The Ten Days of Teshuvah
[1] (Halacha 89)
The Laws of HaMelech HaKadosh and HaMelech HaMishpat
Question: Why during the Ten Days of Teshuvah do we change to HaMelech HaKadosh and HaMelech HaMishpat?
Answer: Since during these days the Holy One, blessed be He, displays His kingship to judge the world1.
-------------------------
HaMelech HaKadosh
Question: One who, in place of HaMelech HaKadosh, said HaKel HaKadosh — what should he do?
Answer: a. If he said only the word HaKel and did not finish HaKadosh, he should say HaMelech HaKadosh and continue his tefillah, even if more than the time of "toch kedei dibbur" has passed [the time it takes to say: Shalom aleicha rebbi2]3.
b. In a case where he finished and said HaKel HaKadosh, if he remembers "toch kedei dibbur," he should correct it immediately and say HaMelech HaKadosh and continue his tefillah4.
c. However, if he remembers after the time of "toch kedei dibbur," or he has already begun to say the following bracha, he returns to the beginning of the tefillah5.
-------------------------
HaMelech HaMishpat
Question: What is the law in a case where, in place of HaMelech HaMishpat, he said Melech Oheiv Tzedakah U'Mishpat?
Answer: a. If he remembers "toch kedei dibbur" and before he began the following bracha, he should correct it immediately and say HaMelech HaMishpat and continue his tefillah6.
b. If he remembers after he began the following bracha or after "kedei dibbur," the poskim are divided. Some say7 that since in the words Melech Oheiv Tzedakah U'Mishpat there is a mention of kingship, he has fulfilled his obligation. But some say8 that since during these days judgment is the essential matter, we should not mention tzedakah at all, and he has not fulfilled his obligation, and therefore he returns to the bracha of Hashivah, and if he finished his tefillah he returns to the beginning of the tefillah.
c. In practice, since with regard to safek brochos we are lenient, therefore as long as he has not finished his tefillah he cannot go back to the bracha of Hashivah, but rather he should finish his tefillah. And after he has stepped back it is good that he pray a tefillas nedavah, and there is no need to introduce anything new into it9.
--------------------
Doubt
Question: A person who is in doubt whether he said HaKel HaKadosh or HaMelech HaKadosh — what is his law?
Answer: a. One who is in doubt, his law is like one who did not say it10.
Question: A person who wanted to accustom himself and said 90 times Baruch atah Hashem HaMelech HaKadosh/HaMelech HaMishpat, and now he is in doubt whether he said it — what is his law?
Answer: He is like anyone who is in doubt, whom we presume did not say it, even though 90 times constitutes a habit as in the case of Morid HaTal11. But here it is different, since he cannot truly practice, because in the bracha there is a mention of Hashem's Name, and in practicing he cannot say Hashem's Name as it is pronounced so that it will not be a bracha levatalah. Consequently, when he says it in tefillah with Hashem's Name, he reverts to his original habit and says HaKel HaKadosh12.
------------------------------
Notes:
1 שוע"ר סי' תקפב ס"א ↩
2 שוע"ר או"ח סי' רו ס"ג. סדר ברה"נ פ"ט ה"ב ↩
3 אשל אברהם סי' תקפב סק"א הובא באלף המגן אות טז ↩
4 שוע"ר שם ס"ב ↩
5 שם ס"א ↩
6 שם ס"ב ↩
7 תלמידי רבינו יונה ברכות ז, א ד"ה ומיהו וכ"פ הרמ"א בסי' קיח ↩
8 ארחות חיים הל' תפלה אות קד וכ"פ המחבר בסי' תקפ"ב ס"א ↩
9 שוע"ר שם ס"ב ↩
10 שם ס"א ↩
11 שוע"ר סי' קיד סי"א ↩
12 שם ס"ג ↩
[3] (Halacha 91)
Asking for Forgiveness and Reconciliation [2]
The Order of Reconciliation
Question: Before how many people must the reconciliation take place?
Answer: The Alter Rebbe wrote1: 'And each time he goes to reconcile with him, even the first time, he should take with him three people and reconcile with him before them.'
Question: At the time of reconciliation, must one specify in what way he sinned against his fellow?
Answer: The Alter Rebbe wrote2: 'And at the time of asking for forgiveness one must specify the sin he committed against his fellow. And if his fellow is embarrassed by this, he should not specify the sin.' That is to say, ideally the person must specify, for this is the process of teshuvah, that a person verbalizes and specifies in what way he sinned [and as one does with sins between man and G-d3].
The Acharonim discussed4 what the law is in a case where a person shamed his fellow, such as if he spoke lashon hara about him, but his fellow knows nothing about it — whether he too must go to him and specify the sin; and in a case where he spoke lashon hara about him before people and it caused him harm, but the one who was spoken about does not know who did this to him — in this case the person should go and specify the sin and ask forgiveness; but in a case where no harm was caused to him from this, since the listeners immediately rejected the words — on the contrary, since that person knows nothing, by going and telling him what he did he would cause him greater anguish, and therefore in such a situation it is preferable that he not specify but rather suffice with a general forgiveness of Erev Yom Kippur.
Question: We went to reconcile and the person is not willing to be reconciled — what must we do?
