Mezuza on a Caravan

Question: We own a caravan that we use a couple of times a year, while the rest of the time it remains parked in our driveway. Are we required to affix a mezuza to it?

Answer: Rambam (Mezuza 6:9) and the Shulchan Aruch (YD 286:11) rule that a dwelling on a ship is exempt from a mezuza because it is not intended for permanent residence.

R’ Shraga Feivish Schneebalg (Shraga Hameir 3:19) clarifies that caravans, which are generally not designed for long-term living, do not require a mezuza, even if someone resides in them year-round.

R’ Mordechai Yaakov Breish (Chelkas Yaakov YD 147:45; 163) and R’ Moshe Stern (Baer Moshe 2:88) note that if a caravan is used as a permanent home, there is indeed an obligation to affix a mezuza with a beracha. However, if the caravan is primarily bought or rented for travel purposes, a mezuza should be affixed without a beracha.

R’ Yitzchak Yaakov Weiss (Minchas Yitzchak 2:82) discusses a scenario in which a caravan serves as a person’s primary home, due to financial constraints. In such cases, he asserts that a mezuza must be affixed with a beracha, though he expresses some doubt about reciting the beracha. If the caravan is continuously on the move, there is no requirement to affix a mezuza.

R’ Moshe Sternbuch (Teshuvos Vehanhagos 2:542) adds that if one lives in a caravan for at least a month while it is stationary, a mezuza should be affixed without a beracha. If the caravan is never stationary for that long, there is no obligation to affix one (see Rivevos Ephraim 3:505).

In conclusion, if the caravan is used solely for holiday travel, there is no need to affix a mezuza. However, if it is used as a residence and remains stationary for at least a month, a mezuza should be affixed, albeit without a beracha.

Wearing Different Tefillin

Question: Occasionally, we forget to bring our tefillin to school and end up borrowing a friend’s. Some of us use Ashkenazi tefillin, others use Sefardi, and some use Chabad tefillin. Does it make a difference?

Answer: The writing of a Sefer Torah follows three primary traditions: Ksav Ashkenazi, with sharp, distinct forms and prominent crowns; Ksav Sefardi, with rounded, flowing letters; and Ksav Ari, which blends rounded and sharp elements. While each shul generally has a sefer Torah written according to its mesora, R’ Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer YD 2:20; Yechave Daas 2:3) cites various Ashkenazi and Sefardi poskim who agree that one can read from any sefer torah regardless of one’s tradition.

A further machlokes among the rishonim concerns the spacing at the start of the fourth paragraph in the tefillin. Rambam (Tefillin 8:2) holds that there should be a large space, with the paragraph beginning in the middle of the column (pesucha, or ‘open’), while the Rosh (Sefer Torah 13) maintains that it should start at the beginning of the line like the other paragraphs (stuma, or ‘closed’). The Shulchan Aruch (OC 32:36) follows Rambam, ruling that if the fourth portion is not closed, the tefillin are passul.

Ashkenazim generally follow the Taz (OC 32:26), who proposes a compromise: leaving a short space (less than nine letters) both at the end of the third paragraph and at the beginning of the fourth (see Mishna Berura 32:164; Aruch Hashulchan OC 32:63). However, R’ Ovadia Yosef (Yechave Daas 4:3; Yabia Omer OC 9:108:24) underscores that for Sefardim, adhering to the Shulchan Aruch, such spacing invalidates the tefillin. Consequently, tefillin prepared in accordance with the Taz would be considered passul according to the Shulchan Aruch.

R’ Ben Zion Abba Shaul (Ohr Letzion 2:3:7) writes that if a Sefardi can only find Ashkenazi tefillin, he should wear them without saying the beracha. However, Sefardim may wear Chabad tefillin, as Chabad follows the Rambam’s opinion (see Shulchan Aruch Harav OC 32:52).

In contrast, an Ashkenazi may wear Sefardi tefillin and say a beracha (see Igros Moshe OC 5:2).

In conclusion, an Ashkenazi may wear Sefardi or Chabad tefillin without issue. Sefardim should only wear Sefardi (or Chabad) tefillin.

