Asking the Kohen to Leave

Question: I am one of the only kohanim in my shul and regularly receive the first aliyah. Recently, I was asked to leave shul so that two people with yartzheit could receive an aliyah. Was this right?

Answer: The Mishna (Gittin 59a) teaches that we give the first aliyah to the kohen because of darchei shalom, the ways of peace. Thus, the Shulchan Aruch (OC 135:3) writes that a kohen receives the first aliya. The Shulchan Aruch Harav (OC 201:3) writes that this is a mitzva mideoraisa of honouring the kohen. The Gemara (Gittin 59b) concludes that a kohen cannot concede this honour on Shabbos and Yom Tov when more people attend shul. Tosafos writes that this only applied in the times of the Gemara when people were too busy with work to attend shul during the week, but it now applies equally to Monday and Thursday, too.

The Tur (OC 135:4) writes that there is a machlokes as to whether a kohen can ever forgo his honour of being called up first to the Torah. The Levush (OC 135) and Mishna Berura (135:9; 18 quoting the Pri Megadim) maintain that he cannot.

Nonetheless, the Magen Avraham (135:7) writes that a shul can insist that the kohen forgoes the honour when selling aliyos, and the kohen should leave the shul. R’ Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe OC 2:34; 3:20), R’ Yitzchak Yaakov Weiss (Minchas Yitzchak 2:41), R’ Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer OC 6:23) and R’ Moshe Sternbuch (Teshuvos Vehanhagos 1:151) write that one may ask the kohen to leave on Monday and Thursday but not on Shabbos and Yom Tov. They add that this may be appropriate when there are multiple chiyuvim, e.g. two yisraelim have yartzheit. R’ Ovadia Yosef adds that unlike a kohen who cannot duchen, the kohen does not need to leave the room.

The Maharam Schick (OC 60) stresses that this must only be done in extenuating circumstances. Likewise, the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 135:23) opposes selling the first aliyah (see Mishne Halachos 3:13; Shevet Halevi 8:25).

In conclusion, if there are extra chiyuvim in shul during the week, the gabbai can ask the kohen to leave the shul for a minute so that he can call up a Yisrael instead.

Bentching Gomel Upon Recovery

Question: I have just returned home after a week in hospital where I underwent heart-surgery. My doctor said I should ask, should I bentch gomel now that I have recovered?

Answer: The Tur (OC 219:8) writes that there is a machlokes among the rishonim as to how ill one must be in order to recite the beracha of hagomel. Thus, the Shulchan Aruch (OC 219:8) follows Rambam who writes that anyone who was bedridden should bentch gomel upon recovery. The Bach (119:4 quoted by the Magen Avraham 119:8) and Elya Rabba (119:3) write that we follow the Shulchan Aruch.

The Kaf Hachaim (OC 219:8) and R’ Benzion Abba Shaul (Ohr Letzion 2:14:n44) write that this even applies to one who was bedridden and unable to move for a few hours.

Nonetheless, the Rema follows the Raavad who writes that this only applies to a choleh who was dangerously ill and writes that this is the Ashkenazi practice. The Levush (OC 219:8) and Aruch Hashulchan (OC 219:11) concur. The Taz (OC 219:5) defines this as one who has been bedridden for at least three days. Likewise, the Chayei Adam (1:65:6), Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (61:1) and Ben Ish Chai (Ekev 1:7) write that one who was bedridden for three days recites the beracha.

Nonetheless, the Mishna Berura (219:28; Biur Halacha 219:8) writes that even if one was seriously ill for a shorter period of time, one should bentch gomel.

R’ Avraham Avraham (Nishmat Avraham OC 219:2) quotes R’ Shalom Elyashiv who maintained that anyone undergoing a procedure under general anaesthetic should bentch gomel (See Tzitz Eliezer 12:18; Halichos Shlomo, Tefilla 23:2).

In conclusion, one who undergoes heart-surgery should bentch gomel upon recovery.

Tefillin Mirror

Question: I see many people use a mirror to ensure that their tefillin shel rosh is placed exactly in the middle of one’s head. Is this necessary?