Answer: We must go again with 3 people to reconcile with him, and the second time to try to appease him in a different manner (that is, to think of additional ways how to appease and reconcile), and if that too did not help, to try a third time. And if he went 3 times and his fellow did not forgive him, he need not go again5, and Yom Kippur will atone for him6. But he must make it known to the public — before ten people — that he went to reconcile with him and he was not willing to be reconciled, so that people will not suspect that he did not want to humble himself before his fellow to ask him for forgiveness7.
Question: After 3 times, is it permitted to try again a fourth time?
Answer: The Alter Rebbe wrote8: 'And even when he angered his fellow, if he wishes to be stringent with himself and go to him several times, he has permission to do so, provided that there be no disgrace of Torah there.' (That is to say, if the one seeking reconciliation is a talmid chacham he should not go more than 3 times, since this is a disgrace to the Torah that he learned). However, if the matter is that he angered his rebbi — even if he is not a primary rebbi but he merely heard words of Torah from him — even after 3 times he must go and reconcile with him until he is reconciled, and as we find9 that Rav went to reconcile with Rav Chanina thirteen times.
Notes:
1 סי' תרו ס"ב וכשיטת רש"י ד"ה בשלש בגמ' ביומא פז, א ↩
2 שם ס"א ↩
3 שו"ע אדה"ז סי' תרז ס"א ↩
4 חפץ חיים כלל ד סי"ב ובבמ"ח שם. מועדים וזמנים ח"א סי' נד. שו"ת אז נדברו ח"ז סי' סו ↩
5 שם ס"ב. תניא אגרת התשובה פי"א ↩
6 פר"ח ↩
7 שם ס"ב ↩
8 שם ס"ג ↩
9 יומא פז, ב ↩
[4] (Halacha 92)
Asking for Forgiveness and Reconciliation [3]
When the Offended Party Forgives
Question: 1) What is the tefillah of "Hareini Mochel" that is brought in the Siddur of the Arizal and the Alter Rebbe in Krias Shema she'al hamittah? 2) And can one rely on the fact that the offended party said "Ribbono shel Olam, Hareini Mochel"?
Answer: a. It is written in the Shaar HaKollel1 that the Mekubalim instituted a special tefillah before sleep in which we forgive and pardon anyone who wronged us and we request that no one be punished on our account. This tefillah is founded on the Gemara2: 'His students asked Rabbi Nechunya ben HaKanah: By what merit did you attain long life? He said to them: In my days I was never honored through the degradation of my fellow, and the curse of my fellow never went up upon my bed .. as in the case of Mar Zutra, who, when he would go up to his bed, would say: I forgive anyone who has caused me distress.' And similarly it is related in the Zohar3 about a great miracle that was done for a man in the merit of his not going up to his bed until he forgave everyone.
b. However, even though we know about a person who says this tefillah, if, G-d forbid, we wronged him, we must go and ask him for forgiveness, and as is proven from the story in the Gemara4 that Rav, even though he could have forgiven the butcher, nevertheless chose to go to him, to try to get the butcher to ask him for forgiveness — rather it is proven that it is necessary that the offender too himself be aroused to teshuvah and submission and ask for forgiveness5.
Question: We wronged a person during his lifetime and he passed away before we managed to reconcile with him — what must we do?
Answer: The Alter Rebbe wrote6: And if the one against whom he transgressed has died, he brings ten people and stands them at his grave and says before them: I have sinned to the G-d of Israel and to this person against whom I transgressed (and he should not specify the sin, lest this be a disgrace to the deceased), and he must go there barefoot; and if it is outside of three parsaos (approximately 12 km) from his grave, he need not go there, but rather he should send his agent to ask forgiveness from him on behalf of the one who sent him, before ten people.' And he further wrote7: 'And even if he uttered slander against him during his lifetime, it is effective for him to ask forgiveness from him before ten people, because we assess the mind of the deceased that presumably, were he alive, he would have forgiven him.'
Question: We spoke ill of a person who has already died — what must we do?
Answer: It is forbidden to speak about the dead, and as the Alter Rebbe wrote8: 'The enactments of the early authorities and a cherem not to utter slander against the dead.' And in a case where we transgressed and spoke, the Alter Rebbe writes9: And if he reviled him after death, he need not go to his grave but rather asks forgiveness from him in the place where he shamed him.'
Notes:
1 פל"ו אות ב ↩
2 מגילה כח, א ↩
3 מקץ דף רא, ב ↩
4 יומא פח, א ↩
5 פלא יועץ מערכת תשובה. שערים המצוינים בהלכה סי' קלא אות ח. הליכות עולם סי' תרו אות ד ובפתחי עולם אות ה ↩
6 שם ס"ה ↩
7 שם ס"ו ↩
8 שם ס"ט ↩
9 שם ס"ז ↩
[5] (Halacha 93)
Asking for Forgiveness and Reconciliation [4]
The One Being Reconciled With
Question: Must the one being reconciled with forgive immediately?
Answer: The Alter Rebbe wrote1: that 'the one who forgives should not be cruel and refrain from forgiving, but rather should forgive him then and there immediately.'
Question: In which cases is it permitted for a person who was offended not to forgive?
Answer: a. In a case where he feels that for the benefit of the one asking for forgiveness it is preferable that he not yet forgive him, so that his uncircumcised heart will be subdued. b. In a case where it is possible that harm will be caused to him if he forgives, for then the rule of "your life takes precedence over your fellow's life" applies. c. In a case where he uttered slander against him, for then he need not forgive at all, even if he asks him more than 3 times, since it is possible that there are people who heard the slander and not the reconciliation, and they still think that the slander is true, and he is still suspect in their eyes. But nevertheless it is a trait of humility to forgive even in the case of slander2.
