Question:I purchased an electric coffee machine, and I am quite sure that if I immerse it in a mikva the appliance will be ruined. Are there any Halachic solutions for this predicament? Introduction:The mitzvah of tevilas keilim is the obligation to immerse klei se’udoh (i.e. utensils used in conjunction with food) purchased from a non-Jew in a kosher mikva (enumerated in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De’ah Siman 120). The obligation of tevilas keilim applies to metal or glass utensils specifically and not to klei se’udoh made from other materials. 2) “Repairing” the utensil with a Jewish craftsman – regarding a utensil that is too large to immerse in the mikva the Chochmas Odom (Klal 73 Se’if 13) advises to first pierce the utensil (and create a hole large enough that will nullify the kli status from the utensil) and then a Jewish craftsman should repair the utensil. The Chochmas Odom explains (in Binas Odom #66) that since the utensil was rendered unusable while pierced, the tumas akum disappears and when the utensil is subsequently repaired and rendered usable by the Jewish craftsman it is exempted from tevilas keilim because it is now considered a new utensil (“ponim chadoshos”). Therefore, posits Rav Wosner, the principle of ma’amid will be followed to obligate a kli in tevilas keilim, but it will not exempt a kli that is otherwise obligated in tevilas keilim from tevila. (Furthermore, it is clear in the Taz s.k. 13 and the Pri Chodosh s.k. 33 that in such a scenario the utensil is still obligated in tevilas keilim.) Therefore, according to Rav Wosner, repairing the appliance with a Jewish craftsman is not an acceptable solution to avoid the obligation of tevilas keilim. Despite the seemingly irrefutable proofs of the Shevet Halevi, several Poskim quote the solution of the Chochmas Odom and apply it to electrical appliances: Shu”t Be’er Moshe (Chelek 4 Siman 100), Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach (Minchas Shlomo Chelek 2 Siman 66:4) and Sefer Tevilas Keilim (Page 112). And as we have mentioned earlier, the Pischei Teshuva (s.k. 1) quotes the Chochmas Odom and makes no mention of any dissenting opinion. It is clear from the Poskim that repairing the appliance with a Jewish craftsman is only an acceptable solution if the appliance is first dismantled to a degree that it is no longer usable and requires professional intervention to re-assemble it. Merely dismantling components of an appliance is from a Halachic perspective inconsequential, and the appliance is still obligated in tevilas keilim. In summary: One acceptable solution (according to several of the Poskim) regarding tevilas keilim for electrical appliances is to dismantle the appliance to a degree that it is no longer usable and requires professional intervention to re-assemble it, and then have the appliance re-assembled by a Jewish craftsman. 3) Transferring ownership to a non-Jew: Rav Akiva Eiger (on Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De’ah Siman 120 Se’if 1) quotes an opinion that maintains that regarding large utensils that do not fit into the mikva one can give them as a present to a non-Jew and then borrow them from the non-Jew and use them. Since technically these utensils now belong to the non-Jew there is no further obligation of tevilas keilim. [It should be noted that Rav Akiva Eiger is specifically discussing a type of earthenware barrel that is coated with lead. Such a barrel is not obligated in tevilas keilim according to all opinions. Therefore, there is more room for leniency (as Rav Akiva Eiger himself points out).] The Darkei Teshuva (Siman 120 s.k. 112 quoting the Shulchan Govoha) and the Ben Ish Chai (Year 2, Matos, Se’if 11) also write that where tevilas keilim is impractical (because of the size of the utensil) one can give the utensil to a non-Jew as a present, and then borrow the utensil from the non-Jew. The Minchas Yitzchok (Chelek 5 Siman 126:2; Chelek 9 Siman 83) discussing electrical appliances quotes the Darkei Teshuva. However, this solution is questionable and not unanimous, because we find several major Poskim who write that where the utensil remains indefinitely in the domain of the Jew it is obligated in tevila (despite technically being the possession of a non-Jew): The Shulchan Aruch discusses a situation where one has a utensil that is obligated in tevilas keilim and one forgot to tovel the utensil before Shabbos and rules (Orach Chayim Siman 323 Se’if 7; Yoreh De’ah Siman 120 Se’if 16) that one can give the utensil to a non-Jew and subsequently borrow it from the non-Jew and use it on Shabbos without tevila. The Taz (Yoreh De’ah Siman 120 s.k. 18) writes that this is only a temporary solution because as soon as a utensil will remain indefinitely in the domain of a Jew it will require tevilas keilim. The Pri Chodosh (ibid s.k. 42) rules similarly. In Orach Chayim (Siman 323) the Mishna Berura (s.k. 35) and Kaf Hachayim (s.k. 50) both write that if the utensil [given to the non-Jew, then borrowed by the Jew] remains indefinitely in the domain of the Jew it will require tevila. We see therefore, that although the utensil of a non-Jew is exempt from tevilas keilim, if a utensil belonging to a non-Jew is lent to a Jew for long term use, since it will remain indefinitely in the domain of a Jew it will now require tevilas keilim. In summary: According to several Poskim a solution to avoid the obligation of tevilas keilim on electrical appliances is to give the appliance to a non-Jew, and then to borrow the appliance from the non-Jew. Since the appliance is technically property of the non-Jew it is exempt from tevilas keilim even if used by a Jew. However, several major authorities argue on this suggestion and write clearly that wherever a utensil remains indefinitely in the domain of the Jew, even if it technically belongs to the non-Jew it is obligated in tevilas keilim and the only leniency is when the loan to the Jew is for short term use only. 4) Immersing the appliance into snow – the aforementioned Chelkas Ya’akov (Shu”t Yoreh De’ah Siman 41) mentions the possibility of being tovel the appliance in snow. Regarding tevila in general, whether tevila in snow is acceptable is a machlokes Rishonim (quoted by the Beis Yosef in Yoreh De’ah Siman 201). Although the Beis Yosef (ibid) favours the lenient opinion, his conclusion is that regarding an issur d’orayso [e.g. issur niddoh] one should not be lenient and allow tevila in snow, however regarding [chiyuvei d’rabonon such as] netilas yodayim one can rely on the lenient opinion and tovel one’s hands in snow in lieu of water. The Chochmas Odom (Klal 73 Se’if 19) rules that in extenuating circumstances one can be lenient and tovel glass utensils (which are only obligated in tevilas keilim mid’rabonon) in snow. The reason that the Chochmas Odom only permits tevila in snow under extenuating circumstances appears to be because the Shulchan Aruch rules regarding netilas yodayim (Orach Chayim Siman 160 Se’if 12) that one can only perform netilas yodayim in snow after it is melted specifically. Therefore, if feasible, and if there is no alternative option and if the appliance is only obligated in tevila mid’rabonon it would be possible to immerse the kli in snow (to avoid damage to the kli through immersion in water). This is only possible where there is a collection of 40 se’ah of snow together in one place, and there is enough snow to cover the entire appliance with snow at one time. |
Tevilas Keilim
Leave a Reply