Answer: The Shulchan Aruch (OC 27:10) writes that one must ensure to place one’s tefillin shel rosh in the middle of one’s head. The Mishna Berura (27:36) notes that one does not fulfil the mitzva according to some acharonim if one’s tefillin are not in the middle, adding that larger tefillin can be problematic.

The Shulchan Aruch (YD 156:2) writes that men should not look in a mirror unless they need to do so for medical reasons, etc. Nonetheless, the Rema writes that where it is common for men to do so, it poses no issue.

Nonetheless, R’ Chaim Sanzer (Divrei Chaim OC 2:6) demonstrates that the tefillin do not need to be exactly in the middle and writes that using a mirror to position one’s tefillin is considered uncouth. R’ Menashe Klein (Mishne Halachos 5:8; 11:29-30) notes that the Brisker Rav was accustomed to using one. Nonetheless, he writes that for thousands of years, men wore tefillin without using a mirror, and it is ideal not to use one. R’ Eliezer Waldenberg (Tzitz Eliezer 12:6:2) concurs, adding that, if necessary, one may look into a dim reflection of a window, etc.

Sefer Halichos Shlomo (Tefilla 4:n108) notes that R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach used a mirror to position his tefillin later in life. Likewise, the Dirshu Mishna Berura (27:n42) quotes R' Yosef Shalom Elyashiv who maintained that as men do use mirrors nowadays, it is appropriate to use one.

In conclusion, there are different opinions regarding using a mirror to straighten one’s tefillin. Some Chassidishe poskim frown upon using one while others are encouraging.

Temporary Mezuzos

Question: We asked a sofer to come to our house to check our mezuzos. He said that it would take him a couple of days until he could return them. Do we need to put up other mezuzos in the meantime?

Answer: The Pri Megadim (Eshel Avraham OC 38:15) writes that one must not remain in a house without a mezuza. Thus, if a mezuza falls down on Shabbos or Yom Tov, one must vacate their home and move into another house if they have one. The Pischei Teshuva (YD 285:1) adds that this halacha applies equally to the weekday, and one may only stay in their home if they do not have another home to go to. Nonetheless, R’ Ephraim Greenblatt (Rivevos Ephraim 2:28:4; 5:548) quotes R’ Chaim Kanievsky who maintained that one is not required to leave a home without a mezuza.

R’ Moshe Sternbuch (Teshuvos Vehanhagos 1:643) notes that people often remove their mezuzos unnecessarily as a good mezuza on an internal door should not need checking regularly. It is advisable for a sofer to have spare mezuzos that he can affix, particularly for when one owns the house.

Nonetheless, R’ Avraham Dovid Wahrman (Daas Kedoshim 291:1) writes that if one removes one’s mezuzos to be checked, one is not required to replace them in the interim. One would only need to replace them if it would take a while to find someone to ask. R’ Ephraim Greenblatt quotes the Emek Beracha who explains that chazal never required that one replace the mezuzos while they are being checked. R’ Dovid Feinstein relates that his father, R’ Moshe, would remove all of his mezuzos together to be checked, rather than check them one at a time.

R' Shamai Gross (Shevet Hakehasi 1:273) writes that while one does not need to replace one’s mezuzos while they are being checked, it is commendable to place one on one’s front door.

In conclusion, one is not obligated to affix temporary mezuzos when one removes theirs to have them checked. If a mezuza is found to be passul, one must replace it immediately, if necessary, by borrowing one until one can buy a new one. Ideally, one should ensure that there is a mezuza on their front door overnight.

Reciting Berachos With Children

Question: Can I pronounce Hashem’s name properly when teaching children?

Answer: The Gemara (Nedarim 7b) warns us about the consequences of saying Hashem’s name in vain. The Shulchan Aruch (OC 215:4) writes that one who says an unnecessary beracha has said Hashem’s name in vain. The Magen Avraham (215:6) writes that according to Rambam (Berachos 1:15) this is forbidden mideoraisa while Tosafos (Rosh Hashana 33a) and the Rosh (Kiddushin 1:49) write that it is forbidden miderabanan.

