- This topic has 47 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
What do you know of the idea that a baby should not look into a mirror until after the first tooth has come in? Has anyone heard this, is there such a law, and what is the makor and/or rationale for it?
I’ve heard it’s a lubavitcher minhag.
I don’t follow it
I heard that it’s an inyan not to let a baby look in the mirror until s/he’s three months old and that it’s because they see a malach. I heard it from many people but I don’t know if its something real. It doesn’t hurt to be careful.
I heard 2 yrs old. I really wonder about the source…
ive heard until they get their first tooth, and ive also heard until they begin to talk.
I’m almost sure there is a mekor and is exact info abt this i’ll try to find out asap
I heard it from my mother when I was young. I am sure it was an old bubba meisah. I was told until a baby started to talk or s/he would be frightened and wouldn’t talk. It didn’t work, they all talk and they love looking into the mirror. Somehow my mom forgot about it as we started bathing the kids in the bathroom instead of in a baby bath in the bedroom and lifted them up wrapped in their towels and showing them off in the bathroom mirror.
I was told by a choshuva Yerushalmi that it is until they get a tooth.
aries2756:
I wrote similar on Motzei Shabbos but the moderator deleted it. Then again, they deleted every post of mine that night. Guess it was a late night for the Moderator!!
I heard a shiur a number of years ago from a known Posek in New York who said it’s nonsense. Same thing about “stepping over” somebody.
The debrecziner rav z”l brings it in Be’er moshe (don’t remember exactly where) and says that until the baby gets its first tooth it should not look in a mirror.
When I had a child I was also nervous about this as many toys come with mirrors.
So I asked R Yaakov Hillel who told me that there is no mekor for it.
Maybe it has nothing to do with spirits or angels but might be more based on down to Earth, reasons?
For example: Perhaps a baby that looks into mirrors will grow up being vain and could G-d forbid wind up being like some who always have to worry about their looks, and who can’t pass by a mirror without admiring themselves?
So if as babies, they are taught not to look at mirors, perhaps they might be less likely to get that characteristic of being so vain, and self absorbed, later on in life?
hereorthere, your theory that infants are discouraged from looking in mirrors so as not to promote vanity or self-absorption is an interesting one. However, I disagree with that explanation, because most babies won’t recognize themselves in a mirror before they’re a year old. Before that age, looking in a mirror wouldn’t foster vanity, since infants don’t realize they are seeing themselves. And judging from previous posts, there don’t seem to be any minhagim discouraging babies from looking in mirrors past one year of age.
although i was so sure of myself that there is a mekor for this – however the answer i received is that there is No Mekor for it – just like stepping over someone – that they won’t grow. (I would be a shrimp if that were the case)
Anyone heard about not kissing the sole of a baby’s foot? Anything to that one???
EDITED, Although the discussion is interesting, the olam in CR is not the best place to definitively determine if a Yiddish practice is the result of hidden Chochma or not.
sofdavar, I am curious, now that whoever you asked is unaware of a mikor for this, and now that you have given a “proof” from your own self, would you step over your child or grandchild?
My wife says that my mother-in-law used to mention that minhag as well.
Rav Moshe Stern zt”l (Be’er Moshe 8:36) was asked regarding the validity of three minhagim pertaining to children.
1. Not to let a baby looks at itself in a mirror before its teeth start to come out because the teeth may not come out on time and its speech development may be delayed.
2. Not to walk over children because it may stunt their growth. If one walks over a child he should make sure to walk back over again.
3. Tie a red string on a baby carriage and/or crib to ward off Ayin Hara.
He says they are all valid minhagim that were practiced in his home, and people in general were careful about them. He quotes a Rashba that says that you should not cheapen or be “Mizalzel” in Minhag Nashim Zekeinos (old wives tales) since they are certainly rooted in holy ideas, even if we have forgotten the reason for them.
mod 80-interesting because I never heard a sure answer about allowing babies to look in the mirror but I definitely heard that the other two things you mentioned are totally made up and have no mekor(and I asked my rav about it)
“He quotes a Rashba that says that you should not cheapen or be “Mizalzel” in Minhag Nashim Zekeinos (old wives tales) since they are certainly rooted in holy ideas, even if we have forgotten the reason for them. “
Too bad it seems that some people seemto take joy in being mezalzel our minhagim and Chazal.
Mischiefmaker I would be surprised if YW Moderator-80, was misquoting Rav Moshe (though I do not ‘know’ for sure).
So if Rav Moshe really said this, what would your Rav say in response?
I will ask my rav and tell you as soon as I know.
Mod 80 – yes i would. I actually asked my posek when i had another shayla. He is very tall and responded to my question that it’s the same thing as stepping over someone. He ended off “noch a mazel they stepped over me when i was young otherwise i’d be like Og Melech Habashan” those were his words. He is a very respected and well known posek in my community and i trust him. Ch”v i’m not trying to be mezalzel in the minhagay Klal Yisroel. If there’s no source, it’s not a minhag.
Thanks sof
Im not sure I would agree with: “If there’s no source, it’s not a minhag.”
The source of these old “minhagim” is not always known today. That doesn’t mean there is no source. The source may not necessarily be in Halachah, or even something in Seforim. Maybe some shouldn’t be called Minhagim, but rather the conduct of our alter bubbies.
