To browse our database on the laws and customs of Kaparos see here.
Kaparos:[1]
A. The custom:[2]
It is customary in these provinces [of Ashkenazi Jewry] to take and slaughter a chicken, which is called a Gever[3], for atonement on Erev Yom Kippur.[4] One takes a male chicken for each male family member and a female chicken for each female family member, and waves the chicken around the head upon pronouncing Zeh Chalifasi. The following are the detailed laws relating to this custom:
B. Amount of chickens and gender?[5]
One is to take one chicken per family member.[6] This applies irrelevant of the age of the family member and applies even to a fetus in the mother’s womb. A pregnant woman is to take three chickens for herself and her fetus as explained next. [Thus, for example, a family with six children and a pregnant mother is to take 10 chickens, one chicken per child and parent, and two for the fetus.]
The gender of the chicken:[7] One is to take a male chicken for a male family member, and a female chicken for a female family member.
Pregnant woman:[8] For a pregnant woman one is to take and slaughter one female chicken on her behalf, and one female and male chicken on behalf of the fetus whose gender is in question. [Thus, in total, a pregnant woman takes three chickens, two females and one male.]
|
Summary: One takes a chicken for each family member, a male chicken for a male, a female chicken for a female and two females and one male chicken for a pregnant woman. |
|
Q&A What is one to do if he cannot afford to purchase a chicken for each family member?[9] If one is unable to afford buying one chicken per family member, then one male chicken may be used for all the male members of one’s household and one female chicken may be used for all the female members of one’s household. This applies even in accordance to those who follow the custom to take one chicken per person.
May Kaparos be redone with the same chicken on another person?[10] This follows the same law as above, that initially each person is to use a single chicken which is then slaughtered and not reused for any other person. However, in a time of need, one may use the same chicken for Kaparos of various people.[11] It is forbidden for Kaparos organizers to trick the public and reuse the same chickens for the people doing Kaparos. One who does so is stealing from the original owners and is tricking each subsequent person who reuses that chicken for their Kaparos. Nevertheless, seemingly Bedieved everyone fulfills their obligation, as stated above that in a time of need one may use even one chicken for many people.[12]
What is the law if a woman used a male chicken or vice versa?[13] She fulfills her obligation. The Kaparos is not required to be repeated.
May one use Maaser money to purchase Kaparos? Background: It is disputed in Poskim[14] as to whether one may use Maaser money for the sake of a Mitzvah, or if it must be given as charity to paupers. Practically, it is permitted to use Maaser money for the sake of a Mitzvah under certain conditions.[15] These conditions are as follows: a) The Mitzvah is not an obligation for one to fulfill, and rather is voluntary[16]; b) One is unable to afford the voluntary Mitzvah and hence would abstain from doing so unless he uses his Maaser funds.[17] Now, although Kaparos is merely a custom rather than a Biblical or Rabbinical institution, nonetheless, this custom receives an obligatory status. Thus, ideally Maaaser money cannot be used for the fulfillment of this custom of Kaparos. However, it is disputed amongst the Poskim as to whether one must to take a single chicken per family member or if a single male chicken suffices for all the male family members, and a single female chicken for all female family members.[18] The final ruling follows that one is to take one chicken per family member[19], although if one is unable to afford to do so, then one male chicken may be used for all the male members of one’s household and one female chicken may be used for all the female members of one’s household.[20] Based on this, the following is the final ruling regarding using Maaser money to purchase Kaparos: The law: One may not use Maaser money to perform the Mitzvah of Kaparos.[21] If, however, one cannot afford to buy one chicken per family member, then he may use Maaser money to do so. However, even in such a case, at least one male and female chicken is not to come from the Maaser funds.[22]
How many chickens is a woman to take if she is pregnant with twins?[23] It requires further analyses whether she is to suffice with three chickens as any pregnant woman or is to take five chickens.[24] Some Poskim[25] however conclude that she is to take 5 chickens.
If a woman gave birth after Kaparos but before Yom Kippur, should Kaparos be redone on the baby? This matter requires further analyses.[26] However, some Poskim[27] conclude that she is not required to repeat the Kaparos on the infant.
If an ultrasound revealed the gender of the fetus, how many chickens are to be used? Some Poskim[28] rule that one may follow the ultrasound and use a chicken of the projected gender. Others[29] rule that one should not rely on it.
