Borer - Removing a Tea Bag from the Liquid

I sent the following question to Rav Ostroff:

Siman 319:9 (It is forbidden to put dregs inside a strainer even when the strainer was hanging before Shabbos, but if the dregs were put inside before Shabbos it is permitted to pour water over them until the water becomes clear) seems to describe perfectly a tea bag. Clear water goes into the bag, picks up the flavour of the tea from the leaves and then drops through the other side. So why is it assur to take a tea bag out and let it drip back into the cup?

Rav Ostroff replied:

The difference between the two is that in the first case you are pouring water, which does not require separating (that's the explanation we gave), and [in the second case] you are lifting out the tea bag in order to separate the leaves from the surrounding beverage.

For further discussion see SSK 3:48 footnote 171 and Sefer Shulchan Shlomo siman 319 paragraph 2.

Borer - Cracking Nuts - Opinion of Shulchan Aruch HaRav

The following question was sent by one of the Chabura to Rav Ostroff:

Cracking nuts. I understand the Alter Rebbe [author of the Shulchan Aruch HaRav] in Siman 319:9 is machmir, but I do not understand why?

a) The Alter Rebbe does not mention cracking the nut, only the skin and the green shell. Why do we say the shell is ossur and not mutar?

b) Your explanation on page 41 "since one is able to crack the nut and eat it without peeling he should do so." This implies cracking the nut is mutar?

Rav Ostroff replied:

The Alter Rebbe in the Siddur suggests against cracking nuts because it can lead to borer, not that cracking is always borer, because cracking for now is permitted.

Silverware - Borer after Scattering

The following question was sent by one of the Chabura to Rav Ostroff:

I believe I am correct that if silverware is "thrown" on to the table, I can take what I want even if not l'alter. If yes what is the source for this?

Rav Ostroff replied:

Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igros Moshe, OC Vol. IV Siman 74 (Borer Question 11), based on the Gemora.

For those without immediate access to an Igros Moshe, here's what is written there:

יא) האם מותר לברר כפות ומזלגות ע"י שיזרקם קודם על השולחן ויפרדו

(כי הא דשבת ע"ד ע"א ושדא קמייהו וברש"י שם).

תשובה: היא עצה טובה.

Borer - Arranging Chairs

The following question was sent by one of the Chabura to Rav Ostroff:

If I have two cups on table, my understanding is I can only take the one I want (l'alter). What about arranging chairs? And what if they're stacked?

Rav Ostroff replied:

But it's one min and they're the same, I don't see a mixture. It's like having 10 identical socks in a drawer - there is no mixture.

Borer - What is a Mixture?

The following question was sent by one of the Chabura to Rav Ostroff:

What is the definition of a taroves [mixture]? Does borer apply to all items? In Siman 319:3 the Mechaber writes "two foods which are mixed" and the Mishna Berura (15) adds mixtures of different types of keilim or clothing.

Rav Ostroff replied:

Your question is the hardest issue of borer!! Rav Neuwirth gave a shiur and mentioned 12 cases of where he cannot define whether items are in a mixture or not. One must determine whether jumbled items are together and a mixture, or separate; it is hard to determine.

Siman 319:8 - Separating Karshanim

In Vol. IV Shiur 6 HaRav Ostroff mentions in the name of his father-in-law, why we don't say that using a sieve in this case [removing peel from karshanim by placing them in a sieve] is a psik reisha, namely that the action is one of carrying the sieve and not a ma'aseh borer.

I'd just like to mention that the Kaf HaChaim on this Seif, 319:75, writes that we are not worried that borer will axiomatically take place as "לא עביד כלום" - i.e. not only is he not doing borer, but he isn't doing anything at all (carrying or otherwise). He makes the further point that we don't prohibit this in case he might do an actual ma'aseh borer as it wouldn't be derech b'reira (it's a shinui) and he would only be doing an issur d'Rabbanan.

Uvda d'chol and Borer

I would be interested in your comments before I bother Rav Ostroff with this theory, that any time borer is permitted with a shinui it is because of uvda d'chol and not borer per se:

In truth, all borer for constructive purposes should be prohibited. Because borer is so common and necessary to function and enjoy Shabbat, Chazal made certain allowances. The caveat is that there is a distinction between uvda d’chol borer and Shabbat borer. A shinui on a permitted action too similar to a weekday act is permissible. One could never turn a truly ossur act, either d’oraita or d’rabonon, into a permitted one with merely a shinui.

The Teferet Yisrael in Kalkelet Shabbat identifies three categories of activity prohibited by Chazal because of uvda d’chol:

An activity which resembles one of the 39 forbidden labors on Shabbat

An activity which might lead one to perform one of the 39 forbidden labors on Shabbat.

An activity which entails excessive exertion and ruins the spirit of Shabbat.

Examples:

Filtering slightly turbid water is permitted thru a cloth but not thru a dreg strainer. Slightly turbid water is one min and is not subject to borer; if it were, it would also be prohibited to strain thru a cloth. Proof is that, cloudy water is a taarovis and prohibited to strain thru a cloth. A dreg strainer is the usual weekday tool for straining. Its use for slightly turbid water was too close to a weekday activity so Chazal insisted on a shinui.

