Mikvaos, Siman 201, Shiur 13

May 14, 2019

1- We learnt the next Seif, 19 –

Mechaber 19

שתי מקואות שאין בשום אחת מהן מ’ סאה, ונפל לזו לוג ומחצה ולזו לוג ומחצה ונתערבו ב’ המקואות, – Two mikvahs in which neither have 40 seah, and 1½ lug fell into one and another 1½ lug fell into the other, and then the two mikvahs mixed.  הרי אלו כשרים מפני שלא נקרא על אחד מהם שם פסול – they are kosher because neither one has been called invalid.

אבל מקוה שאין בו מ’ סאה, שנפלו לתוכן ג’ לוגין מים שאובין ואחר כך נחלק לשנים, וריבה מים כשרים על כל אחד מהם, הרי אלו פסולין – However, a mikvah that does not have 40 seah, that had 3 lugin of drawn water fall in it and afterwards split into two, and more kosher water was added to each of them, they are invalid.

2- We began to learn 3 Seifim which discuss the Kashering of a Mikvah that is פסול.

The central point is as follows:

If a Mikvah is not Kosher, due to מים שאובים, then adding rain water to it, even an enormous amount, does not make it Kosher. Period.

The only way it can become Kosher is if we remove the invalid water, either by drawing it out or by adding more water causing the Mikvah to overflow. So only if the original water is drawn out  or displaced by the rain water does the Mikvah become Kosher.

But, if we add water, and the Mikvah overflows, how do we know if the ‘old’ water has been removed? Does not the ‘new’ water mix with the ‘old’ and both flow out?

Example: a Mikvah that has a capacity of exactly 40 סאה . One filled it almost entirely with מי גשמים. So there is less than 40 סאה . He then throws into the Mikvah 3 lugin of tap water and thereby rendering the entire water in the Mikvah as פסול.

He can of course empty it……thank you Yankel….

The only way to Kasher by adding more מי גשמים is when are sure that the entire original water is displaced and that 40 סאה of the new water remains.  

So, say he pours 50 סאה of clean מי גשמים. That will cause 50 סאה to overflow.

So now we have 4 options on how we can view this 50 סאה that overflowed:

1- The entire original 40 flowed out plus 10 of the new. So the Mikva is Kosher.

2- The entire 40 of the new water flowed out and just 10 of the old. Not Kosher, since there is no 40 סאה  of rain water remaining. .

3- Half and half. 25 of the new and 25 of the old. Not Kosher, since there is no 40 סאה  of rain water remaining. .

4- Proportionally. 40 old vs 50 new. That 5/4 . Meaning that 44% of the old and 66% of the new flowed out. Not Kosher since there is no 40 סאה  of rain water remaining. 

We mentioned a similar concept from the business world as to how one tracks the cost of sold inventory.

Known as the LIFO and FIFO principle. See here.

So in some cases the Chachamim established that we can assume that the first water to leave the Mikvah is only the old water. Option 1 above

 

3- Here is the fist Seif.

 

סעיף כ

Mechaber

בור שהוא מלא מים שאובים והאמה נכנסת לו ויוצאה ממנו, לעולם הוא בפסולו עד שיתחשב שלא נשארו מהשאובים שהיו בבור שלשה לוגין –  A pit that is filled with drawn water and an aqueduct comes in and goes out of it, it is always invalid until it is calculated that there is not three lugin of the original drawn water left in the pit.

 

Notice that the Mechaber did not say how to calculate. See the next Seif.

 

We will learn more about this next week IY”H.

 

4- Here is the next Seif:

 

סעיף כא

Mechaber

מקוה שנפל לתוכו מים שאובים ונפסל, ואחר כך ריבה עליו מים כשרים עד שנמצאו הכשרים מ’ סאה, – A mikvah into which drawn water fell and invalidated it, and afterwards kosher water was added to it until the kosher water amounted to 40 seah, which would ostensibly make it a kosher mikvah as it now has 40 seah of kosher water הרי הוא בפסולו עד שיצאו כל המים שהיו בתוכו ויפחתו השאובים פחות מג’ לוגין. – It is nonetheless still invalid. Since it still contains in it the invalid water, and thus, until all the invalid water is taken out and the drawn water is reduced to less than 3 lugin. If the original mikvah had 39 seah + 3 lugin we must now remove 39 seah + a little – thus, in total we would have the kosher 40 seah and less than 3 lugin

 וכן אם עשה מקוה שיש בו  ארבעים סאה מים כשרים, ועירבו עם המקוה הזה הפסול, טהרו אלו את אלו (וה”ה במעין כל שהוא שהמשיך אליו השאובין, נטהרו כמו שנתבאר לעיל) – And likewise if one made a mikvah of 40 seah of kosher water, and it mixes with the water of the invalid mikvah, it purifies it (and the same thing is with a spring of any size that ran into the drawn water, it purifies them as was explained above).