Must a pregnant woman prior to 40 days of conception use 3 chickens?[30] No.
|
|
May one do Kaparos on behalf of a family member that is not present?[31] Ø Example: One’s son is in the army and cannot be present for Kaparos. One’s wife gave birth and she and the baby cannot be present for Kaparos. Yes.[32] One is to state prior to the Kaparos that it is being performed on behalf of “Peloni the son/daughter of Peloni”.[33]
May one use chickens that have been sterilized?[34] One should not use sterilized chickens for Kaparos.
|
C. The color of the chicken:[35]
One is to choose a white chicken, if there are white chickens in front of him readily available to be chosen from.[36] If however white chickens are not readily available in front of him, one is not to specifically search out for a chicken of white color.[37]
D. If chickens are not available:[38]
If there are no chickens available for Kaparos, then other animals [such as a goose[39]] may be used for the Kaparos. However, young doves and Turim should not be used.[40] [Others say one may even use fish, as explained in the Q&A. The original custom was to use a plant.[41] Today, the widespread custom is to use money if chickens are not available.[42] This money is then given to the poor.[43] However, based on Kabala, one is to only use a chicken.[44]]
|
Q&A May one use fish for Kaparos? Some Poskim[45] rule that fish is valid to be used for Kaparos in the event that poultry is not available. Based on Kabala, one is to only use a chicken.[46]
Order of precedence if one cannot personally perform Kaparos over chicken: 1. Appoint a Shliach to do Kaparos on your behalf over a chicken, if viable, as explained in B in Q&A. 2. Another animal/bird.[47] 3. Fish[48] 4. Plant.[49] 5. Money[50] |
E. The ceremony that is performed with the chicken:[51]
One holds the chicken and says the paragraph beginning Bnei Adam printed in the Siddur.[52] When one reaches the paragraph of “Zeh Chalifasi, Zeh Temurasi, Zeh Kaparasi[53] etc” one encircles[54] the chicken around [and above] his head three[55] times, while reciting the statement. The above paragraph beginning from Bnei Adam is then repeated another two times[56], thus encircling the head a total of nine times.[57]
|
Q&A In which hand is the chicken to be held? Some[58] write, the chicken is to be held in one’s right hand. Admur does not make any mention of this detail.
Does it make a difference as to which direction one swerves the chicken around his head? This matter is not discussed in Poskim hence assuming that one may do so in whichever direction he chooses.
Should the Nusach of Kaparos be said differently by women, or children? Some[59] write Admur intentionally omitted the change of Nuschaos and therefore one should always say “Chalifasi”, whether a man or woman.
Must each person hold the chicken and wave it over his/her own head or may he/she have someone else hold it and wave it over his/her head? It is initially preferable for the chicken to be held and waved by the person on whose behalf the Kaparah is being performed.[60] Nonetheless, in a time of need, such as children, or the queasy minded who cannot hold a chicken, another person may hold it.[61] [A husband may perform the circling over his wife who is a Niddah so long as they are careful to avoid any contact.[62]] Who is to say Zeh Chalifasi when doing on behalf of another? The person who the Kaparah is being done for is to say “Zeh Chalifasi” while the circles are being made over their head.[63] Alternatively, the person who is holding and circling the chicken is to say “Zeh Chalifascha”.[64] This Nussach is to be said when doing Kaparos on behalf of children who are too young to recite the Nussach.
How is Kaparaos to be performed to small children who cannot do so themselves?[65] The father is to do so for them, as explained above.
Must one first perform Kaparos on himself prior to performing it on others [i.e. encircling the chicken over the heads of others]?[66] It is proper for one to first perform Kaparos on himself prior to doing so on behalf of others. If there is a reason that he is not able to do so, then one may initially do the Kaparos for others before doing so on himself.
|
F. When should the ceremony be done?
The ceremony is to be performed on Erev Yom Kippur.[67] It is to be performed towards dawn of the day of Erev Yom Kippur, by the time of Ashmuros Haboker.[68]
|
Q&A May one do Kaparos before Erev Yom Kippur?[69] Kaparos may be performed 1-2 days before Yom Kippur, if doing so on Erev Yom Kippur is burdensome on the public or on the Shochtim.
When performing Kaparos over money should it preferably be done by the time of Ashmuros Haboker, as applies when doing Kaparos over chickens? Even when doing Kaparos over money, it should be done specifically on Erev Yom Kippur as recorded in the Shulchan Aruch regarding the regular Kaparos. However, regarding if it should be performed towards dawn by Ashmuros Haboker, seemingly this is only relevant to when Kaparos is done over a chicken, and thus if waking up this early can ruing ones schedule of Davening, learning or other matter of Avodas Hashem, it should be done later on, on Erev Yom Kippur rather than Ashmuros Haboker, when doing over money.[70]
|
G. Immersing in a Mikveh:[71]
Some have the custom to immerse in a Mikveh prior to performing Kaparos.
