Shiur 09/26/17 – Beitza 26b

Beitza 26a

1- We continued about Mishna where a dispute is presented regarding the circumstances under which it is permitted to examine a בכור on Yom Tov.


The Gemara clarifies that the Mishnah refers to a case where a bechor developed a temporary blemish before Yom Tov.  R’ Yehudah allows an expert to examine the animal and certify that it is indeed a מום and therefore permitted for consumption.

Reb Shimon does not allow this certification. Rashi explains that the prohibition is not an issue of muktzah because R’ Shimon does not subscribe to the prohibitions of muktza.

The reason for the restriction is that when the Rabbi declares that the animal is blemished it appears as if, through his ruling, he is making the animal usable (מתקן) which is prohibited on Yom Tov.

Image result for defective

2- Now what if some prohibited food –איסור became mixed with permitted food – היתר ,either on Shabbos or before Shabbos, but one did not become aware of the mixture until Shabbos, is one permitted to ask a Rav to determine whether the mixture has the necessary ratio of 60:1 to nullify the prohibited substance?  And if so, he is permitted to declare the mixture permitted.

Related image

It would seem obvious that one would be permitted to do so.

Why then is it prohibited for a Rav to render a decision regarding the blemished  בכור  and yet it is permitted for a Rov to render a decision regarding a potentially prohibited mixture?

3- The Terumas HaDeshen, resolves this contradiction by differentiating between the mechanism of permitting a blemished bechor and the mechanism of permitted a mixture of איסור and היתר . When rendering a decision regarding  איסור והיתר all that is required is knowledge of the facts of the question and knowledge of halacha.

Ruling on a blemished bechor, on the other hand, requires the pronouncement of a Chacham or a Beis Din. In that way, issuing a decision concerning a bechor is a more formal declaration than a decision rendered for  איסור  והיתר .

The TA”Z (9) quotes the Magid Mishna with an  alternative resolution: The reason issuing a ruling for a bechor is prohibited is because if the ruling is negative then it becomes Muktze. Handling it then would become a problem.

This issue is only with בכור that has  a pre existing prohibition (חזקת איסור ), as opposed to the mixture which has never been declared prohibited.

Alter Rebbe regarding the TA”Z.

4 -For Yom Kippur we studied the text of a Teshuva of the Tzemach Tzedek. OC 36.

The question submitted to the Tzemach Tzedek was as follows: if eating a  כזית  of bread on Shabbos is Min Hatorah then why don’t we eat it on Yom Kippur that falls out on Shabbos?

Related image

The shiur of fasting is not to eat anything greater that a date!


Image result for dates

So if one would eat a  כזית  of Challa he would be fulfilling his obligation of eating on Shabbos and still be considered fasting!

Image result for miniature challah

We discussed three answers presented by the צמח צדק  , the first from the   מהרלנ”ח , concerning a person who swore to eat a  half-כזית kazayis of נבלה , that even though m’d’Oraisa it would be permitted, the chachamim nevertheless prohibit him from eating it because –    חכמים העמידו דבריהם בשב ואל תעשה .

Ultimately, he explains the distinction is that when יוה”כ falls on שבת, the torah’s  commandment to fast completely voids the commandment to eat on שבת  –

ביטלה התורה לגמרי המע דאכילת שבת כשחל בו יוהכ”פ

as opposed to the regular run-of-the-mill case where you could simply say דאין עשה דוחה לת ועשה – etc. here there is no עשה to be דוחה .


Previous Shiur- short  notes.

1- We spoke about Yalta, the wife of Rav Nachman. See here.

2- We asked a riddle:

How is Shabbos Teshuva different from all other Shabbosim, in Halocho, according to some opinions.

Boaz suggested that Parshas Ha’azinu is the only Parsha that one cannot add more than seven Aliyos. See here.

לא מפסיקין באמצע השירה. רק ב’הזי”ו ל”ך‘. כמ”ש בגמ, ובשו”ע תכ”ח.

ואולי לכן גם לא מפסיקין בהפסוקים שלאחרי השירה.

But not all Shabbos Teshuvas are Parshas Ha’azinu….

for example, next year

We suggested the Tosfos in Shabbos 12b, that Shabbos Teshuva is the only Shabbos that according to all one can visit the sick and pray for his well being.

התירוץ הוא:

במס’ שבת (יב) מובא שמותר לבקר את החולה ולהתפלל עליו. ואומרים: שבת היא מלזעוק ורפואה קרובה לבוא.

