חדש באתר: NotebookLM עם כל תכני הרב מיכאל אברהם. דומה למיכי בוט.

Q&A: The Four Species for Family Members

Back to list  |  🌐 עברית  |  ℹ About
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.

The Four Species for Family Members

Question

Hello Rabbi,
In many homes, the father of the family buys Four Species sets for everyone in the household.
Does one need to be careful to assign each set to a specific person, and make sure to take only his own set?
And what is the law if there was no explicit declaration as to whom each set belonged, and I mistakenly took the set of someone else in the family?
 
Thank you,
Nathan

Answer

The question is relevant only to the first day, of course (when it does not fall on the Sabbath—not this year), since on the other days there is no need for the species to belong to the person taking them. I think that in such a case there is no problem, because through the process of selection it becomes clarified whose set each one is. At the moment I took the particular set that I took, it was clarified that this is my set.
Although for Torah-level matters we do not generally apply retroactive clarification, in a partnership we do (see the Talmud at the beginning of the chapter "The Partners" in tractate Nedarim), and especially here, where the result only needs to take effect from this point onward (it is not important that it be mine at the beginning of the day, only at the time I take it. Rashba noted in his responsum that in such a case there is no dispute that retroactive clarification applies). One might still wonder whether this involves a transfer of ownership on a Jewish holiday, but in my opinion there is no problem, because the transfer of ownership was done before the holiday, and only the clarification is taking place now.

Discussion on Answer

Michi (2020-10-08)

It seems to me, logically, that all this applies only to people who have their own independent "purse." Someone who is supported by his father (or by her husband) poses no problem at all. The requirement of "for yourselves" is fulfilled through the father's ownership. Though one could certainly analyze this further.

Nathan (2020-10-08)

And regarding people who do have their own independent "purse," once ownership takes effect through retroactive clarification, is one allowed to fulfill the commandment on the first day only with the set that was clarified as his, and not with the others (which were clarified as belonging to others)?

Michi (2020-10-08)

Indeed.

השאר תגובה

Back to top button