H. What is done with chicken after one finishes the above ceremony?
Semicha and Shechting:[72] After the ceremony one does Semicha[73] to the chicken [or other animal] and then gives it to a Shochet to be immediately slaughtered.[74] [Some[75] however learn from Admur in the Siddur that one is not required to do Semicha to the chicken or slaughter it immediately afterwards.[76] It is however brought that the Rebbe Rashab, would perform Semicha after he finished the Kaparos.[77] Practically, the widespread custom is not to do so.[78]]
Covering the blood of the chicken:[79] It is a Mitzvah for the Shochet to cover the blood of slaughtered fowl with earth or straw.[80] It is nevertheless permitted for the Shochet to honor the owner of the chicken to do so in his place.[81] Earth or straw is to be set up near the slaughtering area and the Shochet then drips some blood onto it.[82] Before covering the blood one says the blessing of “Al Kisoi Dam Beafar[83].”[84] After the Simanim of the chicken, and the knife, are checked and the chicken is verified as Kosher, one says the blessing and then covers the blood.[85] [If the Shochet does not check the knife beforehand, one is to cover the blood without a blessing, or leave it to the Shochet to check at the end of the Shechita, when he checks his knife.[86] In all cases, one should have in mind to not be Yotzei the blessing of another person saying it, or is to make an interval in between.[87]]
Throwing intestines to the birds:[88] The intestines, liver and kidneys of the chicken of Kaparos are to be thrown in an area that is accessible to birds, such as on one’s roof or in one’s courtyard, in order for the birds feed from it.[89]
Donating the chicken or its worth to the poor:[90] It is customary to donate the chicken to paupers. Nevertheless, it is better to redeem the chicken with money and give the money to the poor, as opposed to giving the actual chicken to the poor.[91] [This money is formally known as Pidyon Kaparos.]
|
Q&A Must one repeat Kaparos if the Shechita of the chicken was a Niveila [invalid]?[92] Yes. If the Shechita was invalid one must redo the Kaparos.[93] If, however, it was a Kosher slaughtering, but the chicken was found to be a Treifa, it is nevertheless valid.
Should one perform Kaparos with chickens if the chickens will not be eaten by people but used as animal fodder? It is still preferable to perform Kaparos with a chicken even in such a case.[94] Nonetheless, in the above scenario, it is best to give Pidyon Kaparos to the poor.[95] The chickens are to be slaughtered regularly with a blessing and a blessing is to be recited over the covering of the blood.[96]
Must one own the chicken that he performs Kaparos with, or is a borrowed chicken also valid? Traditionally, the chickens used for the custom of Kaparos are to be owned by the individual and then slaughtered on his behalf.[97] Seemingly, a person does not fulfill the traditional custom by using a chicken that is not his, such as by borrowing someone’s chicken unless that person intends on giving them at least partial ownership over the chicken.[98] Nonetheless, there is room to learn that one can fulfill his obligation even with a borrowed chicken.[99] Practically, it is best for one to take it from the owner with intent to [at least partially] acquire it [or acquire it on condition to return] rather than simply to borrow it.
May a Kaparos organizer arrange for the chickens to be lent to the customers rather than sold to them?[100] As stated above, the traditional custom of Kaparos entails the use of chickens that every individual owns and then has slaughtered on his behalf. Accordingly, it is not befitting for organizers to arrange for the chickens to be lent to the customers and rather it is to be given to them in a form of ownership. It goes without saying that if the arrangement is for the chickens to be lent, that this must be publicized to all the customers, who naturally assume that when they pay money they are buying the chicken. If the organizers did not inform the public about this, and initially arranged with the chicken farm that the chickens would only be lent to the customers and then returned to the chicken farm, then they are considered to have stolen from the public. Likewise, most seemingly no one has fulfilled their obligation of the custom of Kaparos.[101] Unfortunately, there are many organizers who do not pay attention to this crucial detail, either deliberately or do to a lack of knowledge, and it is hence imperative on the customers to be vigilant and question what will occur with the chickens after they are returned and who is in charge of the slaughtering. As all matters that relate to Jewish tradition, it is most proper for Kaparos organizers to have Rabbinical supervision over the process, in order to ensure that it is being done honestly, with integrity, and according to the demands of Halacha.
The custom of Beis Harav by Kaparos: The Rebbe’s household would perform a sign of the four death penalties on the chicken used for Kaparos. To touch it with one’s foot slightly to fulfill the penalty of Sekila. To touch its neck to perform the penalty of Chenek. To scorch a small part of a feather to perform the penalty of Sereifa. The Shaar Hakolel[102] however negates all practices that were not recorded in the Siddur of Admur.
|
|
Tzar Baalei Chaim & Treifos by Kaparos: Not letting your chicken see the slaughter of another chicken
Question: I met an individual who told me that he refuses to do Kaparos on chickens because he feels that the way it is done is cruel to the chickens, being that amongst other factors the slaughtering takes place in view of all the other chickens, and this causes unnecessary fear in the chickens. I answered him by asking him as to how he knows the chickens know what is going on and that they are scared by this. He said to me that he once heard that this is even written in Jewish law. Can you please clarify.
Answer: In general, it is correct that it often occurs with the chaos of Kaparos that unnecessary pain is caused to the chickens, and hence it is the absolute moral, ethical, and halachic obligation upon both the organizers and the people performing the ceremony of Kaparos to be careful to their utmost to diminish the amount of suffering and pain which is caused to the chickens, so it not be a mitzvah that comes as a result of an Aveira. Thus for example, the chickens should be kept in a shaded area away from the sun, he provided ample water and food, and not be thrown around [which can enter into questions of Treifos]. Likewise, the handlers of the chicken by the people performing the Kaparos should be with gentleness, without exerting too much force that can cause unnecessary pain to the chicken. And now to your main question:
Yes, it is indeed correct the Jewish law discourages the slaughtering of chickens in view of other chickens both due to reasons of Tzar Baalei Chaim and due to reasons of Treifos, as we will explain below. Accordingly, it is proper for the organizers to slaughter the chickens a slight distance away from the other chickens, and it is likewise proper for the people holding the chicken in line for slaughter to not hold the chicken in a way that it can view the slaughtering of the other chickens.