מקשין התוס’ שם (ע”ב) מילא לר’ יוסי שאדם נדון בכל יום, ניחא. התפילה תעזור לחולה ולכן מותרת בשבת. [וכן נפסק בשו”ע]

אבל  לפי דעת ר”מ ור”י שגזר דין של האדם הוא ביום כיפורים, אז מה יועיל התפילה ואיך מותר לבקר את החולה ולהתפלל עליו בשבת

מתרצים התוס’ שלדעת ר”מ ור”י אה”נ, מותר לבקרו והתפלל עליו רק בשבת תשובה!


Shiur 09/12/2017 Beitza 25b


Beitza 25b


1- A Baraisa teaches the proper way to drink wine.If one drinks it in one shot he is considered a glutton or “guzzler”.

In two shots – a well mannered person.  

In three shots a ‘showoff’.

We mentioned the story of Yaakov bringing wine for his father Yitzchok to drink.

The משך חכמה (see here) comments on the rare טראפ or cantillation on the word ויבא לו יין וישת. It is a מרכא כפולה  which is a “double trop” and found only 5 times in the entire חומש.


He explains that the Torah is telling us with this double  טראפ  that Yitzchak drank the wine in two sips!

2- The Gemora relates various aspects of the nature of Jews.  One of which is “they are עזים”.

Aggressive? Brazen? Arogant? Focused? Intense? Or plain chutz’pe’dik?

How does this jive with the Gemora in Yevamos that states a natural trait of Jews is them being ביישנים?

We discussed the Maharal explanation on this topic.

Found on the web:

The MAHARAL explains that there are two types of Bushah. One type comes from a person’s lack of motivation and assertiveness. This type of Bushah manifests itself in one who is easily discouraged from taking any initiative because of his shame.

The other type of Bushah is the feeling which one experiences when he realizes that someone else is greater than he, and he thus submits himself to that person.

The Jewish people are brazen with regard to the first type of Bushah, which they entirely lack. The Jewish people have a great degree of initiative and assertiveness. They are always spirited, creative, and innovative.

With regard to the other type of Bushah, however, the Jewish people excel, for they submit themselves to Hashem and recognize that they are nothing in front of Him. It is in that sense that they are Baishanim (the positive type of Bushah).

3- The Gemara states that there are 3 which are עזים (brazen):  Jews from the nations of the world, a dog (or goat) from the animal kingdom, a chicken from the birds. Additionally  the צלף  bush/tree [caper bush?]  is considered “the most brazen of all trees”.

Rashi says “ I have no clue as to why”.  Tosfos however suggests three explanations:

  1. This tree produces 3 types of edibles: עלין, אביונות וקפריסין – (and elsewhere תמרות -buds ) Leaves, berries and another fruit type – the edible flower part

.Image result for caper bush

2. It is brazen since it produces new fruit every day. See Shabbos. 30b.

3. Its fermented fruit produces a sharp wine. The קטורת  was soaked in this wine to make it sharp.

File:הכותל המערבי.JPG
The most spectacular plant in the Kotel is the thorny caper or tzalaf. It is a very hardy plant that grows back no matter how many times it is uprooted. Therefore Chazal say, “Three are persevering: Yisrael among the nations, the goat among the cattle, and the caper among the trees.”  The tzalaf grows in rock crags and in the stone of walls and fences. The ability of this plant to revitalize itself after fire is most amazing. Nothing can compare to the speed at which the underground roots can produce fresh, green, leaf-bearing branches from the charred remains. The caper most certainly earns its reputation as the most “persevering among trees.” So, too, Yisrael — with similar and even greater feats of survival — is the most “persevering among the nations.”

From the קטורת   –

יין קפריסין ששורין בו את הציפורן כדי שתהא עזה

Rashi explains יין קפריסין  as wine coming from כפרס. Cyprus?

Recipes using צלף  fruits.


Salmon with Capers

4- We mentioned a phenomenal idea from the Sefer נחלת יעקב / אבני שוהם .

Here is another version of that thought. It incorporates what Hillel V suggested too!

וי״ל הכוונה עפ״י מה דאיתא במס׳ שבת (דף צ״ו ע״ב) ת״ר מקושש זה צלפחד דברי ר׳ עקיבא, אמר לו ר׳ יהודה בן בתירא, עקיבא כך או  כך כך עתיד ליתן את הדין,

אתה מוציא לעז על אותו צדיק עיי״ש.

הרי דאינו נכון לפרסם כי צלפחד מקושש הי׳.

והנה איתא עוד במס׳ שבת (דף ק״נ ע״ב) ת״ר מעשה בחסיד אחד שנפרצה לו פרץ בתוך שדהו ונמלך עלי׳ לגודרה ונזכר ששבת הוא ונמנע אותו חסיד ולא גדרה ונעשה לו נס ועלתה בו צלף עיי״ש.