Mod 80 – fine maybe that’s a little strong statement yes, maybe there are minhagim that we dont’ know the source but we follow them. Lets just remember that even within minhagim there are different levels. At least lets differentiate between them. Concerning this one with babies, i just follow my posek
Moderator 80,
Thanks for the ???? ????. I always wondered about this ????.
A link to (Be’er Moshe 8:36): http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=890&st=&pgnum=420
sof
I agree fully with your decision to abide by your Posek
if there’s no realsource then it’s lo sinachshu
I heard it was because they see the reflection of a Shin-Daled and it scares them.
We don’t let babies look in until they get their first tooth and when I asked my mother she said because that’s what her grandmother did. 🙂
Maybe this will help people who are torn between calling it minhag or Maase imahos. A friend of mine once asked a big poseik (it’s been a while & I don’t remember whom she asked) about buying things for a baby before it’s born (I think this falls into a similar category as the other items that have been mentioned). The response- There is no known mekor for not buying however you must ask rishus from the Bubbies as if it will upset them it should not be done. (He did say that if she could do it in a way that there was no way the Bubby would find out and it really made a difference to her, then she could do it)
Perhaps we can say something similar here: There is no known mekor, but there are definitely families in which this is the respected practice. If you are a member of such a family, it might be worth your while to try being careful.
The Rashbah is used often to rationalize abiding by something without a known source; the Minchas Yitzchak uses in regards to not eating the first piece of a loaf of bread (many do this only on shabbos). Dayan Fisher, though, used to make fun of the minhag, as it was sourceless. He davka ate the first piece.
But we do find sources going back three hundred years about it, though none bring a reason. Kol Davar Shachasu Bah Zekenos – it’s actually a Yerushalmi; I assume that’s where the Rashbah got it from. But where is the line? I don’t know. But I know there is one. And I know that hysteria also isn’t warranted.
The Minchas Yitzchak quotes two opinions about the above Rashbah –
1) The Teshuvas Remah – this Rashbah only applies to something which is mentioned in the Poskim.
2) The Heshiv Moshe – the Rashbah even applies if there is no other source.
Correction – the Yerushalmi I thought it was referring in the beginning of Brachos refers to the Chachamim. Or at least I think so.
Oomis…forgive me, are you disagreeing with the array of sources above? Care to explain why?
The entire premise of the Rashbah is that our mesorah – even things without sources, as per the Heshiv Moshe – is ultimately something to be wary of rejecting. Hence, the Minchas Yitzchak, The Ben Ish Chai, are wary of eating the first piece of challah. Dayan Fisher disagreeed with them on a Halachic basis (based on a Gemara in Horayos. But I don’t believe that’s where you are coming from).
And perhaps you can source the custom of giving “the spitz” to a pregnant woman? And if you can’t…well, I suppose you should consider it silly as well.
Do you disagree? Why? You seem to respect “valid halachic sources”; does the Rashbah make the par?
The concept is that often old wives tales are often based on something. That is precisely what the Rashbah is saying. While the Remah limits it, the Heshiv Moshe does not. There is certainly room for debate here; but you don’t seem to be basing your point on anything. You seem to be rather flippant with Halachic sources.
—
Again, based on your professed respect of valid Halachic sources, chazal teach us not to teach (emphasis on teach) women Torah to the fact they are Kaley Daas. This is gemara in Sotah, 6a.
Presumably that is a valid halachic source.
This is written in Shulchan Aruch that a woman indeed gets schar for learning Torah, yet it advisable not to do so because most women are Kaley HaDaas. Therefore chazal advised not to so; yet the Remah that women must learn what Halachos are relevant to them. The Chafetz Chaim adds that this applies to anything which brings to Yiras Shamayim.
Clearly that has nothing to do with Zekenos in the mesorah in regards to how to act (such as not eating the end piece of the bread) as this a Halacha which is relevant to them, and hence it is part of their limud. This would apply to any principle of Emunah, as well.
In addition, the concept of Kaley HaDaas is not relevant to keeping a chain of a clear halachic psak; rather, halachic analysis.
The concept is if a woman is sufficiently capably of totally disconnected her emotions from intellectual analysis. Not that she is not capable of intellectual analysis, but as the power of her emotions in influencing her final conclusion. This is something that we see – and appreciate, I should hope – in day to day life.
How exactly to apply this principle is a subject of debate. Not random flippancy.
For further edification, may I suggest Rebbetzins Heller’s excellent “Our Bodies, Our Souls”. She rights extensively about Klaley HaDaas and explains it rather clearly. Or she merely an old wive, as well?
Perhaps a little more respect for valid halachic sources would be in order? Or at least, why you wish to write as you do and still profess respect for “valid halachic sources”?
The end of the challah definitely has a mekor but I’m not sure where.
It can cuz forgetfullness for MEN when learning if they eat it. But oomis, since you’re female, you can continue enjoying that piece of challah!
The ideal as far as babies and mirrors are concerned, is not to have them look at mirrors until they are old enough to understand not to touch the mirror (as babies tend to touch everything they see). If they are allowed to touch a mirror, it definitely causes fingerprints…..
It says in shulchan aruch that a man should not look in a mirror because of beged isha.
Oomis, my apologies. I erred. I am sorry. Thank you for not responding in kind.
so there is a source in SA that men shouldn’t look in mirrors. what was the source re: babies?
I actually asked my Rosh Yeshiva, Horav Shmuel Kamenetzky about this, and he told me it was a “bubbah ma’aseh”
Wait, I just noticed Mod 80 already cited above a ???? ???? for this (as well as stepping over a baby)!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.