Nonetheless, all this is only Lechatchila, and Bedieved if this was not adhered to and the chickens witnessed the slaughter of the other chickens, it remains kosher, especially if it was slaughtered that day, and is having its lungs checked as is commonly done amongst Mihadrin Hashgachas.
To note, that for whatever reason, the widespread custom amongst all slaughterhouses that I have witnessed is even initially to slaughter the chickens in front of each other, having boxes of chickens lined up right next to the slaughter, who then slaughters the chicken in full view of all the other chickens. Seemingly, this is done due to that being stringent in this [and distancing the slaughtering of the chicken from the other chickens] would cause a delay between the slaughtering of each subsequent chicken, which in the end of the day would tremendously raise the price of chickens for the kosher consumer. Hence, they rely on the fact that the chickens are anyways being slaughtered within the next hour or so, and as well as due to the argument that today’s chickens are no longer frightened by this occurrence.
Explanation: The Talmud records that a shriveled [raisin like] lung of an animal or bird deems the animal a Treifa. One of the ways that the lung of an animal can become shriveled and raisin like is if it is frightened. It is brought in the Rishonim and ruled in the Shulchan Aruch that slaughtering another animal or bird in front of it causes this to happen, and hence if one slaughters another animal in front of the animal or bird and its entire lung, or it’s majority, cringed as a result, then it is deemed a Treifa, and is forbidden to be eaten.
Now, the Rashba rules that this worry is only applicable if there will be a delay between this witnessing of another animal being slaughtered and its own slaughtering. If, however, the animal will also be slaughtered right away, then there is not much of a worry and one is not required to check the lungs to verify that this shriveling did not take place.
Nonetheless, the Achronim conclude that it is improper even in this case to slaughter the animal in front of other animals who will be slaughtered right away, and hence they explicitly call out against the custom by Kaparos on erev Yom Kippur to slaughter the chicken in front of the other chickens, and state that doing so is a worry of Treifos due to the potential shriveling of the lung, and is also improper due to Tzaar Baalei Chaim. Nonetheless, Bedieved they agree that we do not have to require the lungs to be checked if this took place, and one may rely on the ruling of the Rashba. They explain that there is no difference between chickens or cows in this regard.
Based on all this, it is clear that by Kaparos one must try to shield the slaughtering of the other chickens from one’s chicken, and that one should try to diminish in their suffering as much as possible. And just as we have showed mercy to them may God show mercy to us.
Sources: See regarding a cringed raisin like lung which is caused by the animal experiencing fear: Michaber Y.D. 36:14; Chulin 54a-55b; Taz 36:20; Shach 36:29; Rashba Chulin 55b See regarding initially being careful not to slaughter the animal in front of other animals due to the above reason and due to Tzaar Baalei Chaim: Beis Efraim Y.D. 26; Yad Efraim on Shach; Pischei Teshuva Y.D. 36:16; Zivcheiy Tzedek 217; Ben Ish Chaiy Tazria 15; Kaf Hachaim 36:244; See regarding the custom today in the slaughterhouses to ignore this rule and slaughter the chickens in full view of the other chickens: Sichas Chulin 55b [Rav Yitzchak Rubin]
|
____________________________________________
[1] 605:1-6
[2] Admur 605:1; Siddur Admur; Rama 605:1 in name of Geonim; Rav Haiy Gaon
Background and other opinions: The custom of Kaparos dates back hundreds of years to at least the times of the Geonim. [Rama 605:1 “Some of the Geonim wrote regarding this custom and it is recorded by many of the Achronim and so is the custom of our communities”] Rav Haiy Gaon testified that this was the custom in his days. [Rashba 395] It was mainly an Ashkenazi custom that later spread to certain Sefaradic communities. [See Rashba ibid] The Rashba ibid writes that although he abolished this custom from his community due to it resembling the act of the Emorites nevertheless he testifies that this is an accepted custom in the Ashkenazi communities. The Orchos Chaim, in name of the Ramban, writes against this custom. The Michaber in 605:1 rules accordingly that the custom of Kaparos is to be nullified. [In some earlier versions of the Shulchan Aruch, the title page reads that the custom is a custom of nonsense “Minhag Shtus Hu.” Practically, however, many have negated this title page from having been authored by the Michaber ibid, and hence in most versions of the Shulchan Aruch, and all current versions, it is omitted. See Shemesh Tzedakah 23; Answer of Shevet Halevi, Rav Shlomo Amar, and other Rabbanim to publisher of Shulchan Aruch Hashaleim Machon Yerushalayim that it should be omitted] The Rama ibid defends the custom saying it is based on the Geonim of previous generations and thus is forbidden to be swerved from. The Alter Rebbe records this custom and does not make any mention of the opinion of the Michaber. Practically, even amongst the Sephardim the custom spread to do Kaparos [Kaf Hachaim 605:8] The Arizal himself was very careful regarding this custom. [Piskeiy Teshuvos 605:1] The Maharal in Nesivos Olam, Nesiv Habitachon, writes there is a complete proof for this custom from the Talmud in Brachos. [Shaar Hakolel 42:1] A similar custom to Kaparos [however not with a chicken, and not on Erev Yom Kippur] is brought in Rashi Shabbos 81b.
