on the fire before Shabbat. The Rabbis were concerned that since the food is not fully cooked when Shabbat begins, one might stoke the coals to expedite the cooking process, which would constitute a Shabbat violation. Accordingly, these prohibitions apply only in cases where there is the possibility of accelerating the cooking process. Hence, according to most authorities, if an urn has no dials or knobs, and is simply plugged into the wall, one would be allowed to fill it with cold water just before the onset of Shabbat, since he has no possibility of increasing its heat to accelerate the cooking process on Shabbat. Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (Russia-New York, 1895-1986), in his sefer Igrot Moshe, Helek 4, Siman 74:23, however, ruled stringently on this issue, forbidding filling an urn with cold water if the water will not become hot before the onset of Shabbat. He was concerned that a person may take some water from the urn before the water is fully heated, which will have the effect of accelerating the heating process, as a lower quantity of water heats more rapidly than a higher amount. Rabbi Feinstein felt that due to this concern we should forbid filling an urn just prior to Shabbat. The majority of authorities, however, disputed this ruling, arguing that the Talmud makes no mention of such a concern. It speaks only of the concern that one might stoke the coals, and therefore in situations where there is no possibility of increasing the heat to accelerate the heating process, one may fill an urn with cold water just prior to Shabbat. See Sefer Matmin U'Mevashel BeShabbat, page 44. Summary: One may fill an urn with cold water just before Shabbat, even though the water will still be cold when Shabbat begins, provided that the urn has no dials or knobs for adjusting its heat.

A "Keli Rishon" – a utensil in which food or liquid has been cooked – has the capacity to effectuate "cooking" in the Halachic sense of the term. This means that placing raw food inside a "Keli Rishon" on Shabbat violates the Torah prohibition of cooking on Shabbat. This applies even after the utensil has been taken off the fire, so long as it is still hot. However, if one transfers the contents of a "Keli Rishon" to another utensil, that second utensil – the "Keli Sheni" – does not have the capacity to cook. The walls of that utensil cool the hot liquid such that it is no longer capable of "cooking" as defined by Halacha. Thus, if one pours boiling water from its original pot into another utensil, one may cook raw food in the water in the second utensil. Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001), in his work Menuhat Ahaba (vol. 2, p. 340), rules that this Halacha of "Keli Sheni" does not apply to a thermos. A thermos is specially insulated to retain the heat of its contents. As such, hot liquid poured from a "Keli Rishon" to a thermos cannot be assumed to have cooled, as it does in a regular "Keli Sheni." We must therefore treat the thermos as a "Keli Rishon," and it would be forbidden to place raw food or a teabag inside the thermos. However, Rabbi Moshe Halevi adds, it would be permissible to pour hot water from a thermos onto a teabag to make tea. He reaches this conclusion on the basis of a combination of two factors. First, some Rishonim (Medieval Halachic authorities) maintain that liquid poured from a "Keli Rishon" does not have the capacity to cook; in their view, hot liquid can cook only while it is inside the original pot. Secondly, the water poured from a thermos into a teacup has come in contact with air twice – after leaving the original pot, and when leaving the thermos. This allows us to treat water poured from a thermos more leniently than water inside a thermos. Hence, although one may not place a teabag inside a thermos, one may pour hot water from a thermos onto a teabag in a teacup to make tea. This is also the ruling of Hacham Ovadia Yosef, as published in the pamphlet Kol Sinai. This Halacha applies as well to an insulated tiger pot which people often fill with hot water from an urn and then bring to the table. It is permissible to pour from the tiger pot directly onto a teabag to prepare tea. Summary: One may not place raw food inside a thermos or tiger pot of hot water, but one may pour hot water from a thermos or tiger pot onto raw food, such as a teabag.

The Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (42) establishes a Halachic equation between hot liquid inside a Keli Rishon – the original utensil in which something was cooked – and hot liquid poured from a Keli Rishon (called "Iruy Keli Rishon"). Namely, as far as the laws of Shabbat are concerned, both liquid inside a Keli Rishon and liquid poured directly from a Keli Rishon have the capacity to "cook" a raw, solid food item. Whether a person places a raw food inside hot water in a pot or if he pours hot water directly from an urn or pot onto raw food, he has transgressed the Torah prohibition of cooking on Shabbat. The Rishonim (Medieval Halachic scholars) debate the question of whether or not this Halacha, equating liquid inside a Keli Rishon with liquids poured from a Keli Rishon, applies to pouring on liquids, as well. A number of Rishonim, including the Rashba, Ran and Rambam, rule leniently in this regard, and allow one to pour hot liquid directly from a Keli Rishon onto cold liquid. According to this view, it would be permissible to heat cold water on Shabbat by pouring hot water into it directly from an urn. Tosefot (Talmudic commentaries by the French and German scholars), however, forbid doing so unless one adds less hot water than the amount of cold water in the cup. In their view, one may add a small amount of hot water from a Keli Rishon into a larger amount of cold water, but it is forbidden to add a large amount of hot water into a smaller amount of cold water. The Shulhan Aruch accepts the lenient position, which allows pouring hot liquid from a Keli Rishon onto cold liquid under all circumstances. Many other authorities, however, including the Ben Ish Hai, Kaf Ha'haim, Rabbi Moshe Halevi and Hacham Ovadia Yosef, accept the stringent ruling of Tosefot. In their view, since we deal here with a potential Torah violation, we must concern ourselves with the stringent position. Therefore, one may not add hot liquid directly from a Keli Rishon onto cold liquid, unless the cold liquid will constitute the majority of the resultant mixture. The exception to this rule is a case where the liquid had been previously cooked, such as if one has a cup of hot tea or coffee that has cooled, and he wishes to add hot water. According to some views, liquid that has been cooked is no longer subject to the prohibition of cooking on Shabbat even after it has completely cooled. Therefore, this situation is one of a "Sefek Sefeka," or "double doubt." The first doubt is whether or not this liquid is subject to "cooking" in the Halachic sense at all, as it had already been cooked, and the second is whether or not pouring onto liquid from a Keli Rishon constitutes cooking. In such a case, then, one may be lenient and add even a significant amount of hot water from a Keli Rishon – such as an urn – into one's tea or coffee. If, however, the liquid in one's cup had never been previously cooked, he may add hot liquid only if the added hot liquid constitutes the minority of the mixture. Summary: One may not add hot liquid directly from a pot or an urn onto raw solid food. One may add hot liquid directly onto cold liquid if the cold liquid had previously been cooked (such as hot tea or coffee that has cooled), or if the amount of hot liquid added is less than the amount of cold liquid in the cup.

Halacha forbids placing any kind of food on an open flame on Shabbat. Even though the food has been fully cooked, and one simply wants to reheat it, he may not place the food on an open flame. Thus, for example, it is forbidden to place a pot of rice over an open flame on the stove on Shabbat to reheat it, even though it had been cooked before Shabbat. Warming food on Shabbat is permissible only if one uses a "Blech," a metal sheet covering the stove, or a hotplate, which has a metal surface covering the heating element. Once the fire is covered, and not exposed, it is permissible to place certain foods on the covering on Shabbat. Namely, one may, according to our custom, place solid food that has been fully cooked on a Blech or hotplate on Shabbat. For example, it is permissible on Shabbat morning to place a pot of rice on a Blech or hotplate to be reheated. Even though the pot has been in the refrigerator all night and the food is cold, one may place the pot on the Blech or hotplate, since the fire is covered. One may not, however, place cold liquid on a Blech or hotplate on Shabbat, even though it has been fully cooked before Shabbat. Halacha follows the view that "Yesh Bishul Ahar Bishul Be'lah," which means that once a liquid has been cooled, reheating it constitutes "Bishul" ("cooking") with respect to the Shabbat laws. As such, it is forbidden to reheat liquid on Shabbat regardless of whether the flame is exposed or covered. Thus, for example, one may not place cold Kibe Hamda (soup with meatballs) on a Blech or hotplate on Shabbat. Similarly, if one has roast in gravy, he must pour out the gravy before warming up the roast on the Blech or hotplate. One who has cold liquid food, such as Kibe Hamda, which he wishes to eat hot on Shabbat, may ask a gentile – such as a non-Jewish housekeeper – to place it on a Blech or hotplate. Generally, Halacha forbids asking or instructing a gentile to perform on Shabbat an action which is forbidden for Jews to perform. However, in the case of reheating cold liquid food on a covered flame, the Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) rules that it is permissible to ask a gentile. The reason for his ruling is that issue of reheating cold liquids on a covered flame on Shabbat is subject to a debate among the Halachic authorities. Although we follow the stringent position, which forbids reheating such foods, we may rely on the lenient view with respect to "Amira Le'nochri" – asking a gentile. Therefore, despite the fact that one may not personally reheat cold liquid on a Blech or hotplate on Shabbat, it is permissible to ask one's non-Jewish housekeeper to do so. This ruling is cited as Halacha by Hacham Yishak Yosef in his She'erit Yosef (vol. 3, p. 405; listen to audio recording for precise citation). See also Yabia Omer, vol. 7, p. 131. It must be emphasized, however, that this Halacha is limited to the particular issue of reheating cold liquids. One should not extrapolate from this ruling that one may ask his housekeeper to also perform other forms of cooking and reheating. As discussed, the case of reheating cold liquids is exceptional, due to the fact that some Medieval authorities deemed it permissible even for Jews. Summary: One may not place any food – even fully cooked food – on an open flame on Shabbat. One may, however, place solid food on a Blech or hotplate on Shabbat, provided that it had been cooked before Shabbat. One may also ask a gentile to reheat liquid food (that had already been cooked) on a Blech or hotplate on Shabbat.

