Menachem Av13, 5782. August9,, 2022the
1- We continued the topic of חדש and the two opinions of when one can begin eating חדש when there is no Beis Hamikdash. Either on the 16 of Nisan or the 17th.
[Any produce that took root after that time is prohibited to be eaten until next year פסח].
2- The next Mishnah – what people did when Sukkos occurred on Shabbos.
יוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל חָג שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת, כָּל הָעָם מוֹלִיכִין אֶת לוּלְבֵיהֶן לְבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת. לַמָּחֳרָת מַשְׁכִּימִין וּבָאִין, כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מַכִּיר אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ, וְנוֹטְלוֹ. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים, אֵין אָדָם יוֹצֵא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ בְּיוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל חָג בְּלוּלָבוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵרוֹ. וּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הֶחָג, אָדָם יוֹצֵא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ בְּלוּלָבוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵרוֹ:
each one recognized which one was his…
3- Our Gemara suggests a פסוק that says that ‘every individual needs to take the ד׳ מינים’.
We discussed the Meiri and others that question the need for a פסוק. How else would this מצוה be performed if not by everyone individually? The ד׳ מינים’ is a מצוה שבגופו and one cannot make a shliach. Neither can one be יוצא through someone else.
The classic answer given is that without the פסוק we would think that it is a Mitzva on the Beis Din. Just as the blowing of the Shofar on Yom Kippur in the year of יובל.
We went back and forth trying to understand why we would think so. וצ״ע.
There was an incident involving Rabban Gamliel, and Rabbi Yehoshua, and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, and Rabbi Akiva, who were all traveling on a ship during the festival of Sukkot and only Rabban Gamliel had a lulav, which he had bought for one thousand zuz. Rabban Gamliel took it and fulfilled his obligation with it and then gave it to Rabbi Yehoshua as a gift. Rabbi Yehoshua took it and fulfilled his obligation with it and gave it to Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya as a gift. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya took it and fulfilled his obligation with it and gave it to Rabbi Akiva as a gift. Rabbi Akiva took it and fulfilled his obligation with it and returned it to Rabban Gamliel.
Rabban Gamliel from the Sarajevo Haggadah
כִּי הָא דְּאָמַר רָבָא: ״הֵא לְךָ אֶתְרוֹג זֶה עַל מְנָת שֶׁתַּחְזִירֵהוּ לִי״. נְטָלוֹ וְיָצָא בּוֹ, הֶחְזִירוֹ — יָצָא, לֹא הֶחְזִירוֹ — לֹא יָצָא.
5- מתנה על מנת להחזיר- a conditional gift where the recipient must/will eventually give back the item. Halachically, it is considered ‘his’ now, if he returns it later.
On the 1st day of Sukkos [in Eretz Yisrael and the first two days of Sukkos in the Diaspora as will be explained next] one only fulfills his obligation with a set of Daled Minim which he personally owns. Therefore when using someone else’s Lulav one must receive it as a present on condition to return. Thus the giver should explicitly say to the recipient “It is a present on condition you return it”. If this was not explicitly said and rather the Daled Minim were simply given to the person without mentioning anything, he has nevertheless fulfilled his obligation. If however the receiver did not know the law that he must own the Daled Minim then he has not fulfilled his obligation and is to be given it again as a present on condition to return.
Every child knows this concept. But what it means and how it works is a big topic.
What is the status of the item when it is with the receiver? 100% his? What effect does the condition have on this ‘temporary ownership’. How is this different from borrowing?
We scratched the surface beginning with the Rosh who says that it is an absolute sale and the receiver must gift it back to the giver. It does not happen automatically. The condition, that he must return it, is a ‘side’ issue that does not weaken the 100% ownership.
[Thus a child, who can receive a gift but cannot not gift it, would have a problem using מתנה על מנת להחזיר]
If he doesn’t specify that it’s an outright gift and that he will need to ‘re-acquire’ it back, but just says ‘it’s yours until you are done and then it simply goes back to me’ – that is not a מתנה, but שאלה
The Ketzos (241, 4), in one of his famous pieces, argues and says that no קנין is necessary when returning it to the giver.
A מתנה על מנת להחזיר works to be considered 100% owned by the receiver because such ‘a gift is for a set amount of time’. When the time is up, it reverts back to the giver automatically.
As opposed to loaning where the only thing loaned is the usage. Not the actual item.
6 – We learnt the text of the Tosfos that discusses a communal Esrog. The issue is that if members of the Kehila participate in the purchase of the Esrog then it is a partnership. It is not a proper לכם.
Tosfos suggest that every member of the Kehila understand that he needs to gift it to every individual when this individual uses it on the first day of Yom Tov via a מתנה על מנת להחזיר.
7 – We discussed מתנה על מנת להחזיר by פדיון הבן which does not work. YD 305, 8.
The question is if one is allowed to ask the כהן to return the silver coins.