Food for Zimmun

Question: We regularly have lunch together at work, where two of my colleagues eat bread while I usually bring a salad. Can we still make a zimmun?

Answer: The Gemara (Berachos 48a) teaches that, for a group of ten to recite the special zimmun of “nevareich Elokeinu,” a majority, must have eaten bread. Rambam (Berachos 5:8) and the Shulchan Aruch (OC 197:2) rule that when seven of ten participants eat bread, the remaining three may join even if they have only eaten other foods, forming a valid zimmun.

A machlokes exists, however, regarding a zimmun of three: The Rif (Berachos 35b), Rambam, and Rashba (Berachos 48a) hold that all three participants should eat bread, while the Ri (Tosafos Berachos 48a), Rabbenu Yonah (35b), and Rosh (Berachos 7:21) allow one participant to join even if he ate other foods. Tosafos goes further, permitting a third who has only had a drink to participate, though the Kol Bo (25) requires a minimum of a kezayis of food (see Beis Yosef OC 197:2).

The Shulchan Aruch (OC 197:3) advises avoiding this machlokes by ensuring that those eating other foods should not join two who have eaten bread. Still, the Magen Avraham (197:9) cites the Knesses Hagedola, who rules that it is sufficient if one person has only had a drink. The Mishna Berura (197:22) supports this, and R’ Ovadia Yosef (Yechave Daas 4:13) clarifies that this leniency aligns with the Shulchan Aruch. In earlier times, the leader would recite the entire bentching aloud while others listened. Today, with individual recitations, a zimmun may be led even if not all participants ate bread, especially given that Hashem’s name is not invoked during the zimmun.

The Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (45:10), Mishna Berura (197:20), and Ben Ish Chai (Korach 1:5) elaborate that ideally, one who has not eaten bread should consume a kezayis of mezonos to join a zimmun. If that is not possible, any kezayis of food or drink, aside from water, suffices.

In conclusion, one who has only eaten a salad may join as the third member of a zimmun.

Beracha on a Borrowed Tallis

Question: I am single and do not wear a tallis while davening. Do I need to recite a beracha when I wear one to daven from the amud or for an aliya?

Answer: The Aruch Hashulchan (OC 91:2) and Kaf Hachaim (OC 147:4) state that one who receives an aliya (or any other kibbud) should wear a tallis out of respect for the tzibbur. The Magen Avraham (14:1) quotes the Rosh, who indicates that one who wears a tallis to lead the davening or to duchen should recite a beracha.

The Mishna Berura (14:11; Biur Halacha 14:3) addresses a machlokes regarding whether one should recite a beracha when borrowing a tallis. This issue specifically concerns borrowing a friend’s tallis. However, one does recite a beracha when wearing a tallis that belongs to the shul, as the tallis is partly considered his. He therefore suggests that it is preferable to borrow a friend’s tallis to avoid the safek of reciting a beracha (see Har Zvi OC 17).

Nevertheless, the Kaf Hachaim (OC 14:14, quoting the Ben Ish Chai), R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichos Shlomo, Tefilla 3:12), R’ Ephraim Greenblatt (Rivevos Ephraim 5:14:2), and R’ Menashe Klein (Mishne Halachos 9:234) maintain that one does not recite a beracha even when wearing a shul tallis for an aliya

. R’ Greenblatt explains that the shul tallis was not necessarily purchased on behalf of the shul members but was likely an old tallis that someone no longer needed.

In conclusion, one recites a beracha when wearing their own tallis. However, one who borrows a tallis to daven for the amud or for an aliya does not recite a beracha.

Tallis Before Tefillin

Question: Is it important to put on one’s tallis before one’s tefillin?

Answer: The Beis Yosef (OC 25:1) rules that one should don the tallis before the tefillin, citing two reasons. Firstly, the mitzva of tzitzis is considered equal to all other mitzvos. Secondly, we follow the principle of ‘tadir ve’sheino tadir, tadir kodam, the mitzva that is performed more frequently takes precedence.’ Since we wear a tallis every day, but not tefillin on Shabbos and Yom Tov, the tallis is put on first.