[3] Siddur Admur based on Yuma 20b; Rosh Yuma 8:23 “Since its name is Gever it is able to atone for man which is called Gever”
[4] The reason: We slaughter the chicken in order to subdue the severities, and we remove it’s blood in order to sweeten it. It is called a Kaparah similar to the scapegoat that is thrown off the cliff on Yom Kippur. [Siddur Admur; Siddur Arizal; Peri Eitz Chaim; Shelah 235b; See Shaar Hakolel 44:1]
[5] Siddur Admur; Second custom in Admur 605:3; Custom of the Arizal brought in Shaar Hakavanos and Peri Eitz Chaim Shaar Yom Kippurim; M”A 605:2; Shelah Yuma 235; Elya Zuta 605:4; Tashbatz 125; Bach in name of Mordechaiy Katan; Mateh Efraim 605:2; see Piskeiy Teshuvos 605:1
Other opinions-Ruling of Admur in Shulchan Aruch 605:3: In the Shulchan Aruch 605:3 Admur records a difference in custom and rules as follows: Some [Levush brought in M”A 605:2; Kitzur SHU”A 131:1] are accustomed to take a single male chicken on behalf of all the male members of the family and a single female chicken on behalf of all the female members of the family. Others [Poskim ibid] however are accustomed to take a Kapara chicken for each individual family member. [Admur ibid]
[6] The reason: As each individual requires an individual Kaparah for his soul. Furthermore, the Kaparah is similar to a Karban and we rule that two people cannot bring a single obligatory offering. [Elya Zuta 605:4]
[7] Admur 605:3; Siddur Admur; Rama 605:1
[8] Siddur Admur; Second custom in Admur 605:3; Poskim ibid in previous footnotes
Ruling of Admur in Shulchan Aruch 605:3: In the Shulchan Aruch 605:3 Admur records a difference in custom and rules as follows: According to the first custom [brought in previous footnotes] that allows exempting many males with one chicken and many females with one chicken, one is only required to take for a pregnant woman two chickens, one male and one female chicken. [Admur ibid; Rama 605:1; M”A 605:2; Mahril] The reason for this is because if the fetus is a male, then he has one male chicken as required, and if it is a female, then it suffices for the mother and fetus to have one female chicken. [Admur ibid; M”A ibid] However according to the second custom mentioned to take a chicken for each family member, a male for a boy, female for a girl, then one is to take for a pregnant woman three chickens, two females and one male. [Admur ibid]
[9] Mateh Efraim 605:2; M”B 605:3
[10] See Admur 605:3; Elya Zuta on Levush 605; Hamaor 1985 p. 15; Nitei Gavriel 10:12
[11] M”B 605:3; Levush 605:1 “As two people can take one Kaparah”; This follows the 1st custom mentioned in Admur 605:3 who allows one chicken to be used for many family members.
[12] Meaning that one fulfills his obligation according to the 1st custom in 605:3, however according to the 2nd custom there one does not fulfill his obligation. [See Elya Zuta on Levush 605; Hamaor 1985 p. 15; Nitei Gavriel 10:12]
[13] Ashel Avraham Butschetch Tinyana 605
[14] Stringent opinion-Must give to pauper: Rama Y.D. 249:1 “One is not to use his Maaser money for a Mitzvah, such as to donate candles to a Shul or other Devar Mitzvah, and rather the money is to be given to paupers”; Maharil Rosh Hashanah and Teshuvah 56; See Beir Goleh ibid who explains that the Rama refers to a Mitzvah that one already obligated himself to pay, and on this he can’t use Maaser money, however in general he agrees with the Maharam that Maaser may be used for a Mitzvah, and hence there is no dispute. [Pischeiy Teshuvah 249:2] So can also be implied from Taz 249:1 that there is no dispute. [See Tzedaka Umishpat 6 footnote 7] However, see Chasam Sofer 231[brought in Pischeiy Teshuva ibid and Ahavas Chesed 18:2] who negates this explanation and states that according to Rama:Maharil it is always forbidden to sue it for a Mitzvah, and so explains Rebbe in Toras Menachem 34:272.