Question: What type of forgiveness is the one who forgives required to grant?
Answer: In the manner of forgiveness there may be three levels: a) forgiveness for the sin so that the offender not be punished, but it is possible that in his heart he is still angry. b) beyond that, that he forgives the person himself in such a way that in his heart there is no longer any anger at all. c) forgiveness and reconciliation so deep that it uproots the sin — the offense entirely, and no trace remains, to the point that the one forgiven returns to being favored and beloved before him as before he wronged him.
And from the language of the Alter Rebbe3: that he should not be cruel and refrain from forgiving — meaning that the forgiveness itself should not be a cruel forgiveness — an incomplete forgiveness that leaves anger and the like — but rather forgiveness at the highest, third level.
[And the poskim wrote4 that the one seeking reconciliation should ask the one being reconciled with to pray for him, and the one who forgives is himself commanded to do so. (And in today's terms, that the one who forgives should invite the one asking for forgiveness to sit with him over a cup of coffee in love and brotherhood)].
And in the merit of forgiving wholeheartedly and with a willing soul and with alacrity, we will merit the forgiveness of Hashem, the Master of Mercy, with alacrity and in a manner of kindness and mercy with visible and revealed good5.
A Tikkun for Embarrassing Someone Publicly
To conclude, I will quote from a letter of the Rebbe6: 'Regarding what you wrote about a tikkun for whitening the face of one's fellow, after the fellow has forgiven — it is true that in the aforementioned there is a matter that is between man and his fellow and also between man and G-d, and for this a tikkun is needed; and like all matters of tikkunim, it must be in the very detail in which the corruption occurred, that is to say, to increase in honoring the dignity of people in general and the honor of friends in particular; and since in the vast majority of cases the cause of whitening one's fellow's face is connected with the trait of anger or arrogance, in this too one must conduct oneself toward the utmost opposite extreme, and as is understood from what the Rambam wrote in Hilchos De'os chapter 2.
Notes:
1 ס"ד, ובנזקי גוף ונפש ס"ו. ובתניא אגרת התשובה פי"א ↩
2 שוע"ר שם ס"ד ↩
3 כאן ס"ד מרש"י חוקת כא, ז, ולשון הרמ"א כאן ס"א ↩
4 יש"ש יבמות פ"ח סי' כז ↩
5 לקו"ש חכ"ח חוקת ב ↩
6 אג"ק ח"ז אגרת ה'תתסג - ע' פד ↩
[6] (Halacha 374)
Bread of Non-Jews During the Ten Days of Teshuvah [1]
Question: Could you please explain what is the caution regarding bread of a baker (palter) that is required during the Ten Days of Teshuvah, which the Alter Rebbe writes in the laws of the Ten Days of Teshuvah — siman 603?
Answer: In order to understand this law we will first introduce the essential prohibition of eating bread of non-Jews, as follows:
The Mishnah in Maseches Avodah Zarah1 states: 'And these items of idolaters are forbidden but their prohibition is not a prohibition of benefit .. and the bread..'. And further on the Gemara 36b explains the reason for the prohibition: 'For when Rav Acha bar Ada came, he said in the name of Rabbi Yitzchak: they decreed against .. against their bread and their oil on account of their wine, and against their wine on account of their daughters.'
But in the Gemara we find several leniencies in this decree [and likewise in the Yerushalmi2], for the Gemara there states: 'And the bread. Rav Kahana said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: bread was not permitted by beis din. This implies that there is one who permits? Yes, for when Rav Dimi came he said: once Rebbi went out to the field and an idolater brought before him bread from an oven, a loaf baked from a se'ah, Rebbi said: how nice is this bread, what did the Sages see to forbid it; what did the Sages see? On account of intermarriage! Rather, what did the Sages see to forbid it in the field; the people thought: Rebbi permitted the bread, but that is not so, Rebbi did not permit the bread. Rav Yosef, and some say Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda, said: the incident was not so, rather they said: once Rebbi went to a certain place and saw that bread was scarce for the students, Rebbi said: is there no palter here? The people thought he meant: an idolater palter, but he only meant a Jewish palter. Rabbi Chelbo said: even according to the one who says an idolater palter, we said this only where there is no Jewish palter, but in a place where there is a Jewish palter, no. And Rabbi Yochanan said: even according to the one who says an idolater palter, this applies only in the field, but in the city, no, on account of intermarriage. Aivu would bite and eat bread at the boundary; Rava, and some say Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, said to them: do not converse with Aivu, for he eats the bread of Arameans.'
Thus we learn from the words of the Gemara that there are those who permitted the eating of bread of a non-Jew. And among those who forbid, there are also two cases in which there is an aspect of leniency regarding bread of a non-Jewish baker: a. when bread cannot be obtained from a Jewish baker. b. in the field — that is, when eating in a manner and situation where there is no concern of intermarriage3.