The Gemara (Berachos 53b) teaches that when children are practicing reciting berachos, one should not say amen in response. The Kesef Mishna (Berachos 1:15) writes that it is clear from the Gemara that adults teaching children can say the berachos for them to repeat, complete with Hashem’s name. In such a case, one should not say amen when the child says the beracha (See Mishna Berura 215:14). The Shulchan Aruch (OC 215:3) writes that one should say amen, however, if they are saying a regular beracha, e.g. before eating. The Mishna Berura (215:16) points out, however, that this only applies to a child over the age of chinuch (See Mishna Berura 128:123).

R’ Yaakov Emden (She’elas Yaavetz 1:81) writes that his father, the Chacham Zvi, admonished a teacher who avoided using Hashem’s name when teaching children chumash. R’ Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe OC 2:56) explains that this only applies when the children are reading the complete passuk in one go. R’ Moshe adds that one may even use Hashem’s name when teaching adults how to properly recite berachos.

In conclusion, one should recite berachos including Hashem’s name with children to teach them how to pronounce the words correctly. One should only say amen to a child’s berachos when they reach the age of chinuch and have a basic understanding of berachos (about five or six years old).

Bentching Gomel Following a Crash

Question: I narrowly missed a serious pile-up on the motorway in which people were seriously hurt. Should I bentch gomel?

Answer: The Gemara (Berachos 54b) teaches that there are four specific scenarios following which one recites the beracha of hagomel. They are crossing a desert or a sea, imprisonment, or serious illness. Nonetheless, the Shulchan Aruch (OC 219:9) writes that there is a machlokes as to whether this list is exclusive or not. The Magen Avraham (219:10), Shulchan Aruch Harav (Birkas Hanehenin 13:7) and Mishna Berura (219:32) write that we pasken that one recites the beracha upon being saved from other potentially fatal situations, too.

Nonetheless, the Chida (Birkei Yosef OC 219:8; Machzik Beracha OC 219:6), Ben Ish Chai (Ekev 1:10) and Kaf Hachaim (OC 219:52) write that we only recite the beracha following these four instances. If one survived a different incident, one should recite the beracha without Hashem’s name.

The Chayei Adam (1:65:4) writes that one who has survived being hit by a heavy falling stone recites the beracha, regardless as to whether the stone hit them or just missed.

However, the Mishna Berura (218:32) disagrees, writing that if the stone fell and just missed them, there is a machlokes as to whether one recites the beracha. Thus, one should recite the beracha without Hashem’s name.

Following this, R’ Yisroel Pesach Feinhandler (Avnei Yashpei 1:46:2) and Piskei Teshuvos (218:10) write that one who narrowly avoided a dangerous car crash should not bentch gomel.

One who was involved in a dangerous car-crash should bentch gomel. One who narrowly avoided such an incident, does not bentch gomel.

Omitted Baruch Hashem in Maariv

Question: I davened maariv in a Chassidishe shul and they did not say the beracha of Baruch Hashem leolam.. before the amida. Should I say it after Maariv?

Answer: The Tur (OC 236:2) explains why we recite the beracha of Baruch Hashem before the amida. In the olden days, shuls were situated in the cities. In order to prevent people returning home so late, chazal penned an abridged version of the amida. We continue saying this even though the reason no longer applies, though there are rishonim who maintain that we no longer say it.

The Taz (OC 236:2) writes that one who comes late to shul should skip this beracha, if necessary, to daven the amida with the tzibbur and recite it after maariv instead. Likewise, the Elya Rabba (236:7) and Chayei Adam (1:34:3) write that if one needs to skip Baruch Hashem, they should recite it after Maariv. The Magen Avraham (296:7) adds that as saying this is only a minhag, one can skip it, if necessary, though does not write whether one should repeat it afterwards. The Mishna Berura (236:11) writes that the Magen Avraham implies that one should repeat it, while the Maharam Schick (OC 93) understand the Magen Avraham as not requiring one to recite it later.

The Maharam Schick quotes Tosafos who implies that one who skips it does not say it after Maariv. He argues that reciting it later could even be a beracha levatala. While there is no requirement to say it, if one does so, they should not conclude the beracha with Hashem’s name. Similarly, the Mishna Berura (236:11) quotes the Maaseh Rav (67) who writes that one should not recite it after. He concludes that one who says it should not say the concluding beracha (see Shraga Hameir 4:42:2).

