Cast Your Bread Upon The Waters

Rav Dovid Feinstein seems to have ruled stringently on both issues and requires New York City water to be filtered and wild fish checked for the presence of the Anisakis worm. Rav Yisroel Belsky ruled leniently on both issues.

That was an exciting week to be learning the daf. This week the topics covered seem to have little relevance to us. We learned about animals that experience difficulty giving birth. In one passage, the Gemara questions what would be the halachic ruling about a weasel that swallowed an animal embryo directly from the womb of an animal, only to return it later. Tosfos in Kesubos says that the Gemara sometimes entertains questions that cannot possibly occur just for the sake of learning Torah and receiving reward.

We learned another passage that has practical relevance if you are a cattle rancher. We learned about the status of an animal embryo that stuck out a limb from the womb and subsequently the mother was ritually slaughtered. That limb remains non-kosher and is considered tamei.

The question raised in the Gemara is whether that non-kosher limb that protruded from its mother’s womb is considered connected to the rest of the embryo. This has ramifications to the laws of tumah and taharah. Ravina ruled that the limb is not considered connected. Since it is non-kosher it will inevitably be cut off. Ravina is of the opinion that anything that is destined to be cut off is halachically considered already cut off. Interestingly enough, this halachic argument does have consequences for us here in New York in 2011.

There is a mitzvah to use two complete loaves of bread for lechem mishneh at the Shabbos and yom tov meals. They represent the double portion of the manna that fell before Shabbos and yom tov. What if part of a loaf is severely burnt to the point that it is inedible? Is that loaf still considered whole? The Mekom Shmuel (Siman 45) says that the halachah is in accordance with Ravina’s logic mentioned above. Something that is destined to be cut off is already considered detached. Therefore, this untouched partially burnt loaf is deemed to have had the burnt part already cut off and it is no longer considered whole. The Mekom Shmuel says that the burnt part must be truly inedible.

I have to add one note. A previous article mentioned the possibility that my wife’s challah may on a rare occasion burn. However, for the sake of shalom bayis I am correcting that inaccurate information. The truth is that my wife’s challos never burn. It is an open miracle that that small part of challah that is separated for hafrashas challah does actually char.

If someone else burns their challah, the Mishnah Berurah writes (274:2), “In regard to a partially burnt challah that has not been cut into, some say that one may fulfill his obligation of lechem mishneh with it.” The implication is that it would be preferable to use another challah if possible. However, there is leniency that is often followed that if less than 1/48th is missing, the challah is still considered whole. Similarly, if only a small portion was burned to the point that is inedible, it would still be fine.

This last halachah, while not a burning controversy, does demonstrate how even obscure halachic discussions have practical applications.