Resources for Beitzah daf 34
Rabbi Yitzchok Gutterman
- The גמרא discusses whether the prohibition to heat up new רעפים on יו"ט is because צריך לבדקן or צריך לחסמן. The גמרא also says that whether one can shecht a bird on יו"ט with a ריעותא is dependent on whether you hold צריך לבדקן or צריך לחסמן. The גמרא doesn’t have a clear מסקנא. See the ר"ן in ד"ה גרסי who holds that since it’s a בעיא דלא איפשטא, we should be מחמיר like the שיטה of צריך לבדקן and prohibit schechting the bird as ספק דאורייתא לחומרא. Incredibly, the רשב"א ד"ה אנן מפּני says that we should be מיקל like the שיטה of צריך לחסמן and allow one to shecht the bird since ספק דרבנן לקולא! See רע"א בגליון שו"ע סימן של"א בסעיף י' who explains that it is only aספק דרבנן because we can say מתוך to allow the שחיטה on a דאורייתא level (מתוך that one can do נטילת נשמה לצורך, one can do נטילת נשמה שלא לצורך), and then he would only violate anאיסור דרבנן of טירחא שלא לצורך if the bird turns out to be a טריפה. As far as the שיטת הרמב"ם, see the רמב"ם in הלכות יו"ט פּרק ג' הל' י"א who says one cannot heat up רעפים on יו"ט and does not mention that the איסור is limited to new רעפים. See the מגיד משנה there who says that this is an indication that the רמב"ם also agreed to the רשב"א that we hold צריך לחסמן. As such, there is also an איסור of heating up old רעפים since those get better with heat as well. The גמרא only mentioned the איסור with new רעפים since it was also going according to the opinion of צריך לבדקן. See the שולחן ערוך סימן תק"ח סעיף א' as well as שולחן ערוך סימן תצ"ח סעיף ח' where the שולחן ערוך paskens that you can shecht a bird with a ריעותא on יו"ט.
- The גמרא says that there are no תרומות ומעשרות in a שמיטה רש"י quotes a דרשה to prove this. See the רמב"ם in פּירוש המשניות, ידים פּרק ה, משנה ג who says that there is no דרשה to make it פּטור from תרומות ומעשרות. It is simply פּטור since all fruit during שמיטה are הפקר, and ממילא they are פּטור from תרומות ומעשרות like all ownerless fruit. This is also the psak of the שולחן ערוך in יו"ד סימן של"א סעיף י"ט .The נפקא מינא between these two approaches is if someone guards their produce during שמיטה and prevents others from partaking. According to רש"י, it would still be פּטור from תרומות ומעשרות while according to the רמב"ם it would be חייב. However, see the חזון אי"ש in כ"ג, ז' who says that שמיטה fruit are intrinsically הפקר, and it would not matter if someone was guarding them, they are always פּטור.
- The גמרא says that שבת is קובע למעשר because the pasuk says וקראת לשבת עונג. The question is whether this הלכה has relevance in other areas of הלכה as well. See the אגרות משה או"ח ד' סימן ס"ג who suggests that since our גמרא lists figs as something that שבת is קובע, it should stand to reason that one could be יוצא קידוש במקום סעודה with fruit, since the reason we need קידוש במקום סעודה is because we need קידוש in the place of עונג, and apparently eating figs is considered עונג. (In the end, Rav Moshe says that it would only work to allow you to eat but would not fulfill the requirement for קידוש במקום סעודה.) In a somewhat similar application, see the תשובות מהר"ח אור זרוע סימן ע"א who says that based on our גמרא, if one eats a כזית of פּת הבאה בכיסנין such as cake on Shabbos, then one would need to bentch since שבת is “קובע” and if one is קובע on cake, one needs to bentch. As we are all aware from attending קידושים, the מנהג is not like that opinion. See theחידושי ר' מנחם זעמבא who explains that הלכות ברכות is not similar to הלכות מעשר. For example, if someone is personally קובע on a small amount of cake where most others are not, he does not need to bentch. We therefore see that your own personal קביעות does not change the הלכה, whereas by הלכות מעשר, on whatever you are personally קובע , creates the קביעות.
-------------------------------------------------------
Click below to download daf summary by Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz (in PDF)