The Shulhan Aruch, in a famous ruling, distinguishes between solid and liquid foods with regard to the permissibility of reheating on Shabbat. When it comes to liquids, the Shulhan Aruch rules that "Yesh Bishul Ahar Bishul," which means that once a liquid food has cooled, reheating it constitutes cooking and is forbidden. It is therefore forbidden to reheat cold liquid food on Shabbat in any manner. With respect to solids, however, the Shulhan Aruch maintains that "En Bishul Ahar Bishul," meaning, the food cannot be "cooked" twice. Even after the cooked food has cooled, reheating it does not constitute a new "cooking." It is therefore permissible to reheat solid foods on Shabbat over a covered flame or hotplate. Common examples of such food include rice and kibbeh. The authorities debate the question of whether or not one may reheat on Shabbat food that is mainly solid, but has some liquid, as well. It must be clarified that we do not refer here to foods that contain liquid inside; nearly all foods have some water inside them. We refer here to a situation such as a roast, or yebra (stuffed grape leaves), which is a solid food but has some gravy sitting on the bottom of the pot. This question depends on how one interprets a certain passage in the Bet Yosef, as well as the correct text of the passage in question. In short, the Minhat Kohen, based on his interpretation of the Bet Yosef, held that a food which is primarily solid has the status of a solid food with respect to this Halacha. Even though it contains some liquid, the food's status is determined by the majority, and therefore it may be reheated on Shabbat despite the presence of some liquid. It is recorded that the practice in Jerusalem was to follow this ruling. Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in his work Yehave Da'at, accepts this lenient position of the Minhat Kohen and allows reheating on Shabbat food that contains some liquid. Interestingly, in a recorded public lecture, Hacham Ovadia appeared to express some ambivalence on the matter, and many understood that he rescinded the ruling issued in Yehave Da'at. But in a later publication (Yabia Omer, vol. 9), Hacham Ovadia clarified that he did not retract his ruling, and that he indeed permits warming such foods on Shabbat. He does, however, add that those who are stringent are "worthy of blessing," as they satisfy all opinions. This point is made by Hacham Ovadia's son, Hacham Yishak Yosef, in Yalkut Yosef. Strictly speaking, though, according to Hacham Ovadia, Halacha follows the lenient view of the Minhat Kohen. Other authorities, however, disagreed. Hacham Ben Sion Abba Shaul (Israel, 1923-1998), for example, ruled stringently on this issue and maintained that one may not reheat liquid under any circumstances, even if the liquid constitutes the minority of a food which is mainly solid. As for the final Halacha, those who have a non-Jewish housekeeper working on Shabbat should preferably ask the housekeeper to place such a food on the Blech or hotplate, rather than doing so themselves. This is permissible according to all views. Those who do not have a non-Jew working in their homes may reheat food that contains some liquid, though it is preferable to be stringent in this regard. Summary: One may reheat on Shabbat (on a Blech or hotplate) dry cooked food that contains some liquid, such as a roast or yebra that has some gravy or juice on the bottom. In order to satisfy all opinions, however, it is preferable to have a non-Jew reheat this food and not to do so oneself.

Summary | One of the greatest challenges you may encounter while pursuing your calling is success. This challenge arises because it tests authority. If we credit our success to our own actions, then we are questioning God's authority in our lives.   This podcast is a ministry of Faith Community. We are one church connecting believers worldwide to God and each other.    Give | http://faithc.link/give Join | https://faithcommunity.io/