One is not allowed to peel the thin skin off peanuts by rubbing them in between two hands or sifting them through two hands, but may separate them by rubbing them with the tips of his fingers (SA 319:6) or sift them through one hand (SA319:9). Peanuts and their skin are two mineem, but one is allowed to separate with his hands before eating or remove the outside cover to access the inner food just before eating. Hands can’t be a kli for separating the definition of a borer kli is facilitating separating which can’t be done with ones hand! Peeling the sifting peanuts with two hands is the normal weekday procedure, one hand is a shinui

Heat can’t be a kli for separating. One can’t hold heat! Nevertheless, one is prohibited from standing “milk in a hot place for it to become cheese” (MB seif katan 63). This is a transgression of mechabeytz מחבץ which is a toldah of borer. Yet what did one do? One is allowed to stand up a bottle of wine and let the dregs settle out, even though the wine in its original state is a taarovis and settling is borer mamish, because, what did one do? Placing milk in a warm location was forbidden by Chazal because it is the uvda d’chol manner of making cheese.

This Blog - Comments and Suggestions

Now that we are up and running I am creating this post so that any of you can leave comments and suggestions by "commenting" to it.

Double Knots - A Sefardi Perspective

I e-mailed HaRav Ostroff the following question. The parts in bold type are his comments.

Dear Rabbi Ostroff,

You wrote about double knots:

The Sha'arei Teshuva 1 cites the Birkei Yosef who says that

We are accustomed in our area to tie a double knot in our belts, because it is neither permanent nor a craftsman's and nobody refrains from doing it except a very small minority, which are batel within their own minority.

The probable explanation is that the knot is not tight and therefore it does not enter the category of a craftsman's knot.

I found it quite an interesting exercise viewing some of the Sefardi Poskim on this matter.

The Kaf HaChaim (23) quotes the Birkei Yosef and writes that "it seems that this is case of a knot that is not tight".

The Ben Ish Chai (Ki Tisa Second Year Seif 2) refers to a much longer treatment on the subject in his Rav Pa'alim, but basically he agrees that a double knot is assur. His take on the Birkei Yosef is that the tiny minority referred to is of the people, not the Rabbis, and so you can't learn from that case. (The Kaf HaChaim also agrees that the tiny minority refers to the people, but he doesn't take it to the same conclusion as the Ben Ish Chai).

So, you have the support of two major Sefardi Poskim who both agree that a double knot is assur.

Now lets look at the Yalkut Yosef (my Sefardi son-in-law bought me a set). It's volume 4, Hilchos Shabbos Volume 2, Siman 317 Seif 8. The chapter heading says that most of this chapter was written by Rav Ovadiah himself.

Although he begins with a "Yeish Omrim" that a double knot is forbidden, he concludes that the Minhag is to permit one to tie a tight double knot on Shabbos, so long as one doesn't intend for it to last, but one who is machmir, "Tavo Alav B'racha."

In the footnotes he bases his p'sak on the Birkei Yosef who, he says, was obviously talking about a tight double knot. What I find interesting (as a fan of Rav Ovadiah's works) is that he dismissed the Ben Ish Chai and completely ignored the Kaf HaChaim.

That is because Rav Ovadia's shita is to return to the BY and not make mention of the Ben Ish Chai (in many cases) becasue he followed other shitot other than the BY, mainly the Rama.

Thank you for the info, it is very interesting

Kol tuv

Rabbi Dovid Ostroff

Trapping - A large aquarium

Dear Chavura,

What is your answer to the question below?

Rabbi Dovid Ostroff

Dear Rabbi Ostroff,

In Shiur 16 questions at the end, question number 8 asked about a fish in a large aquarium. The answer said a small aquarium is ossur d'rabbanan. What about the large aquarium. I answered it would be d'oraisso because I cannot catch a fish very well, especially in a large aquarium. Is this correct.

Thank you,

Tzvi

Trapping - Cockroaches Problem

Dear Chavura,

What is your answer to the question below?

Rabbi Dovid Ostroff


Dear Rabbi Ostroff,

A practical question: We get roaches in our apartment. I catch them in a plastic cup, and throw it outside (where it runs free). Is "catching and releasing" considered trapping (since for the minute until I carry it outside it is trapped), or is it similar to tying knots that are untied immediately are not considered tied (I have not gotten to those halachos yet, but I believe I learned that previously)? I am not worried about muktze because I believe it is roi shel graf (repulsive). If "catching and releasing" is considered trapping, would there still be a heter?

I imagine some of the considerations would be that it is not a hunted species, which would put the trapping of the roach as a d'rabbanan. In addition, the trapping is not for the sake of trapping (I do not want the roach, I want the roach outside), so that could put it as a melacha sh'aino tzricha l'gufo. Also, while it will likely not cause physical harm (though sanitary considerations may come into play for health), my wife is VERY unhappy when she sees one in the apartment.

Finally, would the roach be considered partially trapped since it is the apartment? For this last one, I would think that is not true since it can escape (however it got in, it could leave), and I cannot always catch it with one lunge. I was not clear enough on what would be considered trapped (e.g.a bird trapped in a big house).

Thank you,

Tzvi

Introduction

Welcome to my Blog. This is the place for those who are studying the Pirchei Shoshanim Hilchos Shabbos Program can discuss matters connected with their learning and where, I hope, questions to HaRav Dovid Ostroff shlita, together with their answers, can be posted.