5- Now that we established that if there are 3 lugin in an empty Mikva then adding מים שאובים to will never Kasher it, we can understand why a Mikva needs to be totally dry after it is cleaned.

Moreover, it is the reason why Kashering a Mikvah just with זריעה is not advisable as we discussed at length.

 

 

Shiur 12

May 7, 2019

1- We continued to learn the second half of סעיף ט”ו.

Here begins the Sugya of  שלשה לוגין. The basic concept is that in order to drive the point that only a proper Kosher Mikvah achieves טהרה, and not a ‘shower’ or ‘bath’, the חכמים enacted various גזירות concerning מים שאובים.

The most famous one is that by just entering a pool of water that is not a proper Mikvah renders someone טמא!  Ditto when taking a shower.

In our case the גזירה concerns a Mikvah that does not have full 40 סאה. If one puts in 3 Lugin (which is about a quart), of מים שאובים the Mikvah becomes פסול. So even if a Mikvah is missing a drop less that the full 40 סאה, adding the 3 Lugin spoils this Mikvah. (We will learn later on on how to remedy this situation).

2- Here is the Shulchan Aruch:

אבל כל זמן שאין במקוה מ’ סאה, אפילו אם אינו חסר אלא כל שהוא, אם נפלו לתוכו ג’ לוגים מים שאובים, פסלוהו – However, any time that a mikvah does not have 40 seah, even if it is missing an infinitesimal amount, if 3 lugin of drawn water fall inside, it invalidated the Mikva. 

לא שנא שאבן בכלי, לא שנא סוחט כסותו והגביהו והמים שבה נופלין ממקומות הרבה (רמב”ם פ”ה;  – It does not matter if the drawn water is from a vessel, or if one squeezes one’s clothing above the Mikvah and the water drips from many places;   וכן המערה מהצרצור ומטיל ממקומות הרבה לתוכו, או שזרקם בחפניו, ואפילו נפלו בו משני כלים או משלשה, מזה מעט ומזה מעט, מצטרפין – and the same ruling will also apply if one pours from a watering pot and it pours from the many holes into the Mikva, or it is thrown with his hands, and even if it is dropped from two or three pots, a little from this one and a little from that one, they combine to invalidate it with 3 lugin.

3- We discussed the case when  “one squeezes one’s clothing above the Mikvah and the water drips from many places”. Is the issue here שאובין or is the issue that this Mikvah was created via ‘the hand of a human’?  

4- What is a צרצור? Some say it is a garden watering can.

 

5- We mentioned the Mishna in כלים 2, 6. Where a vessel called Titrus is mentioned.  טִיטְרוֹס

What is a Titrus? Jastrow translates it: a perforated vessel, sprinkler, strainer.

We mentioned the Rambam who says that it is a vessel that has one hole on the top and many holes on the bottom. To use it one dunks the entire Keli into water. He then places his finger on the top hole thereby causing the water not to leak out of the bottom.

6- Not to be confused with the Greek word Tetris which is a prefix for the number 4. Hence the name of the Tetris game which derived its name from Tetris since all the shape configuration have four squares.

We continued to learn Seif 16-19

סעיף טז

Mechaber

הספוג שבלועין בו ג’ לוגין וכשנפל למקוה נתערבו המים הבלועין עם מי המקוה, – A sponge that absorbed 3 lugin and when it fell into a mikvah the absorbed water mixed with the mikvah waters, וכן דלי שפיו צר ובו ג’ לוגין מים שאובין ונפל למקוה ולא יצאו כל המים שבתוכו אלא נתערבו עם מי המקוה, – and Likewise a bucket that has a narrow opening that contains 3 lugin of drawn water that fell into a mikvah and not all of the water that was in it came out but it mixed with the mikvah water, לא פסלוהו  –  It is not invalid   שלא אמרו אלא שלשה לוגין שנפלו ונתערבו כולם עם מי המקוה – Because we only say that the mikvah is invalid if/when 3 lugin of drawn water fall in and mix entirely with the mikvah waters.

סעיף יז

Mechaber

מים שאובין שהיו בצד המקוה, אע”פ שהמים נוגעים במי המקוה, לא פסלוהו – Drawn water that was on the side of the mikvah, even though this water touches the mikvah water, it does not invalidate it.