The Shulchan Aruch (OC 25:1) provides a third reason, explaining that we follow the rule of ‘maalin bekodesh, we increase in aspects of holiness’. The Bach (OC 25:1) adds that wearing tzitzis serves as a reminder to perform other mitzvos, including tefillin. The Levush (OC 25:1) explains simply that one is obligated to wear tzitzis upon waking, whereas tefillin can only be worn once one is fully dressed.

The Beis Yosef and Shulchan Aruch write that if one picks up their tefillin first, they should put them on first, adhering to the rule of ‘ein maavirin al hamitzvos¸ one does not pass over an opportunity to perform a mitzva’. Therefore, it is advisable to arrange the tallis bag so that the tallis is reached first.

The Shaagas Aryeh (28) challenges these reasons, arguing that unlike tefillin¸ the mitzva to wear a tallis is not obligatory in the same way tefillin are. Additionally, maalin bekodesh does not apply when dealing with two separate mitzvos. Instead, the holier mitzva should take precedence (see Dagul Merevava OC 25:1).

However, the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 25:1) and Mishna Berura (Biur Halacha 25:1) explain that maalin bekodesh refers to the ascending process of kedusha that we undergo, starting with wrapping ourselves in a tallis and then donning tefillin.

The Ben Ish Chai (Torah Lishma 1) adds that there are kabbalistic reasons for putting on the tallis first. As such, if one put on their tefillin first, they should remove them to put on their tallis first (see Kaf Hachaim OC 25:1). However, other poskim disagree (Aruch Hashulchan OC 25:3; Mishna Berura 25:5).

In conclusion, it is important to put on one’s tallis before putting on one’s tefillin.

Cover Tefillin on Arm

Question: Is it important to cover the tefillin shel yad with one's sleeve?

Answer: The Gemara (Menachos 3b) teaches us, based on the Passuk (Shemos 13:9) “vehoyu lecha leois (it shall be a sign for you),” that the tefillin shel yad should be placed on the upper arm, which is typically covered, as opposed to the hand which is usually exposed.

The Rema (OC 27:11) writes that one does not need to be overly particular about covering the tefillin shel yad. However, the Shulchan Aruch Harav (OC 27:8) states that if one has a bandage on their arm and must wear their tefillin over it, they should cover their tefillin.

The Elya Rabba (27:17) cites the Levush who asserts that the tefillin shel yad should be covered regardless. He questions why the Rema does not require this, especially since the Gemara implies its necessity. Thus, the Mishna Berura (27:47) notes a preference for covering. The Shaarei Teshuva (27:17) cites the Chida (Birkei Yosef OC 27:5), who writes that there are kabbalistic reasons for doing so, adding that one should pull down one’s sleeve after donning the tefillin shel yad. Similarly, the Ben Ish Chai (Vayera 1:15) writes that even when davening alone in a dark room, one should cover one's arm (see Kaf Hachaim OC 25:33).

The Aruch Hashulchan (OC 32:88) frowns upon the use of plastic protective covers on the tefillin shel yad. Nevertheless, the Zichron Yehuda (1:16) quotes the Maharam Schick, who asserts it’s laudable to affix such a box as it prevents the tefillin from becoming passul. Similarly, R’ Avraham Yitzchak Kook (Orach Mishpat OC 9), R’ Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer OC 8:4) and R’ Shmuel Wosner (Shevet Halevi 8:8) approve of the protective covers, though they advise removing them while donning the tefillin and affixing them only afterward (see Piskei Teshuvos 27:n199).

In conclusion, it is commendable to cover one’s arm by pulling down one’s sleeve. It is advisable to keep the protective cover on one’s tefillin shel yad, ideally affixing it after donning the tefillin.

Drying Hands During the Beracha

Question: I learned that one shouldn’t perform any action while reciting berachos, yet I see many people drying their hands while reciting al netilas yadayim. Is this permitted?

