This blog is a forum for the posting of insights on the daf yomi (daily daf). Postings will be brief and to the point. Comments are welcome.
Sunday, November 05, 2006
Beitza 9b - Opinion of Beis Shamai by Kisuy Hadam
This point on the daf yomi was raised by R' Menachem Spira. In the situation of Kisuy Hadam, there are 2 issues, one is a chafira issue that the gemara says is not deoraysa since you don't need the hole, and the other is a muktzah issue that deker na'utz hepls for (Beis Hillel is only willing to rely on deker nautz bidieved, but l'chatchila they require afar muchan or eifer kirah). When the Gemara suggests that we don't have to swap BS and BH, because BS maybe is really more machmir in simchas yom tov than BH, but the reason he is more lenient by Kisuy Hadam is bec. there is a deker na'utz so there is no issur at all. It seems that this is not sufficient, as Tosafos points out 8a (d.h. v'eino) that there is still an issur derabonon of chafira for the dirt (melacha shein tzricha l'gufa), and BS is lenient bec. of simchas yom tov. Therefore, the mishna should still imply that BS is more lenient by simchas yom tov than BH!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
menachem,
It is true that there are 2 potential issues, 1. muktzah on the dirt. 2. digging. But it is not clear which reason compels beis hillel to be machmir. Perhaps beis hillel agrees with beis shamai that simchas yom tov is sufficient to be matir the issur derabonon of digging, yet they are machmir bec. of the issur of muktzah. Beis Hillel holds that deker na'utz is a low level hachana that we only rely on bidieved, not lechachila. therefore, as far as simchas yom tov is concerned, we don't necessarily see that beis shamai is any more lenient for the purpose of simchas yom tov than beis hillel.
i moved yossi's comment from a post to a comment on the previous post.
re horav menachems spira q
מהשעורים ששמעתי מהר' קאליש כתוב לי שלב"ה עדיין אוסרים אף בדקר נעוץ מפני ג טעמים: 1. לרשב"א שם ־ שהוי קצת מוקצה 2. למג"א וכן משמע מתוס' שקצת חפירה 3. ולרש"י בסוגיא הכא שיש חשש כתישה.
וגם לחשש חפירה הרי זה לא כ"כ פשוט דהרי יש כאן שתי קולות, אצ"ל ומקלקל ועיין בקרבן נתנאל שם שיש צד בראשונים להתיר לכתחילה או עכ"פ במקום מצוה. יוצא דלכל הטעמים יש מקום לומר עכ"פ בהו"א ־לשיטת תוס' דכל זה הו"א־ שע"י דקר נעוץ מותר לגמרי עכ"פ במקום מצוה. וכנרה שהולך אני בדרכו של הרב ששוכן במערבא.
ויש לעיין אי רש"י מפרש ענין הכתישה הכא לומר משהו...
Post a Comment