ומטו בי׳ משמי׳ דהאריז״ל [והובא בספר פתח עינים להרחיד״א ז״ל במס׳ שבת ק״נ ע״ב], דאותו חסיד הי׳ גלגול של צלפחד, ובא לעולם שוב שנית לתקן עץ חילול שבת מגלגול הקדום.


וזהו שרמזו חכמז״ל בלשונם, ועלת״ה בו צל״ף, שהיתה עי״ז עליי׳ לנשמתו של צלפחד (אותיות צלף־חד),   

   – pointed out by Hillel Vogel, Ed


ולפי״ז מובן היטב מהו עזותו של אילן הצלף, כי על ידי הצלף נתוודע שצלפחד מקושש הי׳, ודו״ק.


Shiur 09/05/2017 – Beitza 25a, b

Beitza 25 a-b

1- So we continued the issue of animals that have been shechted and the bedika that follows.

Image result for shochet inspecting lung

Rav Ami bar Abba teaches that before one eats meat, the animal should have the skin removed and the limbs should be cut up.

The Gemara first tentatively suggests that perhaps the reason for this is that we require that the animal be inspected/bedika for any indications of tereifah before one can assume it is kosher. Before this is determined, eating from it would be irresponsible and prohibited.

Nevertheless, the Gemara quickly rejects this explanation for Rami bar Abba’s words, based upon our Mishnah where we find that it is permitted to eat from an animal before it is dismembered.

2- Additionally, the Gemara assumes that the ruling of Rav Huna is accepted by all.

Rav Huna’s 2 principles:

  1. A) – A live animal (before it is slaughtered) has a Chazakah – חזקה – that it is בחזקת איסור  – prohibited (“Chezkas Isur”) until proven otherwise. Thus, if a question arises with regard to whether the act of Shechitah was performed properly, the animal is presumed to be forbidden due to its Chezkas Isur.

Why does an animal have a Chezkas Isur until it is known that it was slaughtered properly?


Image result for chicken foot

Rashi maintains that the animal’s Chezkas Isur is due to the prohibition of Ever Min ha’Chai,  אבר מן החי –  eating part of a live animal. When the animal is alive, it is forbidden to be eaten because of the prohibition of Ever Min ha’Chai.

[We had a heated trying to understand Rashi. As Tosfos (below) asks – how can a dead animal have such a prohibition?

Yanki T asked a good question: If an animal does not lose its אבר מן החי  status even after it is dead how can a goy eat meat that was non shechted properly!?]

Tosfos questions Rashi’s explanation. The prohibition of Ever Min ha’Chai departs as soon as the animal dies. How, then, can that prohibition be the basis of a Chezkas Isur that forbids the animal when it is dead, after the primary prohibition of Ever Min ha’Chai no longer applies?

[We mentioned the Rashba in Chulin who comments that this question is not so strong.

ומיהו אינו קשה כל כך, דאפשר לומר דכיון דמעיקרא בחזקת איסור אבר מן החי עומדת ועכשיו נמי לא נתברר אם נשחטה כהוגן, הרי היא מוחזקת מאיסור לאיסור –  רשב”א חולין ט א ד”ה בהמה

Perhaps Rashi maintains that the principle of מחזיקין מאיסור לאיסור – “Machzikin me’Isur l’Isur” applies to prohibit the animal after its death. “Machzikin me’Isur l’Isur” means that when an animal was once definitely prohibited for one reason, and now there is a doubt whether it is still prohibited due to a different reason, the rules of Chazakah still apply. The animal remains prohibited until there is conclusive proof that it is permitted].

In any case, Tosfos maintains that the Chezkas Isur of a live animal is based on the prohibition against eating any animal that was not properly slaughtered. This prohibition is an “Isur Aseh” which stems from the Mitzvas Aseh of “Tizbach v’Achalta” — “You shall slaughter and eat” (Devarim 12:21), which prohibits one from eating meat that was not slaughtered properly. Obviously, this prohibition does not depart from the animal just because it is now dead. We spoke of the Ritzva Tosfos in Shevuos 24a, who questions the existence of such an Mitzvas/Isur Aseh.

B- An animal that has been properly shechted is assumed that it is kosher even if has not been checked internally to assure that it does not have one of the 18 treifos.  The reason is that most cows/bulls are kosher and we rely on the ‘rov’.

3- We discussed this 2nd ruling of Rav Huna length.

In short, that is indeed the Halacha.