And indeed the Tosafos4 wrote: implies that there is one who permits — from the fact that it says bread was not permitted by beis din, it implies that if it wished it would have permitted it, which shows that its prohibition did not spread, and from here they now relied to eat bread of idolaters since its prohibition did not spread throughout all of Israel .. and a further proof, as it says below (folio 37a) in our days he would permit even the bread, and he refrained from permitting it only because he was called a beis din that permits, and after him came another beis din that permitted it; and further, as they say in the Yerushalmi of our chapter and in the first chapter of Shabbos, bread — they stood up against it and permitted it.' And see also in the Mordechai5.
But the Rambam6 wrote: 'Even though they forbade bread of idolaters, there are places that are lenient in the matter and take bread of the idolater baker in a place where there is no Jewish baker and in the field because it is a time of pressing need, but for bread of homeowners there is no one who rules leniently regarding it, for the essence of the decree is on account of intermarriage, and if he eats bread of homeowners he will come to dine with them.'
And this is the language of the Tur7: 'And the decree of bread did not spread in all places, and my father and teacher the Rosh z"l wrote, and on this the great ones rely who do not forbid it to the people of their region who practice permitting it, for they say that they are among the places where its prohibition did not spread there; and further they rely on what is written in the differences of customs between the people of Eretz Yisrael and the people of Bavel, that one who fasted 3 days is permitted in bread of an idolater on account of preservation of life, and in most of the places of our exile a Jewish palter is not available, and it is as if he fasted 3 days, end quote. And there are those who forbid it unless he actually fasted 3 days. And there are among the Geonim who permitted it on Shabbos if he has nothing to eat, on account of the delight of Shabbos. And according to my father and teacher the Rosh z"l there is no distinction between bread of a homeowner and that of a palter, but some of the authors distinguished between that of a homeowner and that of a palter, since intermarriage applies only to that of a homeowner, therefore they forbade it in every case except in a place of danger, but that of a palter has not so much closeness of mind, for he is engaged in his craft. And so the Yerushalmi distinguishes, that it permits purchasing from an idolater palter in a place where a Jewish palter is not available. And the Rashba wrote: even if there is a Jewish palter there, if the bread of the Jewish palter is not like the bread of the idolater palter, it is permitted since it is more pleasant to him; but this does not appear so from the Yerushalmi, which permitted only in a place where a Jewish palter is not available, but if it is available, only that the idolater's is more pleasant to him, it did not permit.'
In this halacha we learned a bit about the opinions of the Rishonim regarding the prohibition of bread of a non-Jew. Tomorrow, with the help of Hashem, we will learn the halacha and the practical minhag.
Notes:
1 לה, ב ↩
2 שבת פ"א ה"ד, ועבודה זרה פ"ב ה"ח. ירושלמי זה הובא בראשונים רבים כבסיס לכך שהפת הותרה ↩
3 דנו הראשונים האם להלכה יש להקל רק כאשר קיימים שני הפרטים יחדיו דהיינו כאשר נמצא בשדה וגם אין פת של יהודי. או שכל טעם לחוד מספיק כדי להקל וראה בר"ן ↩
4 ע"ז לה, ב ↩
5 עבודה זרה רמז תתל ↩
6 הל' מאכ"א פי"ז הי"ב ↩
7 יו"ד סי' קיב ↩
[7] (Halacha 375)
Bread of Non-Jews During the Ten Days of Teshuvah [2]
In the previous halacha we learned the main opinions of the Rishonim regarding the laws of bread of idolaters.
The Practical Halacha
The Mechaber wrote1: 'The Sages forbade eating bread of the nations, on account of intermarriage. And even in a place where there is no concern of intermarriage, it is forbidden.' And further on he wrote2: 'There are places that are lenient in the matter and take bread from the non-Jewish baker, in a place where there is no Jewish baker, because it is a time of pressing need.' And the Rema wrote: 'And some say that even in a place where Jewish bread is available, it is permitted.'
And the Mechaber continues there: 'But bread of homeowners, there is no one who rules leniently regarding it, for the essence of the decree is on account of intermarriage, and if he eats bread of homeowners he will come to dine with them.' And the Rema wrote in a gloss: 'And it is not called bread of a homeowner unless he made it for the members of his household, but if he made it to sell, it is called palter, even though this is not his usual practice. And likewise a palter who made it for himself is called a homeowner.'
Thus the Mechaber and the Rema adopted the words of the Rambam that there is no aspect of leniency regarding bread of a homeowner, and only regarding palter bread are there aspects of leniency3, except that the Rema wrote that some say one may eat palter bread even when Jewish bread is available4.
This dispute also bears on the case of a person who is traveling, as the Mechaber wrote5: 'There is one who says that one who is careful about bread of a non-Jew, and he is on the road, if there is Jewish bread within 4 mil, he should wait.' And the Rema wrote in a gloss: 'And it has already been explained above that the practice is to be lenient.'
An additional leniency we find regarding bread is that it suffices when the Jew throws a chip into the oven, and as the Mechaber wrote6: 'If a non-Jew lit the oven and a Jew baked in it, or if a Jew lit and a non-Jew baked, or if the non-Jew lit and the idolater baked and a Jew came and stirred the fire a little, this is permitted. And even if he threw only one piece of wood into the oven, he permitted all the bread that is in it, for the matter is only to have a distinguishing sign that their bread is forbidden.' And the Rema wrote in a gloss: 'And if he blew on the fire, it is like stirring.'
