Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Bracha for Shechting Ben Paku'ah But Not for Extra Chanukiah

Right.  Having now established precisely (more or less) what a ben paku'ah is, we are now ready to understand why a bracha is required for the sh'chita of a ben paku'ah, but not bracha is required (nay! even permitted) when lighting a chanukiah in a second window that faces a different direction.  The source of our consternation is that in both cases it is Chazal who required the additional action and that action is required for the same reason; namely, to prevent onlookers from drawing a false conclusion based on our suspicious activity.  R' Shlomo Zalman Auerbach gives four differences in the situations that help us to understand the difference in decrees of our Sages.

First there is a timing issue.  The second chanukiyah is usually going to be lit at the same time (or within minutes) of the first one.  The ben paku'ah, on the other hand, could very well be shechted even years later.  It is perfectly reasonable, therefore, to consider the lighting of the second chanukiyah as covered by the first bracha, which is not the case for our walking happy meal.

Second, the nature of sh'chita is that it serves a two-fold purpose: the fulfillment of a g'zeira and also permitting something that was here-to-fore forbidden; turning the animal into meat, in this case.  The lighting of the chanukiyah, on the other hand, is simply the fulfillment of a g'zeira; that action serves to remove suspicion, but not to permit anything that was forbidden before.  We do not find that Chazal established brachos for those activities.

Third, the g'zeira requiring sh'chita of a ben paku'ah is a real, live, full fledged g'zeira; even if there are no onlookers and even no possibility of onlookers, that ben paku'ah requires sh'chita.  The g'zeira requiring the second chanukiah is only operative as long as there is a possibility of suspicion from onlookers.  Now a days that we light inside with no concern that passers by should see our chanukiah at all, there is also no necessity to light a second chanukiah either (Mishna Brura 671, sk 54).

Finally, even if an onlooker would suspect a non-second-chanukiah-in-a-second-window-facing-a-different-direction-lighter of not lighting chanukah licht at all, he is certainly not going to conclude that no one in this town lights chanukah licht or that he doesn't need to light.  His suspicion is narrowly focussed on that one ba'al ha'bayis in that one house, because he is surrounded by lots of chanukios in lots of houses.  Shechting a ben paku'ah, on the other hand, could certainly be the only sh'chita going on right now; certainly that was the usual case before refrigeration.

There you have it.  I am sorry if I caused you a lot of distress over Shabbos trying to figure out what the differences might be.  Actually... no; I'm not sorry at all.  In fact, feel free to look into it more yourself, Halichos Shlomo, Mo'ed, chapters 13 - 17.  Don't skip the footnotes.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: Why Halacha Has "b'di'avad"

There was this Jew who knew every "b'di'avad" (aka, "Biddy Eved", the old spinster librarian) in the book.  When ever he was called on something, his reply was invariably, "biddy eved, it's fine".  When he finally left this world and was welcomed to Olam Haba, he was shown to a little, damp closet with a bare 40W bulb hanging from the ceiling.  He couldn't believe his eyes and said in astonishment, "This is Olam Haba!?!"  "Yes, Reb Biddy Eved,  for you this is Olam Haba." b'di'avad gets used like that; f you don't feel like doing something the best way, do it the next (or less) best way.  But Chazal tell us that "kol ha'omer HaShem vatran, m'vater al chayav" -- anyone who thinks HaShem gives partial credit is fooling himself to death (free translation.  Ok, really, really free translation; but its still true).  HaShem created us and this entire reality for one and only one purpose: for use...