Image result for blowing up glove

Nevertheless, the Mechaber  (39, 1) writes that the exception to this rule are the lungs that must be checked. The reason being is that although the majority of lungs are kosher there is a  מיעוט המצוי of lungs, (a definite percentage) that have issues.

4- What is this “percentage” of  מיעוט המצוי? We spoke of the various opinions with the most accepted one being 10%.  

5- We discussed the issue of kosher dairy products. The Halacha (YD 81, 2) is that if one milks a cow and when he shechts it finds that it was a treifa that milk is prohibited. We drink milk because we assume, as above, that most cows are non-treif.

The issue is that when shechting milk cows (usually when they are older and the milk produced diminishes) the majority are found to be treif!!!

We spoke of the various reasons why this is (may) not be a problem. See פתחי תשובה  above #4.

6-  We mentioned the lenient ruling that some dubious ‘hechsheirim’ (Hebrew National) rely on for not checking the lungs at all.

Image result for hebrew national

How? It is permitted to eat from an animal if the lung has been removed and subsequently misplaced, even though the required inspection of the organ will now be impossible.

Image result for hebrew national triangle

Being that the lungs are placed on a moving conveyor belt it is viewed as missing!  

So they rely on the assumption that most animals are not tereifah. And the chumra of bedika is alleviated by the disappearing lung…..

6- The Gemara concludes that Rami bar Abba’s ruling that one needs to check the animal prior to eating is therefore explained to be דרך ארץ.

Rashi explains that it is proper to wait until the animal is cut open to ensure that it is not a treifah, although it is not against the halacha to eat it beforehand.

Tosafos questions the explanation of Rashi, as the Gemara continues and states that the halachos of ערלה demonstrates that just as one must wait three years before eating fruit of a tree, so too must a butcher not eat meat before determining that the animal is not a tereifah.

Tosafos understands that waiting is required, and not simply recommended. Therefore, Tosafos explains that although once slaughtered, an animal is not considered a tereifah, if someone eats from it too early, and the animal is later found to be a treifah, the person’s actions are שוגג and not אונס .

7- We discussed the cases of the butchers that we caught selling treifa meats. All customers needed to kasher their utensils.

Image result for kosher pork

The question is if one needs to do Teshuva for the inadvertent eating of the teifa meat.

Image result for kosher pork

The Ponim Meiros (2, 41) ruled that from our Tosafos is would seem that eating meat in case of an אונס  does not require Teshuva. Other disagree.

Enough said.

Shiur 08/29/2017 Beitza 25a

Beitza 25a

1- We discussed the Gemara where Rabbah bar R’ Huna rules that if one plugged a canal before Yom Tov it is permitted to take the fish from it on Yom Tov. The plugging of the canal or stream shows his intent to use the fish on Yom Tov. Thus the prohibition of ‘muktze’ is removed.

Related image


R’ Chisda, applies this ruling to the case of a newborn animal born before Yom Tov on one’s property.


Are these two cases similar? Or perhaps the trapping of the fish prior to Yom Tov shows his readiness to use the fish (זימון). On the other hand, knowing and seeing a newborn calf is perhaps not enough of a ‘preparation – ‘zimun’. The Gemara concludes that zimun is in fact required, except for newborn animals which do not require capture when they are close to the city.


2- We moved on to the next Mishna where it discusses issues related to slaughtering and transporting the slaughtered animal on Yom Tov.

Image result for carrying bull


The issue here is when one realizes, after all the meals have been prepared or eaten on Yom Tov, that his poor animal does not have much longer to live. If he were to wait to shecht it until after Yom Tov the animal will die and a significant loss would be incurred. He therefore wants to slaughter his cow on Yom Tov, lest it die and become a worthless ‘neveila’.

Image result for old cow with walker


The problem is that shechting on Yom Tov is permitted only if there is sufficient  time for it to be eaten on Yom Tov. Now it’s late in the day with not much time left before Yom Tov concludes.

Image result for cow hospital


3- Under normal circumstances, from shechting to eating is a processes of a minimum of a few hours.


How? First one need to skin the animal. The soaking and salting adds another few hours. We then need to do the customary checking of the animal to ensure its kashrus. And of course cooking!


So it would seem that if, say, only a half an hour remains until Yom Tov ends, there would be no excuse to shecht this poor animal because nothing of it could be eaten before arrival of night!


Is there a shortcut to enable the eating of the meat closer to the shchita? Can we bypass the skinning, soaking, salting, bedika and cooking? That is the issue of the Mishna and following Gemara.

Image result for grilling cow

This topic is very interesting and  wide ranging with practical applications today.


Much more IY”H next week.