Resources for Kesubos daf 6

כתובות דף ו׳

1.     The גמרא says that you can’t stuff a cloth into a wine barrel since some of the wine will be squeezed out of the cloth. Theרמב"ם in הלכות שבת פּרק ט הל׳ י"א as well as in פּרק כ"ב sounds like the איסור is ליבון. תוספות in ד"ה האי מסוכרייתא brings ר"ת who disagrees with that possibility since he says you can have ליבון without water. Rather, he says the איסור is מפרק. The רמב"ן brought by the מגיד משנה there explains that theרמב"ם can’t say it’s מפרק because the cloth may not be not גידולי קרקע and there is only מפרק by גידולי קרקע. How would ר"ת answer this question? The אגלי טל in מלאכת דש אות ז ס"ק ב has a חקירה which might help: when looking at whether something is considered גידולי קרקע or not, do we look at whether the thing being squeezed is גידולי קרקע or whether the thing it is squeezed from is גידולי קרקע? If we look at the item being squeezed out, then ר"ת would be right since the thing being squeezed out is wine. However, he proves from ר"ת himself that even if the item you are squeezing out is גידולי קרקע like wine, the בגד you are squeezing from must be גידולי קרקע for it to be an איסור דאורייתא. The ריטב"א answers for ר"ת that there is still an איסור דרבנן even if the cloth isn’t גידולי קרקע.

2.     תוספות mentioned above says that the איסור of pushing the cloth into the wine barrel is מפרק, but says that it must be that you are catching the wine that drips out because if it goes to waste then it would just be a פּסיק רישא דלא ניחא ליה which is מותר. This is known as the שיטת הערוך. The ר"י brought in תוספות disagrees and says that a פּסיק רישא דלא ניחא ליה is אסור. The קובץ שיעורים on our דף explains the יסוד המחלוקת is as follows: what is the reason a פּסיק רישא is normally אסור? Do we say that when you do an action where you know a side result will occur and you are happy with that side result we consider it as if you are also מכוון for that side action? Or is it that when you do an action which has two results, then the entire action is viewed as one action. Consequently, if you wanted the action in general it means you are doing both. The נפקא מינה is when you are not interested in the side result. The example he gives is combing your hair which will necessarily result in pulling out hair. If we are looking at your כוונה, then if you are not interested in pulling out your hair it shouldn’t be אסור. However, if we say that combing which pulls out hair is definitionally one action, then your interest in the result is not relevant since you wanted the action in general.

There is another מחלוקת אחרונים that is discussed here which is relevant. What is the דין of a ספק פּסיק רישא? In other words, if you want to close the door of a room but you aren’t sure if there is an animal inside and if there is it would be a פּסיק רישא of the מלאכה of צד, are you allowed to close the door? The ט"ז in או"ח סימן שט"ז ס"ק ג says it is מותר, and רבי עקיבא איגר in יו"ד סימן פּ"ז סעיף ו sounds like he thinks it’s אסור. In חידושי רבי שמעון in סימן ה, he says that the answer to this question should be תלוי on the above חקירה. If we say that פּסיק רישא is based on analyzing your כוונה, then we can’t say a ספק פּסיק רישא should be אסור since you don’t know if it will happen or not. However, if we say that פּסיק רישא is a redefinition of the action itself to include both actions, then a ספק פּסיק רישא would be a potential ספק דאורייתא in which case you would need to be מחמיר.

New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters

Rabbi Yaakov Blumenfeld - Shakla Vetarya

Rabbi Yechiel Grunhaus - Points to Ponder

Daf HaShavua Choveres - compiled by Rabbi Pinchas Englander