tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36647723.post602320601497875014..comments2023-09-09T00:30:46.617-07:00Comments on Hearos (Insights) on Daf Yomi: Baba Metzia 10b - Shliach L'dvar AveiraAvi Lebowitzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10757679478618591719noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36647723.post-74605539612535455232009-05-05T15:09:00.000-07:002009-05-05T15:09:00.000-07:00thanks.
here is a mention of the same nodeh b'yehu...thanks.<br />here is a mention of the same nodeh b'yehuda.<br />http://hearos.blogspot.com/search?q=divorce+will+shliach+aveiraAvi Lebowitzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10757679478618591719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36647723.post-7963681580421621342009-05-05T15:04:00.000-07:002009-05-05T15:04:00.000-07:00http://dafnotes.blogspot.com/2008/07/agent-to-free...http://dafnotes.blogspot.com/2008/07/agent-to-free-slave.html<br /><br />The Acharonim ask: One who frees his Canaanite slave has violated a Biblical commandment! If so, the agent who is being sent to deliver the emancipation document is an agent for an aveirah! There is a well established principle that one cannot be an agent for an aveirah!?<br /><br />There are those who prove from here that although one is not permitted to serve as an agent to commit an aveirah, the agency, nevertheless, is not negated because of it. Tosfos in Bava Metzia (13b), however, states clearly regarding one who was sent to serve as an agent for an aveirah, the agency is negated and his actions are null and void.<br /><br />The Noda BeYehudah answers that since the agent is acquiring the document for the slave, he is serving as an agent of the slave and not as an agent of the master. He is therefore not regarded as being an agent for an aveirah, because the aveirah is for the master to set him free; not for the slave to gain his freedom.<br /><br />One can also answer that we are discussing a case where it was a mitzvah to free the slave (a tenth man was needed for a minyan), and therefore, there was no aveirah.Avromihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13593992238707872967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36647723.post-4970621345073850132009-05-05T07:31:00.000-07:002009-05-05T07:31:00.000-07:00excellent point.
the concept of ein shliach l'dvar...excellent point.<br />the concept of ein shliach l'dvar aveira really only addresses the actual aveira, whether it is attributed to the sender or the shliach. But, in regard to whether the shlichus that was done is binding (which only applies to some cases of shliach l'dvar aveira, but doesn't apply to hiring someone to kill and the like where there isn't any chalos), is up for discussion. Tosafos actually holds in one answer that by saying ein shliach l'dvar aveira we would actually nullify the act of kiddushin. Tosafos seems to hold that yeish shliach would mean that the kiddushin is effective and the aveira is done by the sender, and ein shliach would mean that the kiddushin is null and void so that no one did any aveira. Apparently Tosafos holds that if by removing the chalos of the kiddushin we can make it that no one will have done the aveira, ein shliach will remove the chalos, whereas in cases that there isn't any chalos the concept of ein shliach would make the shliach responsible for his actions.<br />Regarding a kohen marrying a gerusha, if we say ein shliach tosafos will hold that the kiddushin is not binding. The first answer of Tosafos that would seem to hold that the kiddushin is binding will say that the shliach did an aveira, but the kohen didn't commit an aveira through the act of kiddushin (but may have an obligation to divorce the gerusha as he would be obligated to do in a case where he himself married her).Avi Lebowitzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10757679478618591719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36647723.post-62262109715095023892009-05-05T06:43:00.000-07:002009-05-05T06:43:00.000-07:00In the case where the Yisroel marries the gerusha ...In the case where the Yisroel marries the gerusha on behalf of the Cohen, if we say Ein Shaliach so the Cohen has not violated an issur, is the kiddushin valid? If so, is not the cohen married to a gerusha and still in violation of a prohibition?Michaelnoreply@blogger.com