סעיף יח

Mechaber

שתי בריכות זו למעלה מזו וכותל ביניהן ואחד מהן מלאה מים כשרים וחבירתה מלאה שאובין ונקב ביניהם – Two pools one on top of/next to the other and they are separated by a wall, one filled with kosher water, however less than the requisite 40 seah, the other with drawn water and there is a hole between them,  אם יש כנגד הנקב שלשה לוגין מים שאובין, נפסלה. – If there is 3 lugin of water against the hole, they are invalid.  כמה יהא בנקב ויהיה בו שלשה לוגין, אחד משלש מאות ועשרים לבריכה – How much is needed in the hole for it to have 3 lugin? 1 in 320 to the pool.

1 Seah = 6 kav = 4 lugin

40 Seah = 960 lugin

960/3 = 320th of 40 Seah = 3 lugin

BS”D

Shiur 11- April 30, 2019

1- We began to learn Seif 15.

The fist part discusses the ‘power of a Kosher Mikvah”. Meaning that a proper Mikva –  [whether made Kosher by being a מעין  (even with just a trickle of water, כל שהוא) or 40 סאה  of rain water] – cannot become פסול by adding more water- even מים שאובים. This rule applies even if the מים שאובים that is added is by far greater in volume than the original amount of water that was in the Mikvah.

Here is the Shulchan Aruch:

סעיף טו

Mechaber

מקוה שיש בו ארבעים סאה, ומעין כל שהוא, יכול לשאוב כל מה שירצה ליתן לתוכה והם כשרים, אע”פ שהם רבים על המים שהיו בתוכה תחלה – A mikvah that has 40 seah, and a spring of any size, one may pour any amount of drawn water into them and they are kosher, even though the quantity is greater than the water originally in there.

2- So now we have a Mikvah that began with, say, 40 סאה  of rain water. Then one added 1000 (or more) סאה of tap water, this Mikvah is 100% Kosher.

Note: If one begins to take out water from this Mikvah, it becomes an issue, as we discussed in the past and will learn more about in the future.

Now, what happens if this Mikvah overflows into another pool? The Halachah is that this pool is considered a proper Mikvah.

 

3-The above is true if the original Mikvah is one with מים גשמים.  

What about a spring – a מעין? For example a well, that had water flowing at the bottom and one added 1000 gallons to raise the water level. Is this well is a proper Mikvah with all the properties of a מעין?

The Halachah is that it is not 100% a מעין. It would not be Kosher if it begins to overflow and its water is still flowing out of the second pool. – זוחלין.

Here is the ש”ך.

ש”ך

מא) והם כשרים

ואם הלכו אותן המים שהשליכו במעיין למקום חסר שלא היה בו כלום יש מתירים ג”כ לטבול בו עכ”ל רבינו ירוחם ומביאו ב”י – The Beis Yosef quotes Rabeinu Yerucham – That if after adding drawn water to a mayan this water then continued to fill an empty pit/hole that previously had nothing inside. There are those who validate it for immersion.  ומשמע דיש אוסרים והלכך טוב להחמיר – However it seems that there are those who invalidate it and therefore it is best to be stringent.

 מיהו נראה דדוקא במקוה חסר שלא היה בו כלום – However, it’s only best to be stringent when the pit/hole was completely empty beforehand  אבל במקוה חסר כל שהוא יותר ונשאר שם כ”א סאין אינו פוסל המקוה לכ”ע דרובא בהמשכה כשרה כדלקמן סעיף מ”ד – But if it was only a mikvah missing an small amount and there was at least 21 seah  it does not invalidate it according to all opinions as the majority was done through hamshacha that was kosher. As will be explained later in Seif 44:

4- So the overflow of this מעין is פסול בזוחלין. What about the other property of a מעין  which is that it does not need to be at least 40 סאה?  

That is the topic of the next ש”ך. He quotes sources that for טבילת כלים,  this מעין can indeed be used even if it has less than 40 סאה. So what we have is a new category of מעין.  

זוחלין: no.

כל שהוא : yes!

 

מב) אע”פ שהן רבים כו

וכתב ב”י בשם הרמב”ם והרא”ש מיהו נתבטל מהמעיין דין זוחלין אלא מטהר באשבורן דוקא – The Beis Yosef writes from the Ramba”m and Rosh – Although adding drawn water does not invalidate the mayan, in one regard it nonetheless cancels as a mayan – to validate immersion while in motion. Whereas a mayan is kosher while moving, this mayan only purifies when stationary.    וכ”כ הב”ח לדעת הטור וכ”כ בד”מ לדעת הטור ומביאו בהגהת דרישה סעיף כ”ה וכבר ביאר זה הרב בסעיף י”א – And so too the Bac”h writes in the name of the Tur and the Drisha brings it as well. As the Ramo already previously clarified in seif 11.