And the Shach explained7 that this leniency too is based on the words of the Yerushalmi, that the reason they were lenient regarding bread is because bread is preservation of life, and this is his language: 'And it is not similar to cooked foods in siman 113 where the practice of leniency was not adopted in any place, for by bread man lives, and the reasoning of the Yerushalmi of preservation of life applies to it, and for this reason they were also lenient regarding bread with the throwing of a chip, and likewise several matters that are not effective for cooked foods, as the Mechaber wrote in siman 113 se'if 6.'
Thus we saw that there are numerous leniencies, at least for some of the poskim, in this prohibition of bread of a non-Jew, and that indeed there were many who were lenient. (Except on certain days on which one must be stringent, as we will learn in the following halachos).
It is important to note that there are those who wrote to be stringent regarding this prohibition in general throughout the entire year, and as the Arizal wrote8: 'One who wishes to be a chassid must conduct himself with extra stringencies even though he is not obligated in them according to the law .. also he should be careful not to eat bread of non-Jews, even from the palter at all, and even in a case of doubt he must be careful, and to check whether the bread that the Jewish shopkeeper sells is from an idolater palter, as is customary in Eretz Yisrael, where there is a Jewish shopkeeper who sells bread of an idolater palter'9. And it is brought in practice in the Kaf HaChaim10.
And to note from what the Aruch HaShulchan wrote11: 'And behold, in our country all are always careful about this throughout the entire year in every case. And in the distant places where Jews are few and there is no Jewish palter, they eat from their palter but not from bread of a homeowner unless he has nothing at all to eat and he is hungry, for then it is within his ability to eat even bread of a homeowner, and so it is proper to do and one should not deviate.'
And indeed, thank G-d, today many are stringent and do not eat palter bread. However, to note that there are many kashrus certifications that permit bread of idolaters, and according to the minhag to be stringent not to eat bread of idolaters, particularly when Jewish bread can be found and particularly regarding items that are not preservation of life, it is very proper to give attention to this.
In the following halacha we will learn about a stringency that one should observe in this regard during the Ten Days of Teshuvah.
It is important to note that all of the above discussion concerns bread in which all the ingredients and the vessels etc. are kosher, and the problem is only from the aspect that a non-Jew baked it, and as the Darchei Teshuvah wrote12: 'And know that all of this is in their days when there was no concern of a mixture of a forbidden substance in bread of an idolater, only on account of the decree of intermarriage as stated; but in our times, in which there is on every bread of an idolater, even of a baker, a concern of a great prohibition, for it is the way that they put milk into the dough so that its leavening will rise and it will be well-flavored, and there is also a type of bread called zwieback in which there is a persistent report that they mix fat into it, and who knows whether it is not forbidden fat, and as is known to the knowledgeable, certainly it is clear that now it is certainly forbidden to purchase bread even of a palter, even in a place where a Jewish palter is not available, and even to purchase the dough and bake it oneself is forbidden in all manners until it is verified with certainty that no milk and no forbidden fat has been mixed into it, and see Shu"t Beis HaYotzer Chiyu"d siman 22.'
--------
https://did.li/Shonehalacha
-------
Notes:
1 שו"ע יו"ד סי' קיב ס"א ↩
2 שם ס"ב ↩
3 אך הקשו הנו"כ (ש"ך סק"י) מדברי המחבר בס"ח שכתב: 'יש מי שאומר דבמקום שאין פלטר מצוי כלל, מותר אפילו של בעה"ב'. וכתב רמ"א: 'וא"צ להמתין על פת כשר, וכן נוהגין'. אך הערוה"ש שם סי"ח כתב ליישב: 'ולכן נ"ל דס"ל דגם הרמב"ם מודה לזה דהן אמת דאיהו ס"ל דלא הקילו בפת בעה"ב מיהו זהו הכל כשעכ"פ יש פלטר שלהם ואין פלטר ישראל דאז התירו פת הפלטר ולא פת בע"ב דבכה"ג מיירי בס"ב אבל במקום שאין פלטר כלל, לא פלטר ישראל ולא פלטר שלהם בכה"ג לא גזרו חכמים ולכן א"צ להמתין על פת כשר ..'. ובדעת הרמ"א ראה ש"ך ס"ק ח ↩
4 אך ראה בש"ך סק"ט שנקט שראוי להחמיר היכא דיש פלטר ישראל ↩
5 יו"ד שם סט"ז ↩
6 שו"ע שם ס"ט ↩
7 ס"ק ו ↩
8 בשער המצות פ' וילך ↩
9 ולהעיר שבטעמי המצות פ' עקב נראה שזה כן חומרא ששייכת לכולם, שכתב: 'צריך אדם לשמור מאד שלא לאכול לחם מפלטר כותי..'. אלא שידוע שלשון השמונה שערים מוסמך יותר וכמ"ש הרבי הרש"ב (תורת שלום סי' ד, הובא בלקו"ש חל"ז ע' 142): 'אך ידוע דהשמונה שערים מוסמך יותר ועליו סומכין' ↩
10 יו"ד שם ס"ק נו ↩
11 יו"ד שם סי"ז ↩
12 יו"ד שם סק"ב ↩
[8] (Halacha 376)
Bread of Non-Jews During the Ten Days of Teshuvah [3]
In the previous halachos we saw that there is a prohibition against eating bread of idolaters due to the concern of intermarriage, and that in this prohibition there are those who are lenient, and there are those who distinguish between bread that the non-Jew bakes for himself, called bread of a homeowner, which is more stringent, and bread made for the purpose of sale, called palter bread, in which they are more lenient; but we found that there are days on which one must be stringent even regarding palter bread, even for those who are lenient about it throughout the year, as follows:
It is written in the Talmud Yerushalmi1: 'Rabbi Chiya the Great commanded Rav: if you are able to eat all year long chullin in purity, eat. And if not, eat seven days of the year'.