Lenient opinion-May use for Mitzvah: Shach 249:3; Taz 249:1; Maharshal; Derisha 249:1; Maharam Menachem 459; Admur Hilchos Talmud Torah 1:7 regarding using Maaser to pay tuition of Talmud Torah; Admur Seder Birchas Hanehnin 12:9 “The Maaser of the son may be used for other Mitzvos”
[15] Admur Hilchos Talmud Torah 1:7 regarding using Maaser to pay tuition of Talmud Torah; Admur Seder Birchas Hanehnin 12:9 “The Maaser of the son may be used for other Mitzvos”; Likkutei Sichos 9:346; Toras Menachem 34:272 [brought in Shulchan Menachem 5:110]
[16] Beir Hagoleh ibid [in explanation of opinion of Rama ibid]; Chasam Sofer 231, Pischeiy Teshuvah 249:2
[17] Shach 249:3; Taz 249:1; Maharshal; Derisha 249:1; Maharam Menachem 459; Admur Hilchos Talmud Torah 1:7 regarding using Maaser to pay tuition; Toras Menachem 34:272 [brought in Shulchan Menachem 5:110]
[18] In the Shulchan Aruch 605:3 Admur records a difference in custom and rules as follows: Some [Levush brought in M”A 605:2] are accustomed to take a single male chicken on behalf of all the male members of the family and a single female chicken on behalf of all the female members of the family. Others [Poskim ibid] however are accustomed to take a Kapara chicken for each individual family member.
[19] Siddur Admur; Second custom in Admur 605:3; Custom of the Arizal brought in Shaar Hakavanos and Peri Eitz Chaim Shaar Yom Kippurim; M”A 605:2; Shelah Yuma 235; Elya Zuta 605:4; Tashbatz 125; Bach in name of Mordechaiy Katan; Mateh Efraim 605:2; see Piskeiy Teshuvos 605:1
[20] Mateh Efraim 605:2; M”B 605:3
[21] Elya Raba 605:6 in name of Shlah; Mateh Efraim 605:10; M”B 605:6 that one should not use Maaser money to redeem the chickens
[22] Piskeiy Teshuvos 605 footnote 4; See regarding Matanos Laevyonim: M”A 694:1 from Shlah 260b; Mahril 56; Elya Raba 686:4; M”B 694:3; Aruch Hashulchan 694:2
[23] See Likkutei Sichos 22 p. 59; Shaareiy Halacha Uminhag 2:250
[24] The question is that perhaps since this matter is uncommon, and it is in general a doubt whether one needs one chicken per person, then it is not required to take an extra two chickens for the twin.
[25] Kaneh Bosem 2:20
[26] See Hiskashrus 948 footnote 17 that perhaps the atonement for a pregnant woman is not for the fetus but for the woman, and hence once the child is born he needs his own atonement.
[27] Shevet Hakehasi 2:199; Piskeiy Teshuvos 605:2
[28] Kaneh Bosem 2:20
[29] Minchas Yitzchak in a gloss on the above Teshuvah of Kaneh Bosem
[30] Rav Wozner in Koveitz Mibeis Levi 2:17; Piskeiy Teshuvos 605:2
[31] See Keser Shem Tov of Rav Gagin 4 p. 229 that so is custom of Sephardim in Eretz Yisrael; Syria, Egypt and Turkey; Mishneh Halachos 17:70; Mechkirei Aretz 5:111; Nitei Gavriel 11:13; See Rama 605:1; Admur 605:1-3 and Siddur it is implied that the main aspect of Kaparos is to have a chicken slaughtered on one’s behalf, and not necessarily the waving over the head.
[32] The reason: From the wording of all the Poskim it is implied that the main aspect of Kaparos is to have a chicken slaughtered on one’s behalf, and not necessarily the waving over the head. [See Rama 605:1; Admur 605:1-3 and Siddur]
[33] Nitei Gavriel ibid
[34] Mateh Efraim 605:4
[35] Admur 605:2; Siddur Admur; Rama 605:1; Maharil; Arizal in Shaar Hakavanos; Shelah
[36] The reason: This is in light of the verse [Yeshaya 1:18] “If your sins are like red I will whiten them like snow”. [ibid] One is to avoid taking a black chicken, as black represents severity. [Shaar Hakolel 44]
[37] Admur ibid; M”A 605:3; Taz 605:2; Bach
The reason: This is because this appears similar to the acts of the Emorites [idol worshipers] who would search after white chickens to sacrifice them to idols, and it is forbidden for a Jew to resemble this act due to the verse “and you shall not go in their statutes”. [ibid]
[38] Admur 605:1; M”A 605:3; M”B 605:4
[39] M”B 605:4
[40] The reason: As these birds are fit to be sacrifices on the altar, and thus if one performs Semicha on it with his hands it will appear as if he is sanctifying Kodshim and sacrificing them outside of the Temple. [Admur ibid]
[41] M”A ibid in name of Rashi, in name of Teshuvos Hageonim, explain in Machatzis Hashekel; See Siddur Yaavetz that a plant was used as man is compared to a tree.
