Rob,
I think that selling the kli to a goy for a nominal price and them borrowing it for use can get around the toyveling problem if toyveling is impossible to do where you are located. As long as you, the Jew, don't own the kli you can use it. If it's new it doesn't even need to be kashered.

We do this with hametz at pesach, why can't we do it with klim?

quote:

Originally posted by rob:
What is the rule regarding shul-owned (therefore public, likely) dishes and silverware and cookware?

Should a shul toyvel the congregation-owned dishes? With or without a bracha?

I'm told that in Gateshead Yeshiva they didn't tovel any of their kelim (i.e. the ones used communally)

quote:

Originally posted by MosheYisraeli:
Yisroel,
That's new to me. What is Rav Ovadia Yosef's rationale for toyveling without a bracha? What does the toyveling achieve without a bracha?

One has nothing to do with the other. If you do a Mitzva without a Bracha, you have fulfilled the Mitzva. Since Rav Ovadia elsewhere is very machmir on not making Brachot LeVatala [in vain], it is perhaps not surprising that in a case where the Mitzva is not really necessary that he paskens that, if one wants to do the Mitzva in any event, it must be without a Bracha.

Yisroel,
Why is the mitzvah considered unnecessary if Torah states that it is? Does Torah mean that is it necessary only for personal use?

Basically, part of the job of the Hechser is to make sure that you're not doing any Issur while you sit down and eat in the establishment. whether it's technically under the heading of Kasrus or not.

It's like a Kashrus org. twenty years ago who gave Hashgacha on a place that didn't check the vegetables for bugs. When asked about it they responded, we only give the Hechshur on the vegetables and not on the bugs.

quote:

Originally posted by MosheYisraeli:
Yisroel,
Why is the mitzvah considered unnecessary if Torah states that it is? Does Torah mean that is it necessary only for personal use?

Rav Ovadiah (Yechaveh Da'at Vol. 4 Siman 44) paskens that kelim in a restaurant do not require tevila. If they don't require tevila (i.e. there is no Mitzva) then if one were to tovel them (for example, out of deference to those of his customers who think they should be toveled), one should not make a Bracha as there is no actual Mitzva he is performing on which the Bracha is being recited.

Personal use is a different matter and Rav Ovadiah (ibid.) forbids eating off kelim at someone elses house where he knows they haven't been toveled.

What is the status of food that has been on a non-tovelled dish? Can it be eaten if it is then transferred to a tovelled dish? Does it make a difference whether it was cooked in, i.e. a pot, or just placed upon, i.e. a plate?

quote:

Originally posted by MosheYisraeli:
1. When one does not have ready access to a full fledged kosher mikveh, what bodies of water are acceptable for toyveling new household utensils?
2. Can a large rain puddle do?

Moshe,
I was late in catching on to this very interesting post.
A general rule about ritual baths (ablutions) is that they must be אשבורן, meaning, the waters gathered together in a depressed place upon the ground. The second general rule about ritual baths is that forty seahs of rain water is the minimum amount of water that could render cleanness to a thing defiled.

As to your question, "Can a large rain puddle do?" The first Mishnah in Mikvaoth speaks specifically about puddles of water (Heb. מי גבאים). There, we learn that these puddles usually do not hold forty seahs of water, and that they could only be used, say, for drawing-up water in a vessel to wash one's hands, etc. but not for immersing vessels. However, if one were to immerse vessels within them while it was raining, such an immersion (Tovila) would be considered valid. (see: Maimonides' Hilchot Mikwaoth)

Sincerely,
David

B"H

Moshe,

If you live in a place where there is no full fledged kosher mikveh, I suggest that you make your own mikveh! I had the privilege of asking my Rabbi (Rabbi Yoseph Qafih z"l) before he died how they made their mikveh in Yemen. This is what he said to me:

According to R. Yoseph Qafih z"l, they would carve out a channel upon the rooftop for the conducting of rain water.(1) Afterwards, they would overlay the entire floor of the roof with a coat of lime and plaster. This channel, or conduit, was called in their tongue, "mesillah." (2) It was through this lime-coated channel upon the roof top that rain water was conducted and caused to collect within a reservoir of water built upon ground floor, usually within one's courtyard. The reservoir was actually a pit carved out of stony ground, and which had been coated with lime.
Directly adjoining the reservoir of water was the ablution (Heb. "mikveh"), made for ritual bathing, and which always contained a capacity of holding well-over two-hundred seahs of water. (3)
It, too, was carved out of stony ground, but had steps leading down into it, which were also carved out of the ground, and was entirely overlaid with lime. The rain water which ran down the sides of the wall from the roof top was conducted thence by the aid of grooves carved into the floor of the courtyard, until it emptied itself into the ablution. Once the ablution was filled to its capacity, excessive water was drained away at its opposite end by a sluice leading from the ablution at a slight degrade. Whenever rain water (which had been collected within the ablution) had become brackish or foul, especially in the long winter months when it was dry in Yemen, it was drained away and replaced with drawn water taken from a well or cistern. It was then necessary to open a valve in the ablution ("mikveh"), connecting its drawn water with the rain waters in the reservoir, a practice known in Hebrew as "kissing of the waters." (4)
This practice once again rendered the ablution valid, and fit for purifying those who were unclean. R. Yoseph Qafih added, when I asked him about these matters some years back, that they never made use of the fixed drainage pipes upon their roofs, since these are deemed as "vessels" and would have rendered the rain water invalid. He also added that the roof tops in Yemen, wherein were carved the channels for conducting water, were made of a mixture of stone, clay, lime and earth.(5)

* * * * * * * * * * *
FOOTNOTES:

(1) see: Baba Kama 67a
צינור שחקקו ולבסוף קבעו פוסל את המקוה קבעו ולבסוף חקקו אינו פוסל את המקוה
(2) This channel was formerly known by the name of "tzinor" (צינור) in Hebrew, a word which has since changed in meaning, and which now carries the connotation of "pipe." (cf. Maimonides' Commentary on Mishnah Mikvaoth 4:3) Pipes were formerly called by the name "sillon" (סילון).
(3) The minimum amount of rain water needed to render any immersion valid is forty seahs. Such a capacity would hold 5,760 medium-sized eggs. (see: Numbers Rabba 18:21) Even so, most ablutions in Yemen had well over the capacity of two-hundred seahs of water.
(4) According to the Mishnah (Mikvaoth 6:7), the hole which was to be opened between the ablution ("mikveh") and reservoir of stored water, allowing the waters to intermingle, was to be at least the size of the spout of a skin-bottle, meaning at least two fingerbreadths wide in diameter, or 4.5 cm. (Some put this at 5 cm.)
(5) The ancient method employed in Yemen to plaster walls, cisterns, baths, etc., making them impermeable, was to take freshly fired lime from a kiln, and to have it slaked in water for a period of at least two weeks, during which time it was constantly turned. It was never allowed to dry, during this period. Afterwards, the surface to receive the first layer of lime was prepared. Small stones were roughly imbedded, and the temporary mud plaster partially scraped away. The surface was then dowsed with water, and all dust removed. An aggregate of pebbles, or sand, or volcanic cinders, was mixed with lime, to make the first layer. The two ingredients are mixed in a ratio of two parts of aggregate to one part of lime. They are blended together and pounded. The first layer which adheres to the surface is usually made with coarse particles as large as corn kernels, and its thickness ca. two inches. It was then worked into the surface by pounding for three or four days until it adheres. It was also necessary to keep the lime application moist at all times. Understandably, it takes longer to apply the lime and aggregate to vertical walls, and only by perseverance will one succeed. The second layer of lime and aggregate was made smoother, and in a ratio of one-half lime and one-half aggregate. It was applied directly over the first layer. It, too, was pounded, until it adheres, during which time it was never allowed to dry. Usually, a watery lime solution was kept on hand for spattering. Surfaces exposed directly to the elements required three or four layers of lime, all worked in the manner described above. Indoor surfaces required less. After the lime had been applied, it was then polished, or burnished, by rubbing it in rhythmic motions with a larger-than-fist size riverine stone, which was smooth. This process is time consuming, and tiring, as it requires applying one's full pressure. It may take as much as three weeks, during which time the plaster of lime must be kept moist to avoid hair-line cracks. The polishing will give the lime a hard, marble-like quality and sheen. Finally, a coating of animal fat (usually melted suet) was applied to the finished surface.

David are you a Yemanite Jew yourself?

quote:

What is the status of food that has been on a non-tovelled dish? Can it be eaten if it is then transferred to a tovelled dish? Does it make a difference whether it was cooked in, i.e. a pot, or just placed upon, i.e. a plate?

Gila asked the questions above. I had alluded to them earlier, but no one has answered them yet. I hope they won't get lost in the shuffle.

David,
Thanks for the treatise in mikveh construction. Wow!

quote:

However, if one were to immerse vessels within them while it was raining, such an immersion (Tovila) would be considered valid.

Wow - that's quite a thought.

Is there any requirement that the puddle be large enough to hold that minimum volume of water, or that it not be a putrid standing puddle of water from a prior rain, or filled by water which had been stored in a vessel?

Or any requirement that the rain be more than a drizzle, and in fact enough to fill the puddle in a certain amount of time?

How about pulling from the laws of showering one limb at a time on Yom Tov - can Toyvelling be accomplished by putting dishes and silverware out on a dish rack in a heavy rain, above a grating, no chance of immersing in mud?

quote:

How about pulling from the laws of showering one limb at a time on Yom Tov - can Toyvelling be accomplished by putting dishes and silverware out on a dish rack in a heavy rain, above a grating, no chance of immersing in mud

Rob,
LOL!

quote:

The rain water which ran down the sides of the wall from the roof top was conducted thence by the aid of grooves carved into the floor of the courtyard, until it emptied itself into the ablution.

David: is there any discussion of requiring a sloping grade to the floor? Or perhaps the bottom of the grooves were required to get deeper as it got closer to the mikvah?

I understand that there is a problem if any part of the conduits are flat, that water can collect, and disqualify the mikvah. Have I understood this correctly?

Also... is lime to be seen as an example of a good substance to use, or is it the only permissible substance?

My house has aluminum gutters, and vinyl gutters and channels are readily available now too. There are certain adhesives which are considered good for sealing pieces of rain gutter together.

quote:

Originally posted by AharonBenjamin:
David are you a Yemanite Jew yourself?

A Jew I am; a Yemenite, not yet. I would have been proud and privileged to have been born a Yemenite Jew. I settled for second best, though. I married a Yemenite woman!

David

quote:

Originally posted by Gila:
What is the status of food that has been on a non-tovelled dish? Can it be eaten if it is then transferred to a tovelled dish? Does it make a difference whether it was cooked in, i.e. a pot, or just placed upon, i.e. a plate?

There would be no problem with the food.

Rav Kacev,
What do you mean there would be no problem with the food? If I can eat food from un-toyveled utensils just as well as toyveled utensils, why bother toyvel then?

Presumably no problem b'dieved [post facto].

If there is an aveira for the one serving or using, but not to the one eating, and the food is still fine, no problem eating the food. But this doesn't mean that all toyvelling need is nullified.

Altho one is not allowed to eat from a vessel that was not toiveled, no prohibition is attached to the food if it was moved to another plate that was immersed.

As far as eating in someone's home where the dishes were not immersed--that is a great argument among the poskim without a clear cut consensus.