Answer: The Gemara (Pesachim 7b) teaches that one should recite the beracha before performing a mitzva. Accordingly, the Shulchan Aruch (OC 158:11) states that one should recite ‘al netilas yadayim’ before washing one’s hands. One should first rub their hands to ensure that they are clean. However, the Rema writes that since the mitzva is not complete until the hands are dried, the beracha should be recited between washing and drying them. The Mishna Berura (158:41) notes that this is the accepted practice.

The Rema also indicates that if one forgets to recite the beracha before drying their hands, it can still be said afterward. The Mishna Berura (158:44) explains that ‘al netilas yadayim’ is different from other berachos because it cannot be said earlier due to the potential uncleanliness of one’s hands. However, the Ben Ish Chai (Shemini 1:7) asserts that the beracha cannot be recited after the hands are dried.

The Mordechai (Pesachim 539) suggests that the beracha should be recited while drying the hands. In contrast, the Ben Ish Chai emphasizes that one should avoid performing any action, including drying one’s hands, while reciting the beracha. Nonetheless, R' Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld (Salmas Chaim 15) and R' Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichos Shlomo, Tefilla 22:29) defend this practice, explaining that drying the hands is an essential part of the mitzva of netilas yadayim.

In conclusion, it is ideal to wash one’s hands, recite the beracha, and then dry their hands. However, one should not criticize those who dry their hands while reciting the beracha.

Keep the Torah Open

Question: When receiving an aliya, is it best to close the sefer Torah during the Berachos, or leave it open?

Answer: The Gemara (Megilla 32a) discusses a machlokes about whether one who is called up to the Torah should leave the sefer Torah open or close it while reciting the berachos before their aliya. According to R’ Meir, the sefer Torah should be closed to avoid the misconception that the berachos are written in the Torah. R’ Yehuda, however, is not concerned about this potential misunderstanding. The Gemara concludes that the halacha follows R’ Yehuda.

Consequently, Rambam (Tefilla 12:5) and the Shulchan Aruch (OC 139:4) rule that when called up, they should open the sefer Torah to see the section they will read from, leave it open while reciting the Berachos, and then proceed with the reading. Before reciting the berachos after their aliya, one should close the sefer Torah.

The Taz (OC 139:4) and the Mishna Berura (139:17) explain that closing the sefer Torah and then reopening it to find the place again would constitute tircha detzibbura (an unnecessary burden on the community).

The Rema (OC 139:4) advises that when reciting the berachos beforehand, one should look to the side. However, the Mishna Berura (139:19) suggests that this is not ideal, as it appears that one is looking away. Instead, it is better to close one’s eyes, or read the berachos if they are written on the bimah.

Some follow Tosafos (Megilla 32a), who write that ideally, one should close the sefer Torah before reciting the berachos. The Aruch Hashulchan (OC 139:12) challenges this, asserting that the consensus among the poskim is to leave the sefer Torah open.

In conclusion, it is preferable to leave the sefer Torah open during the berachos to avoid delaying the tzibbur, even for a few extra seconds.

Bar Mitzva in the Omer

Question: My son turns Bar Mitzva during the omer. Can he continue counting each night with a beracha?

Answer: The Shulchan Aruch (OC 489:8) writes that if one forgets to count the omer one day, they should resume counting without a beracha. The Minchas Chinuch raises the question of whether a boy who becomes bar mitzva during the omer should continue counting with a beracha, ultimately concluding that he should.

Bottom of FormWhile his counting before his bar mitzva was only miderabanan due to chinuch, it still contributes to his new mitzva mideroaisa.

According to the Ben Ish Chai (Rav Berachos 2:5; Bereishis 2:14) it is preferable for a boy turning bar mitzva on Friday night to delay reciting kiddush until nacht. R’ Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer OC 3:27; 28) extends this principle even to mitzvos derabannan such as kiddush levana. If a boy approaching bar mitzva can delay performing the mitzva until he has become bar mitzva, he should do so. Moreover, any counting he did before reaching bar mitzva was merely for chinuch and does not fulfil the real mitzva of counting once he reaches bar mitzva. Consequently, he should no longer recite the beracha when counting (See Birkei Yosef 20). Similarly, the Avnei Nezer (539) argues that just as one who performed a mitzva while mentally incompetent hasn't fulfilled their obligation, children are not considered to have fulfilled the mitzva. Hence, he cannot continue counting with a beracha.