[42] Chayeh Adam 144; M”B 605:2; Custom of world Jewry, brought in Siddur Chabad of 1944 published by the Rebbe; Custom mentioned by Rebbe in Seudas Rosh Hashanah 5730 [Hamelech Bemesibo 2:23] that so was printed in Machzorim before the Mishneh Berurah was born to do on money, although that nevertheless, the main custom is to do over chicken as required according to Kabbalah; See 4th option in M”A ibid regarding using a plant
[43] Based on M”B 605:2
[44] Rebbe in Hamelech Bemesibo 2:23 brought in glosses of Rav Raskin on Siddur p. 541
[45] 3rd option in M”A 605:3 in name of Levush; M”B 605:4
[46] Rebbe in Hamelech Bemesibo 2:23 brought in glosses of Rav Raskin on Siddur p. 541
[47] Admur 605:1; 2nd option in M”A 605:3 and M”B 605:4
[48] 3rd option in M”A ibid in name of Levush and M”B 605:4
[49] 4th option in M”A ibid
[50] Chayeh Adam 144; M”B 605:2; Custom of world Jewry, brought in Siddur Chabad of 1944 published by the Rebbe; Custom mentioned by Rebbe in Seudas Rosh Hashanah 5730 that so was printed in Machzorim before the Mishneh Berurah was born to do on money, although that nevertheless, the main custom is to do over chicken as required according to Kabbalah
[51] Admur 605:1, Siddur Admur, Sefer Haminhagim p. 123 [English Edition], based on Hayom Yom 9th Tishreiy [The Shulchan Aruch and Siddur contain slight differences]; See Shaar Hakolel 42:2; Glosses of Rav Raskin on Siddur
[52] The custom is to recite Bnei Adam prior to the circling, and only then begin the circling with the words Zeh Chalifasi. [See Sefer Haminhagim ibid]
Ruling of Admur in Shulchan Aruch/Siddur: In the Siddur Admur makes no mention of the circling at all, and in the Shulchan Aruch 605:1 he writes the circling is to be done before the recital of Bnei Adam.
[53] This stands for the Roshei Teveis of Chatach which means to cut, and stands for the name [of an angel-M”A] that “cuts:decides” life for every creation. [Admur 605:1; Taz 605:2; M”A 605:3]
[54] Admur 605:1; Mordechai; Levush; Sefer Haminhagim ibid; omitted in Siddur; See Shaar Hakolel 42 that perhaps in the Siddur Admur holds the circling is not necessary at all
[55] Sefer Haminhagim p. 58; not mentioned in Siddur or Shulchan Aruch; See Shaar Hakolel 42:2 that learns from Admur in Siddur that it is only needed to be done one time.
[56] Siddur Admur; 605:1
[57] Sefer Haminhagim ibid; In 605:1 Admur states to do it three times; In Siddur Admur omits how many times it is to be done in. See Shaar Hakolel 42:2 that learns from Admur in Siddur that it is only needed to be done one time per statement.
[58] Kitzur SHU”A 131:1
[59] See Shaar Hakolel 42:2
[60] Simple understanding of Admur 605:1; Siddur; See Kitzur SHU”A 131:1 “Each one is to take their own Kaparah in their right hand”; Mateh Efraim 605:6 “If one is doing the wave for someone else because they don’t know”; Makor Chaim 605; Kitzur Shelah; Siddur Yaavetz
Other opinions: Some Rishonim record that the Minhag is for the Rav of the town to hold the chicken and wave it around each person’s head. [See Likkutei Maharich]
[61] Kitzur SHU”A 131:1; Mateh Efraim 605:6
[62] See Nitei Gavriel 11:10
[63] See Nitei Gavriel 11 footnote 17
[64] Kitzur SHU”A ibid
[65] Likkutei Maharich
[66] Mateh Efraim 604:6
[67] Admur 605:1; Siddur Admur
[68] Siddur Admur; Arizal in Peri Eitz Chaim Shaar Yom Kippur
The reason: As at this time a string of kindness reigns over the world, and we slaughter the chicken in order to sweeten the severities and we remove it’s blood in order to sweeten it. [Siddur Admur]
[69] Based on M”B 605:2
[70] Explanation: The source of doing Kaparos over chicken at the time of Ashmuros is from the Arizal, and is later recorded in the Siddur of Admur. It is clearly implied from their wording that the main idea is to have the chicken slaughtered at that time, which would imply that if one is not doing it over a chicken, or if it will not be slaughtered then, then there is no reason to do it specifically by dawn. They explain that the slaughtering of the chicken by Ashmuros helps sweeten the severities and the time of Chesed is by Ashmuros Haboker, and hence it helps to sweeten the severities. Nonetheless, one can argue that there still remains some advantage of doing Kaparos over money then, as certainly giving charity likewise sweetens the severities. This would however then enter into the question of giving charity at night before dawn etc which some are particular ion [but not Chabad which allows giving charity after midnight], as well as that I have never heard of Kaparos over money needing to be done before Alos, and hence I would conclude as above. [See Admur 605:1; Siddur Admur; Arizal in Peri Eitz Chaim Shaar Yom Kippur 1]
[71] Mateh Efraim 605:6; Shevach Hamoadim 21:8
[72] Admur 605:1; Rama 605:1
[73] To lean on the chicken’s head, similar to what is done by a Karban brought to atone one’s sins. [Rama ibid]
Other opinions brought in Admur: There are those [Taz 605:3] who refrain from doing Semicha to the chicken in order so it not appear as if one is sanctifying Kodshim and slaughtering them outside of the Temple. There is no need however to suspect for this matter, being that it is common knowledge that a chicken is not a species fit for the altar. [Admur ibid; Levush]
[74] As immediately after the Semicha one is to perform the slaughtering. [Admur ibid]
[75] Shaar Hakolel 42:2
[76] As Admur omitted this from the Siddur. The reason for this is because it has no basis according to the Kabala of the Arizal. [Poskim ibid]
[77] Reshimos Hayoman p. 258
[78] Glosses of Rav Raskin on Siddur
[79] See Shulchan Aruch Yorah Deah Chapter 28
[80] Michaber Y.D. 28:1 and 8 “The one who slaughters is to cover”; Mishneh Chulin 83b; See Tur 28 and Michaber C.M. 382 regarding the law if someone stole his Mitzvah and covered the blood without his permission
[81] See Simla Chadash 28 and Mateh Asher ibid [Vetzaruch Iyun when doing this one after another why this does not transgress the adding of Brachos Sheinan Tzerichos, and that the previous person who heard the blessing was already Yotzei.]