And in the Ravyah2 he wrote on the words of the Yerushalmi: 'And I have received that these seven days are the seven days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur'3.
And the Rabbeinu Yerucham4 wrote: 'Several people have adopted the practice to be careful not to eat bread of non-Jews at all during the Ten Days of Teshuvah, even though they are not careful throughout the entire year, and they relied on the Yerushalmi, Rabbi Chiya the Great commanded Rav: if you are able to eat all year long in purity, eat, and if not eat 7 days of the year; and the Ravyah wrote: I have received that these 7 days are the 7 between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, and so they practice in Ashkenaz'.
But in the Tashbetz Katan5 he brought the Ravyah and wrote: 'And Rabbi Shmuel of Bomberg said no, [that he was not precise], for specifically chullin in purity, in which there is no prohibition, but it is good to purify oneself. But bread of non-Jews, which is on account of a prohibition — if he practices the prohibition during these 10 days, throughout the year too he should not eat it.'
Except that the Beis Yosef6 reconciled the opinion of the Ravyah: 'And this is not an objection, for since its prohibition is not clear but rather depends on minhag, since at the time that he is careful not to eat it his intention is to be careful only during those days alone, it is obvious that it is not forbidden during the rest of the days of the year.'
And in the Shelah7 he wrote: 'And the holy Rav the Arizal z"l said, certainly the truth is that it refers only to the matter of chullin in purity, and what the Rav Shmuel of Bomberg said that he was not precise, for bread of non-Jews which is on account of a prohibition etc. — he did not understand the meaning, for bread of non-Jews that they wrote here, they do not mean to say that there is in it the prohibition of bread of non-Jews, but rather it is kosher, only that non-Jews baked it. How so? For example that it was made fit through a chip. And those who adopted the practice not to eat bread of non-Jews etc., they mean bread that non-Jews baked and it is kosher — nevertheless they did not eat it on account of tumah, for certainly it was rendered fit to receive tumah, and they need to bake it themselves, and to select that which was not rendered fit as above. It emerges that bread of non-Jews that was mentioned here is on account of the aspect of eating chullin in purity.'
And in practice the minhag is to be stringent, and as the Mechaber wrote8: 'Even one who is not careful about bread of Kusim, during the Ten Days of Teshuvah he must be careful'. And so the Rema wrote in Toras HaChatas9.
And the Levush wrote10: 'If he cannot bake himself, he should make fit the oven in which the non-Jews bake, so that a Jew throws into it one chip so that he will appear as an assistant in its baking'.
And the Magen Avraham wrote11: 'And if he cannot bake himself it suffices with throwing a chip .. And it appears to me that one who is traveling on the road need only wait the measure specified in Yoreh De'ah at the end of siman 112, for they did not accept upon themselves to be stringent during the 10 days more than the rest of the days of the year.'
And this is the language of the Alter Rebbe12: 'Even one who throughout the entire year is not careful about bread of a non-Jewish palter (see Yoreh De'ah siman 112), nevertheless during the Ten Days of Teshuvah he should be careful about it, and if he cannot bake himself he should make fit the oven in which non-Jews bake, that a Jew throw into the oven one chip, as will be explained in Yoreh De'ah siman 112; nevertheless one who is traveling on the road, if there is no Jewish bread before him within more than four mil from the place where he is standing and he wishes to eat, it is permitted for him to eat bread of a non-Jewish palter even during the Ten Days of Teshuvah, just as it is permitted during the rest of the days of the year, as written in Yoreh De'ah there.'
Thus we saw that even those who are lenient about palter bread throughout the days of the year must be stringent about it during the Ten Days of Teshuvah.
Based on this it is important to take note that even those who rely on the various certifications such as OU which permit bread of idolaters, during the days of the Ten Days of Teshuvah one must be careful!
Notes:
1 שבת פ"א ה"ג ↩
2 ר"ה סי' תקכט ↩
3 הובא ברא"ש ר"ה פ"ד סי"ד. ובר"ן ר"ה יב, ב ד"ה גרסינן בירושלמי. אמנם להעיר שמצינו פירושים נוספים לירושלמי, כמ"ש הרבינו מנוח הל' חו"מ פ"א ה"ה: 'ומפרש הרב בעל העיטור בשם אביו דעל שבעת ימי הפסח קאמר ומשום חשש חמץ. פירוש נוסף ראה במקור חיים (בכרך) בסי' תרג מהויכוח מים חיים על תו"ח כלל עה ס"א: 'מה שנראה לי בפירוש ז' ימים שזכר הירושלמי שהם ימים טובים, ושכך נהגו מקדם בק"ק וורמישא בכל יו"ט'. וכ"כ המשך חכמה ויקרא פכ"ג פסוק מב. והטעם שהזכיר שבעה ימים, ולא הזהיר לגבי ר"ה ושבת שובה. ראה דרכי משה סי' תרב סק"ב, ומג"א סי' רמב סק"ד. וראה הלכה הבאה ↩
4 תולדות אדם וחוה נתיב ו ח"ג מט, ד ↩
5 סי' קיז ↩
6 או"ח סי' תרג ↩
7 שער האותיות אות ט ↩
8 שו"ע או"ח סי' תרג ס"א ↩
9 כלל עה דין א. וראה מש"כ הש"ך יו"ד סימן קיב ס"ק ט, ומנחת יעקב שם ס"ק א ↩
10 סי' תרג ס"א ↩
11 סי' תרג בהקדמה ↩
12 שו"ע או"ח סי' תרג ס"א ↩
[9] (Halacha 377)
Bread of Non-Jews During the Ten Days of Teshuvah [4]
Question: Is the stringency specifically regarding palter bread, or is it also proper to be stringent regarding other matters?
