Ben Nidah

[Yankel Nosson]

posted in the adoption thread:
"A child born b'kashrus u'b'tahara..."

"...So if you are not supposed to adopt a non-Jewish child or a Jewish child born to a niddah?"
Curious: is there a difference between a child conceived to a nida and a child conceived to a woman who ceased menstruation for seven days but did not go to a mikveh?

[Torah613]

Both are niddah!

[Yankel Nosson]

Another issue:

What is the underlying principle/mekoros for the idea that a woman who is long past childbearing and hadn't gone to the mikvah can go to the mikvah, even after menopause, and it will affect the generations that came out of her?

[Torah613]

Where is this idea found, or where did you hear it?

[Yankel Nosson]

Originally posted by Torah613
Where is this idea found, or where did you hear it?
My wife came across it in Rivka Slonim's book "Total Immersion":

p. xxxvi: "A single immersion in the mikvah late in life may appear insignificant to some, a quick and puny act. Yet coupled with dedication and awe, it is a monumental feat; it brings purity and its regenerative power not only to the present and future but even to one' past."

p. 150: "...then I heard that Mikvah's effect could be retroactive. My children would still be affected...by my going to the mikvah....I had wanted so badly to do this for my grown children and also for my future grandchildren....I would go once, and it would cover me and my children forever..."

p. 212: "Jewish mysticism teaches that even if the mother goes after the child is born, the effect of Mikvah is retroactive."

[Torah613]

Nu, ask her for a written source.

[rebayzl]

Originally posted by Yankel Nosson
Another issue:

What is the underlying principle/mekoros for the idea that a woman who is long past childbearing and hadn't gone to the mikvah can go to the mikvah, even after menopause, and it will affect the generations that came out of her?


Sicha of Rosh Chodesh Elul 5735

[Torah613]

I don't see any mention there of fixing up the past (for the future the purpose is obvious)!

[stwill]

For some reason, I am not able to post a reply on the "Ben Nidah" thread, so I'm putting it here.

I don't have the exact source, but I clearly remember a letter from the Rebbe to a couple whose child wanted to marry a non-Jew, and the Rebbe said that often the cause is that the child was not born according to Halachah. The Rebbe says that the way to rectify that (if I remember correctly) is to begin to be careful with the laws of Taharas Hamishpachah and to teach others as well.

I believe that the Rebbe writes in several letters that the Tikun for not having observed the Halochos is to teach others.

If I find the source, I will IY"H post it.

[Torah613]

I think it important to point out, that there are seemingly 2 issues: 1) Saying that going to the Mikvah once is retroactive, and undoes the failure of going previously, and all the consequenses (halachik and spiritual) that arise from that failure.
2) Someone who is doing tshuva for previous sins (- not going to the Mikva etc), and is giving a "seder tshuva" (by the Rebbe, or someone else authorized to do that), which may (or: will) include also going to the mikvah, among other things.
In my view, it would seem to be 2 different issues.
I believe the discussion here is on point #1.
[This is in response to stwill in post # 9].

[Yankel Nosson]

The Rebbe responded in this way for many things, such as missing a day of tefillin: to learn the halachos and to recommit to the mitzvah.

I understand how this approach could be mechaper for the parents who neglected the mitzvah, but the issue in the Ben Nidah thread is a little more significant, since it asserts that the retroactive effect impacts not only the parents responsible for the behavior, but also the child who is now a separate being.

I would like to see the sources for this.

[RebYid]

Originally posted by Yankel Nosson
sh'tichiyu

Your kidding??

[Yankel Nosson]

As an aside, perhaps nogea to this inyan, I saw somewhere that R' Uri Strelisker once said that if his father had immersed in a mikvah even once in his life, it would have made his (the son's) avodas Hashem much less difficult.

[Torah613]

It probably means before he was concieved.

[Yankel Nosson]

Originally posted by Torah613
It probably means before he was concieved.
Based on what? R' Uri Strelisker did not qualify his statement at all, why does Torah613 see fit to do so? Especially since the Rebbe (pending sources, of course) seems to be saying precisely not.