[82] Michaber 28:5; Rebbe Zeira Chulin 83b
[83] And not Ba-afar. It is said with a Segol and not a Kamatz.
[84] Michaber 28:2; Rambam Shechita 14; Tur 28 in name of Rosh
[85] Michaber 28:19; Tur 28; Simla Chadasha 28:23
[86] See Michaber ibid;
[87] See Admur 213:4
[88] Admur 605:6; Rama 605:1; Tur; Tashbatz 126
[89] The reason: The reason for this custom is because it is proper to show mercy for creatures on this day in order to invoke Divine mercy upon us. [Admur ibid; Taz 605:4]
[90] 605:4; Rama 605:1; Maharil
[91] The reason: This is done in order to prevent the paupers from facing the embarrassment of receiving the chickens which were taken for atonement. [ibid]
[92] Shaar Hakolel 42:2 [p. 97]
[93] The reason: As the main aspect of the Kaparos is the slaughtering. [ibid]
[94] As the giving the chicken to the poor is an additional Minhag that was added to Kaparos. The main minhag of Kaparos is to sweeten the Gevuros through a Kosher Shechita, irrelevant of what is done afterwards. Thus its ruled in Achronim that if the Shechita was Kosher but the bird was a Treifa it is still valid. See Shaar Hakolel 42:2
[95] See Admur 605:6
[96] See Michaber 18:18; Simla Chadasha 19:1; 28:22; Shulchan Gavoa 28:41
[97] So is the implication of all the sources in Poskim who discuss donating the chicken to charity, and what to do if you can’t afford to purchase a chicken, and no mention is made that it’s possible to simply borrow one. so also seemingly applies according to the opinion that the Kaparos ceremony is to be identical to a Karban, and the person thus must own it [Vetzaruch Iyun, however, from Erechin 21a and Rambam Maaseh Karbanos 14:9 if actual ownership is required by a Karban, or mere consent suffices]
[98] Reply of Rav Eli Landa; Reply of Rav Avishad;
[99] See Erechin 21a and Rambam Maaseh Karbanos 14:9 that one may have another person bring a Karban on one’s behalf, thus implying that it is not necessary to own the animal; In Kfar Chabad, the custom for many years was for the slaughterhouse to allow the residents to borrow chickens for Kaparos for free, and then return them to the slaughterhouse after the ceremony. [Heard from Rav Meir Ashkenazi]
[100] The answer below is based on a real case scenario that happened in which the organizers borrowed the chickens from the slaughterhouse and did not inform the paying customers that they are in essence only borrowing the chicken. The matter was brought up with a number of Rabbanim, and the main consensus was as stated below. See also Nitei Gavriel 10 footnote 18; Hamaor p. 15; Koveitz Beis Aaron Viyisrael p. 78; Shut Rabbanei Europe p. 326
[101] Reply of Rav Eli Landa; Reply of Rav Avishad; As even by Karbanos, in which we find precedent to allow someone else to bring the animal on your behalf, it is only valid if the person had knowledge that he was not the owner of the animal and nonetheless agreed for it to be brought. However, in the case where it was brought on his behalf without his knowledge then it is invalid. Seemingly, the same applies here, that since the people were unaware that they’re only borrowing the chicken therefore the entire ceremony is invalid. Furthermore, in this situation the chicken is not being slaughtered on behalf of those who performed the ceremony, and thus loses the main aspect of the ceremony which is to slaughter a chicken on one’s behalf.
[102] P. 97
Leave A Comment?
You must be logged in to post a comment.