Answer: This matter is learned from the reasons for the caution regarding palter bread during the Ten Days of Teshuvah that the poskim wrote, as follows:
a) The Rabbeinu Manoach wrote1: 'And those who permit interpret the Yerushalmi as referring to the seven days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, for when you remove Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, seven remain. And they are days of selichah and mechilah, and one must guard oneself in them with extra guarding from anything that has in it even (a concern of) transgression, in order to be aroused to repent'.
And in the Levush2 he wrote: 'Even one who is not careful about bread of non-Jews during the rest of the days of the year, the practice is to be careful about it throughout the entire Ten Days of Teshuvah, that is, from Rosh Hashanah until Yom Kippur, in order to conduct oneself in purity during these days and to remember that they are distinguished for the better more than the rest of the days of the year, and if he cannot bake himself, he should make fit the oven in which the non-Jews bake, that a Jew throw into it one chip so that he will appear as an assistant in its baking, in order to bring to mind that we are separated from them in holiness and purity, and we will do teshuvah'.
b) The Ramak wrote3 as follows: 'And even if he is careful in matters of chassidus specifically during these days, it is proper to do so, as the commentators explained, even if he does not afterward conduct himself in that chassidus; and without doubt the reason for this is that He is Kel Melech sitting on the throne of mercy and conducts Himself with chassidus, and likewise Binah is called chassidah, "at the head her house," as they explained in the Zohar Parshas Vayeitzei'.
And the Bnei Yissaschar wrote4: 'Therefore you will find a good reason for what the poskim wrote that one should conduct oneself in matters of chassidus during the Ten Days of Teshuvah (even though he does not practice those stringencies throughout the days of the year), for then there is an illumination of teshuvah from Imma Ila'ah which is called chassidah; and in my opinion it may be said that this is what David said "guard my soul for I am a chassid," meaning that since I am a chassid therefore my nourishment is from the supernal teshuvah, chassidah, and there is the wine preserved in its grapes without the touch of a non-Jew, therefore "guard my soul." And it also emerges from this for us that one who conducts himself in matters of chassidus has extra guarding — understand this well'.
c) The Arvei Nachal wrote5: 'And likewise this matter in the year, for it is known that the Ten Days of Teshuvah are like the matter of these 10 sanctities. And it is known that the first day of Rosh Hashanah is harsh judgment, the second day is soft judgment, and afterward the judgment diminished until Yom Kippur, and afterward throughout the year the judgment diminished still more. And therefore it is explained in the Shulchan Aruch, Hilchos Yom Kippur, that even one who is not careful about palter bread throughout the entire year, during the Ten Days of Teshuvah he must be careful. For seemingly it is puzzling: if it is a transgression, who permitted it throughout the year, and if not, why was it forbidden during the Ten Days of Teshuvah. But it is the matter of which we spoke, that at the very beginning of the matter it is the attribute of judgment and a small matter is considered great, whereas throughout the year that matter does not blemish at all. And likewise in the totality of the year, that is the six thousand years, behold we have seen that in the earlier generations the Holy One, blessed be He, was more exacting, because they were more righteous'.
Thus according to all these reasons it is understood that during these days one must endeavor to enhance and to be scrupulous in general in all areas, and not only regarding palter bread.
Question: Are there additional days on which one must be scrupulous not to eat palter bread?
Answer: The Rema wrote in the Darchei Moshe6: '..and from this there is a practice for each person to knead in his home in honor of Yom Tov .. however the minhag in every place is to make them even for Shabbos'. And he also referred to this in the Darchei Moshe in Orach Chaim in siman 242.
And the commentators discussed the intention of the Rema, whether the need to bake stems from the fact that on Yom Tov and Shabbos too the caution exists to be scrupulous specifically about Jewish bread, or whether the reason for baking the challah for Shabbos and Yom Tov is only from the aspect of the honor of Shabbos and Yom Tov.
The Magen Avraham wrote7: 'to make loaves from them. And the Darchei Moshe brings support for this from the fact that the Tur wrote in siman 602 that one should eat chullin in purity during the 7 days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, and it is difficult, are they not 9? Rather, perforce on Yom Tov he eats in purity in any case, and it requires examination, for on the contrary from there it is proven that on Shabbos he need not be careful, for if not so, only 6 would remain when you remove Shabbos and 2 Yamim Tovim of Rosh Hashanah; and it may be said that Rabbi Chiya would sanctify [the month] according to sighting, as is stated in Maseches Rosh Hashanah, and if so there was only one day of Yom Tov; and to me it appears there is a proof for this from Taanis folio 25, that the wife of Rabbi Chanina every Erev Shabbos would light the oven so that they would think that she baked bread. And nevertheless it is proven from the words of the Rema that the reason is to eat kosher bread, and if so one must eat the challos on Shabbos and not other bread.