In conclusion, if one did not say the beracha of Baruch Hashem before the amida, one should not say it afterwards.

Touching Food Before Negel Vasser

Question: Our ten-year-old daughter poured herself some cereal for breakfast and realised that she had forgotten to wash her hands first. Does she have to throw it out?

Answer: The Shulchan Aruch (OC 4:2; 3; 18) writes that one must wash one’s hands upon waking up to remove the ruach ra’ah, bad spirit. One should avoid touching one’s mouth and eyes, etc. before washing. The Mishna Berura (4:10) writes that we should urge children to wash their hands, too, before touching food (see Moreh Baetzba 2:60).

The Chayei Adam (1:2:2) quotes his grandson who demonstrates that things prohibited due to ruach ra’ah are not prohibited bedieved. R’ Moshe Sternbuch (Teshuvos Vehanhagos 1:1) challenges this, writing that not all forms of ruach ra’ah are equal. He quotes a story in which the Vilna Gaon refused to eat such food, asking for it to be destroyed. Nonetheless, he justifies buying food from places where the workers likely did not wash their hands three times (see Shraga Hameir 7:171:1).

Likewise, the Mishna Berura (4:14) writes that food touched by one who has not washed their hands is not prohibited to eat. Nonetheless, one should wash the food itself three times, if possible.

R’ Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer OC 4:1) quotes many poskim who allow one to eat the food, adding that one can wash the food if feasible. R’ Eliezer Waldenberg (Tzitz Eliezer 13:2) adds that neither the Gemara, Rambam or Shulchan Aruch make any mention of food being touched by one who has not washed their hands becoming contaminated. He quotes the Malbim (Ortzos Hachaim, Eretz Yehuda 4:4) who writes that we are not as concerned for ruach ra’ah nowadays (see Kaf Hachaim OC 4:20).

R' Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichos Shlomo 20:n25) quotes the Shulchan Aruch Harav who writes that we are lenient with regards to children under bar-mitzva or bas-mitzva.

In conclusion, while one should be meticulous about washing one’s hands properly in the morning, if one touched food beforehand, the food does not need to be discarded.

Mezuza Upgrade

Question: I had my mezuzos checked and found out that a couple of them are not the best quality. Do I recite a new beracha when replacing them with better ones?

Answer: The Aruch Hashulchan (YD 289:4) writes that if one removes their mezuza to check it, they do not recite a new beracha if they reaffix it that same day. However, if the mezuza was passul and had to be replaced, one must recite a new beracha. There is a machlokes however as to whether one recites a new beracha when replacing a kosher mezuza with another one.

The Maharam Schick (YD 285) compares this to tzitzis. The Rema (OC 8:12) writes that if one removed one’s tzitzis and donned a new pair one recites a new beracha. So too, one replacing a mezuza must recite a new beracha.

However, R’ Shimon Greenfeld (Maharshag YD 1:57) disagrees, arguing that there is a difference between mezuza and tallis. One who was wearing a tallis and later decided to don a second pair would have to recite a new beracha as each pair is a separate mitzva. However, one cannot add a second mezuza to a doorway. Rather, he compares switching a mezuza to one blowing shofar on Rosh Hashana who has to switch shofar in the middle, whereby one would not recite a new beracha.

Nonetheless, R’ Avraham Dovid Wahrman (Daas Kedoshim 289:4), R’ Shraga Feivish Schneebalg (Shraga Hameir 1:39), R’ Yaakov Yeshaya Blau (Chovas Hadar 11:14) and R’ Shmuel Wosner (Shevet Halevi 2:158:4) write that we pasken like the Maharam Schick and recite a new beracha.

In conclusion, if one replaces one’s old mezuza with another, one recites a new beracha.

Fallen Mezuza

Question: One of our mezuzos got knocked off accidentally. Do we need to fast?