 

So now the question is why doesn’t the Shulchan Aruch mention this leniency of טבילת כלים not requiring 40 סאה? So the Sha”ch says something that is very fundamental – he answers that all of הלכות מקוואות are only referring to the Halachos of טומאה וטהרה. And since these Halachos are not practiced these days, there is no need to mention that כלים can be immersed in such a מעין that has less than 40 סאה.

 

However, טבילת כלים  for dishes and pots purchased from a non-Jew that requires a Mikvah immersion one does indeed need 40 סאה even in a well or spring- מעין!! As is mentioned in Shulchan Aruch Y”D 120.

Here is the Sha”ch.

ומ”מ מבואר דדין מעיין עליו לטבילת כלים בכל שהוא  – However it is regarded as a mayan to validate immersion for vessels with any amount, even less than 40 seah

והמחבר לא ביאר זה דהוי מעיין לטבילת כלים בכל שהוא וכן בכמה מקומות בסימן זה כגון בסעיף ב’ וסעיף ה’ וסעיף י’ וי”א ושאר מקומות היה לו לבאר ולא ביאר – Yet the Mechaber did not explain this ruling in regard to vessels, [which he should have] neither here nor in many places in this siman even when discussing this topic such as in seif , 5, 10, 11  והיינו משום דכיון דטומאה וטהרה אינו נוהג בינינו לא שייכא טבילת כלים האידנא – Because the laws of purity are not practiced by us, therefore there was no need to discuss laws regarding immersing vessels.

 ובכלים הנקחים מן העובדי כוכבים באמת קי”ל דצריך ג”כ מ’ סאה כמו אדם כמו שנתבאר בריש סי’ ק”כ ע”ש – And vessels that are purchased from gentiles need 40 seah just as with humans. As was explained in siman 120 see there.

5- We learnt the text of the Shulchan Aruch Y”D 120.

הקונה מהעובד כוכבים כלי סעודה של מתכו’ או של זכוכית או כלים המצופים באבר מבפנים אף על פי שהם חדשים צריך להטבילם במקוה או מעיין של ארבעים סאה (טור בשם סה”מ ועב”י): הגה י”א דכלים המצופים באבר אפילו בפנים יטבול בלא ברכה (ב”י בשם סמ”ק וארוך) וכן נוהגין:

One who acquires from an idol worshiper a meal vessel of metal or glass or vessels or covered in lead from the inside – even though they are new one must immerse them in a mikvah or a stream that is forty se’ot. GLOSS: There are those who says that vessels that are covered in lead even on the inside are immersed in a mikvah without a blessing, and this is our custom.

6- We discussed the pronunciation of the word אבר (Avur) and  מתכות (Matuchos).

We learned the Ta”z that explains the reasoning that we need to טובל  glass.

From there we digressed to the famous Machlokes between the Sefardim and Ashkenazim in regards to glass. Whereas the former hold that it is never בולע and the latter that it can never be Kashered!

We also discussed the properties of the new invention of Stainless Steel – invented in 1913 – which perhaps is not בולע.

See here Orach Chaim 451.

כלי זכוכית אפי’ מכניסן לקיום ואפילו משתמש בהם בחמין אין צריכים שום הכשר שאינם בולעים ובשטיפה בעלמא סגי להו. הגה ויש מחמירים ואומרים דכלי זכוכית אפי’ הגעלה לא מהני להו וכן המנהג באשכנז ובמדינות אלו (סמ”ג ואגור) וכן כלי כסף שיש בתוכן התוך זכוכית שקורין גשמעלצ”ט אין להגעילו אבל מבחוץ אינו מזיק. (תה”ד סימן קלב):

…Glass containers, even if one put [chametz] inside for an extended amount of time, and even if they are used with hot food, do not need any kashering, because they do not absorb. Normal washing is sufficient for them.

Rem”a: There are those who are stringent and say that even scouring does not work for glass objects, and such is the practice in Ashkenaz and in in these lands (Sma”k and Agur). Silver objects that have glass lining inside called “gishmaltzt” should not be scoured, but if it is on the outside, it does not damage [the kosher status of] the object (Trumat HaDeshen chapter 132).