Nonetheless, the consensus of poskim is that a boy continues counting with a beracha upon reaching bar mitzva. The Ksav Sofer (OC 99) notes that there is a machlokes between Rashi and Tosafos regarding whether the mitzva of chinuch lies on the father or the child. We pasken like Tosafos that the mitzva is the child’s obligation. Thus, his counting as a child counts towards his counting post bar mitzva (See Maharam Schick OC 269).Top of Form

Likewise, the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 489:15), R’ Zvi Pesach Frank (Har Zvi OC 2:76), R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichos Shlomo, Pesach 11:10), R’ Benzion Abba Shaul (Ohr Letzion 1:36) and R’ Menashe Klein (Mishne Halachos 11:397) write that a boy who has counted every night with a beracha should continue doing so after his bar mitzva.

The Shaarei Teshuva (489:20) and Kaf Hachaim (OC 489:94) emphasize that this holds especially true for a boy about to turn bar mitzva as he is deemed ‘mufla samuch laish’, approaching maturity (See Nidda 46b). Additionally, the Minchas Elazar (3:60) argues that since the beracha itself is miderabanan, Chazal would not penalise him for fulfilling a mitzva in his youth, especially one that is also miderabbanan.

In conclusion, a boy who has diligently counted the omer every night should continue counting with a beracha after his bar mitzva.

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 was accidentally knocked off. Do we need to fast?

Answer: The Magen Avraham (OC 44:5, quoting the Mishpatei Shmuel) and Shulchan Aruch Harav (OC 44:5) write that there is a minhag for a person to fast if their tefillin fall to the ground. The Mahari Brunna (127) explains that dropping tefillin should be seen as a sign from shamayim, prompting one to do teshuva. The Chida (Chaim Sha’al 1:12) clarifies that the fast serves as atonement for a lapse in proper care and respect (see Tzitz Eliezer 5:1).

R’ Moshe Zvi Landau (Mezuzos Melachim, Halacha Lemoshe 201) discusses a machlokes regarding whether one must fast if a mezuza falls. R’ Moshe Leib Rosenbaum (Beis Aryeh 15:6) maintains that fasting is required, whereas R’ Chaim Falagi (Lev Chaim 3:131) argues that a mezuza does not possess the same level of sanctity as a sefer Torah or tefillin, and therefore fasting is unnecessary (see Maharsham 2:264).

R’ Menashe Klein (Mishne Halachos 5:195) and R’ Yitzchak Yosef (Yalkut Yosef, Sova Semachos, Mezuza 106) note that the Magen Avraham does not mention a need to fast for a fallen mezuza. R’ Moshe Stern (Baer Moshe 3:9:8) and R’ Shraga Feivish Schneebalg (Shraga Hameir 3:12:1) also write that the minhag to fast does not apply to a mezuza. Thus, the prevailing minhag is to give tzedaka instead of fasting. The Chida advises that each Rav should guide his kehilla according to what is most appropriate.

The Pischei Teshuva (YD 289:1) and the Aruch Hashulchan (YD 289:4) mention that just as one must recite a new beracha when putting a tallis back on after it has fallen off (Shulchan Aruch OC 8:14), one should also recite a new beracha when rehanging a fallen mezuza (see Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7).

However, R’ Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer YD 3:17:11) rules that a new beracha is not necessary when reaffixing a fallen mezuza. He explains that when a tallis falls off, the mitzva is considered complete, and putting it back on requires a new beracha. In contrast, the mitzva of a mezuza remains ongoing even when it falls, so it should be reaffixed immediately without a new beracha (see Halichos Shlomo, Tefilla 3:14).

In conclusion, when rehanging a fallen mezuza, Ashkenazim should recite a new beracha, while Sefardim generally do not. In all cases, the mezuza should be reaffixed immediately. Instead of fasting, give tzedaka.

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.