[stwill]

Yankel Nosson - I still can't post on the other thread.

Igros Kodesh, volume 23, page 376

ועוד להעיר שלפעמים קורה כהנ"ל ע"י שבעת שנתעברה עם הנ"ל הי' זה באופן שלא היו נזהרים ככל הדרוש בשמירת חוקי ודיני טהרת המשפחה... וכיון שתשובה מועילה במידה חשובה גם בנוגע העבר , יש להשתדל בשמירת ענינים אלו הנ"ל


My attempt at translation:

And in addition, to point out that sometimes the above [the daughter having a non-Jewish boyfriend] happens because at the time she was conceived it was in a way that they [the parents] were not as careful as required in the laws of Taharas Hamishpachah ... and since Teshuvah helps in great measure also concerning the past, they should make an effort to be careful in the above.

[Torah613]

YN - I don't know why you are getting nasty, but anyway....
You brought a story - without sources. I am trying to understand that story, in a way that makes sense. So I wrote that "probably" it means before he was concieved - as that makes sense, as it would have put his father on a higher level, and we know that the level of the father affects the child that is concieved from the father. If you happen to track down the source, and it shows the opposite, I will gladly concede that I was mistaken.
As far as what the Rebbe allegedly wrote - as I wrote above in post # 10, there is a difference between doing something in a way of tshuva (on the advice of a tzaddik, a great posek etc.), which sometimes in some spiritual way has the ability to accomplish a kaporo, than saying that fulfilling a mitzva once has the (automatic?) ability to rectify the negligence of that mitzva (and the resulting harm) previously.
If someone skipped a day of teffilin, it is (IMO) absurd to say, that putting on teffilin the next day (which he is obligated to do anyway), corrects the ommision of the previous day.
The examples of the Rebbe about those who skipped teffilin (RT etc) was with additional inyonim/hiddurim etc., not the mere continuing to fulfill the mitzvah (unless there was a rare case where the Rebbe would say that nothing additional was needed).

[Yankel Nosson]

Please forgive the tone, I did not intend to sound nasty.

In any event, this idea of "retroactive mikvah" seems to be widespread, and I am not casting a suspicious eye upon it, I only want to see its source in Chassidus. I sent an e-mail to Rivka Slonim, and perhaps she can tell us where to look.

[Torah613]

Stwill - you didn't bring the full sentence.

[stwill]

Rabbi Elijah de Vidas (1518-1592)

The child is tied to the parents' minds and the parents' actions, from conception throughout life. Especially to those matters from which the child is born. The parents' modesty of dress, where they place their eyes and mind, the care they take with the purifying waters of the mikvah and the time of separation -- all has a great effect on children yet to be born and on those already grown.

(Reshit Chochmah, Shaar HaKedusha, chapter 16)


translated by Tzvi Freeman, posted on chabad.org

[Yankel Nosson]

Last night at the 28 Sivan farbrengen in 770, R' Eidelstein of Springfield told a story of a case he was involved with where a mekurav wrote to the Rebbe about a certain inyan and the Rebbe wrote back that the mother going to the mikveh would help l'mafreya.

[Torah613]

Without seeing the letter and the exact wording, it is no better than the שמועות brought above.

[Majorthinker]

This is an annoying conversation to see, because I saw a letter on this topic three weeks ago, while leafing through an igros, trying to find a source for something else.
I remember it because I was kind of shocked to find it myself, since I had never seen this idea anywhere except online.

Here are the possible krachim, for someone who has more energy and easier access to a set than me right now:
18, 19?, 21?, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 29
This list is of the krachim I had at hand during the time I was looking for something on chinuch.

For those who don't want to look through the entire sefer, there's a tochen inyanim at the front.
And if you still don't feel like doing it, wait till I get to it.

WARNING- I have a list of stuff to do, and since it isn't urgent, it may get pushed off indefinitely.

[Torah613]

A letter from v 23 was brought above.

[Majorthinker]

Nope, not the same one.