On the other hand the Eliyah Rabbah8 disagreed with the Magen Avraham, and wrote: 'And consequently his ruling too is rejected, that one must eat specifically kosher bread, for what has Shabbos to do with kosher bread? For specifically during the Ten Days of Teshuvah does this stringency apply, but here where the practice is [to knead at home] the reason is on account of the honor of Shabbos, and as the Rema wrote'.
And so the Alter Rebbe writes9: '(And in places where they eat bread of non-Jews throughout all the weekdays, it is good to be careful not to eat on Shabbos and Yom Tov except from the kosher loaves that were kneaded in his home, for this is the honor of Shabbos and Yom Tov)'.
And in the source-notes of the first edition (attributed to the Alter Rebbe and his brother the Maharil10), it is written: 'Magen Avraham there. See in Eliyah Zuta se'if katan 6 and it requires examination. See Darchei Moshe siman 60[3]'.
It appears that although the Alter Rebbe copied the words of the Magen Avraham that it is good to be careful, but since the Eliyah Zuta objected to the words of the Magen Avraham he wrote this law in parentheses, meaning that in practice the Alter Rebbe remained in doubt11 regarding this law12.
Thus in practice, even those who are lenient about palter bread throughout the year must be stringent during the Ten Days of Teshuvah, (but it is good to be careful also every Shabbos and Yom Tov).
----------
https://did.li/Shonehalacha
-----------
Notes:
1 הל' חו"מ פ"א ה"ה ↩
2 או"ח סי' תרג ס"א ↩
3 פירוש עבודת יו"כ בסדר תקוני המתכפרים א ↩
4 מאמרי חודש תשרי מאמר ד דרוש י אות ל ↩
5 בראשית דרוש א ↩
6 או"ח סי' תרג ↩
7 סי' רמב ס"ק ד ↩
8 בסי' רמב סק"י. (הובא במחצית השקל סק"ד. וראה גם בא"ז סק"ו) ↩
9 או"ח סי' רמב סי"ג ↩
10 ראה מבוא ל'ספרי ההלכה של אדמו"ר הזקן' ע' כ ↩
11 כמ"ש בשארית יהודה או"ח ס"ו: שמעתי מפי קדשו (דאדה"ז) פעמים רבות דכל ספק (בשו"ע) העמיד בתוך חצע"ג ודעתו היתה לחזור ולשנות פרק זה לראות אם צדקו דבריו. (וראה קונטרס השלחן (להגר"ח נאה) במבוא ס"ח, וב'ספרי ההלכה של אדמו"ר הזקן' במבוא ע' כג. ואכ"מ) ↩
12 ראה חקרי הלכות ח"ג טו, ב ↩
From the 'Shoneh Halacha' project — a daily halacha with reasons and sources
Link to the (silent) group: 'Shoneh Halacha — Chabad Minhogim'
Join the WhatsApp groupRequesting Forgiveness and Reconciliation
[1] (halacha 90)
The Ten Days of Teshuvah
'Transgressions between a person and his fellow'
The Rebbe wrote1: 'A transgression between a person and his fellow — Yom Kippur does not atone for it until he appeases his fellow, as it says, "כי ביום הזה יכפר עליכם לטהר אתכם מכל חטאתיכם לפני ה'" ("For on this day He shall atone for you, to cleanse you from all your sins before Hashem") etc. — that is, your sins that are before Hashem alone, Yom Kippur atones for, but that which is between a person and his fellow, Yom Kippur does not atone for until he appeases him.
Therefore every person should take to heart on the eve of Yom Kippur to appease everyone against whom he has sinned, and even if he only provoked him with words, he must go and appease him and request of him that he forgive him'.
The Time for Appeasement
Question: Is the time for appeasement specifically on the eve of Yom Kippur?
Answer: The time for appeasement is as soon as possible, and therefore a person who has wronged his fellow ought to appease his fellow immediately and not delay with this. However, on the eve of Yom Kippur one must be very careful about this, so that the heart of all Israel be whole with one another and there be no opening for the Satan to accuse them2 [and this is in addition to the individual matter that transgressions between a person and his fellow, Yom Kippur does not atone for].
The Obligation to Appease in a Case of Injury or Damage
Question: Is every person who has injured his fellow in his body or his property obligated to appease him?
Answer: a. A person who has wounded his fellow, even unintentionally — beyond the need to pay the damages of the wound, he is also obligated to request of his fellow that he forgive him for the pain he caused him, and the forgiveness of his fellow is a condition for atonement. So too one who stole money from his fellow — even though he returned the stolen item, atonement is not granted him until he requests forgiveness from his fellow for the pain of the theft and his fellow agrees to forgive him.
b. However, one who damaged the property of his fellow — the moment he pays the payment, atonement is granted him and he need not request forgiveness from him3 [and note from the Rebbe's explanation in the view of the Rambam that even in such a case, from the standpoint of the laws of teshuvah, he must appease his fellow4].
Notes:
1 סי' תרו ס"א ↩
2 שם ס"ח ↩
3 שוע"ר הלכות נזקי גוף ונפש ה"ו ↩
4 לקו"ש חכ"ח חוקת ב ס"ט ↩