Answer: The Magen Avraham (44:5 quoting the Mishpatei Shmuel) and Shulchan Aruch Harav (OC 44:5) write that there is a minhag for one to fast if their tefillin fall on the floor. According to the Mahari Brunna (127) one who drops their tefillin should see it as a sign from heaven that they need to do teshuva. The Chida (Chaim Sha’al 1:12), however, explains that one must do so to atone for not treating them with the due care and respect (see Tzitz Eliezer 5:1).

R’ Moshe Zvi Landau (Mezuzos Melachim, Halacha Lemoshe 201) writes that there is a machlokes as to whether one needs to fast or not if a mezuza falls. R’ Moshe Leib Rosenbaum (Beis Aryeh 15:6) writes that one does need to fast, while R’ Chaim Falagi (Lev Chaim 3:131) maintains that one does not need to fast as a mezuza is not as holy as a sefer Torah or tefillin (see Maharsham 2:264).

R’ Moshe Stern (Baer Moshe 3:9:8), R’ Menashe Klein (Mishne Halachos 5:195) and R’ Shraga Feivish Schneebalg (Shraga Hameir 3:12:1) write that this minhag to fast does not apply when a mezuza falls. Rather than fast, one should donate money to tzedaka.

The Chida concludes that each Rav should decide what is appropriate for his kehilla.

In conclusion, one does not need to fast if their mezuza fell to the ground.

Hanging Mezuza

Question: The top nail came out of our mezuza case causing the mezuza to hang upside down on the bottom nail. Do I need to recite a new beracha when reaffixing it?

Answer: The Shulchan Aruch (OC 8:15) writes that if one’s tallis accidentally slipped off, one should recite a new beracha when putting it back on. The Pischei Teshuva (YD 289:1) and the Aruch Hashulchan (YD 289:4) compare this to a mezuza that fell, writing that one is required to recite a new beracha upon replacing a fallen mezuza.

However, R’ Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer YD 3:17:11) writes that one does not recite a new beracha, arguing that there is a fundamental difference between tzitzis, which one is no longer obligated to wear when they are no longer wearing a tallis, and a mezuza, which must be affixed to one’s doorway at all times.

Nonetheless, the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (11:7), Chayei Adam (Kuntres Hamezuza 289:7) and R’ Menashe Klein (Mishne Halachos 7:186) write that one does say a new beracha if the mezuza had fallen.

R’ Moshe Stern (Baer Moshe 6:6) quotes his father (Shulchan Eish OC 8:15) who questions whether one recites the beracha if the mezuza partially falls. He explains that this doubt would not apply in our scenario where the mezuza was hanging upside down or if the mezuza was hanging freely on the top nail. In such cases, one would have to affix it with a new beracha. Similarly, R’ Yaakov Yeshaya Blau (Chovas Hadar 11:15:n29) writes that one recites a new beracha even if the mezuza did not totally fall.

In conclusion, if one’s mezuza fell so that it was not hanging properly, one must affix it and recite a new beracha. Some Sephardim do so without reciting a beracha.

Classroom Mezuza

Question: Do we need to affix mezuzos to classrooms?

Answer: The Gemara (Yuma 11b) teaches that there is a machlokes as to whether one places a mezuza on the entrance to a beis haknesses. The Shulchan Aruch (YD 286:3) writes that a beis haknesses doorway is exempt from a mezuza unless someone lives in the shul building. However, he writes that there is a machlokes (YD 286:10) as to whether a beis hamedrash doorway requires a mezuza, concluding that it is ideal to affix one, albeit without reciting a beracha. The Shach (YD 286:19) explains that as the students learn there all day, it is considered to be a place of habitat.

Nonetheless, the Shulchan Aruch (YD 286:11) writes that a shop in a market is exempt. The Taz (YD 286:10) explains that such shops remain empty at nights. Nonetheless, a regular classroom contains equipment and supplies that the teachers and students need to teach and learn. As such, it should be obligated with a mezuza (see Kobetz Beis Levi 2:5753)

R’ Ephraim Greenblatt (Rivevos Ephraim 5:545) writes that classrooms have the same status as a beis Hamedrash and one is obligated to affix one, though without a beracha.

In conclusion, one should affix a mezuza to a classroom without reciting a beracha.