Resources for Moed Katan 6

Daf A Week

Rabbi Yitzchok Gutterman

  1. The גמרא says that the שלוחי ב"ד would go out on חול המועד to uproot the כלאים that had grown if there was 1/24 of other species mixed in with the main crop. See the תוספות הרא"שhere who asks in the name of the ראב"ד that if כלאים is an איסור דאורייתא, why isn’t any amount of mixture forbidden? He answers that something can’t have a “שם כלאים” unless it is at level where the mixture is considered “ניכר וידוע”. It sounds like he holds that 1/24 is in fact דאורייתא. See also the רמב"ם in הלכות כלאים פּרק ב הל' א who also says it is דאורייתא. However, see the רע"ב in the first משנה in שקלים who says that מדאורייתא we say חד בתרי בטיל, and 1/24 is just an איסור דרבנן of מראית עין. This is the opinion of many other ראשונים as well. See רבי עקיבא איגר on the משנה in כלאים פּרק ב who asks on the רמב"ם from the ירושלמי that says that one can be "ממעט" the כלאים by adding more of the main crop to the mixture. It goes on to say that this is not a violation of אין מבטלין איסור לכתחילה since it’s just מראית עין. It seems מפורש like the רע"ב that it is only דרבנן?! There is a beautiful חזון איש in כלאים סימן ד ס"ק י"א who explains that this is exactly what our ראב"ד meant! If something doesn’t look like תערובת (hence the term מראית עין), then it isn’t called כלאים at all! So if you make it less than 1/24, you don’t need to use the mechanism of ביטול; it’s now not כלאים.

 

  1. The משנה says that when ב"ד saw that people were happy that the שלוחי ב"ד were taking care of their כלאים for them, they made a תקנה to be מפקיר any land that had כלאים in it. A questions one can ask is that הפקר just means the plants are ownerless—which should mean that the בעל הבית himself can turn around and be זוכה in it again! So what’s the point? See the מנחת חינוךin מצוה רמ"ה אות י who says אין הכי נמי, the קנס is just that someone could potentially be זוכה in it before you. However, see the חזון איש in  כלאים סימן ד ס"ק י"א who says that of course the owner can be זוכה in it again, but if he hasn’t removed the כלאים, it becomes הפקר again! He points out that the לשון of the גמרא is מפקירין, which sounds like the שלוחי ב"ד would actually go around being actively מפקיר Consequently, the חזון איש is מסופּק if someone else was זוכה in the field and wasn’t עוקר the כלאים either, perhaps it would not become automatically מופקר again since there wasn’t a second pronouncement by ב"ד. He also suggests that the דין today does not apply at all since there is no longer a ב"ד around making הכרזות or sending around שלוחים.
  2. The גמרא says that רבינא said that תרביצא (sprinkling) is allowed. The גמרא then goes on to say that the reason for a שדה גריד is because of אפלא לשוי חרפא and the דין should be the same by תרביצא. It is very unclear how to read the גמרא. Seeרש"י and the בעל המאור who understand that the entire statement was said by רבינא. In other words, רבינא was bringing a proof to himself from the fact that שדה גריד can be watered according to the חכמים even though it is just for הרווחה, therefore תרביצא should be allowed as well. According to this, it would seem the הלכה follows the חכמים that even הרווחה is allowed since no one comes to argue with רבינא and he is a later אמורא.  However, see the רי"ף and מלחמות who understand that from the words “שדה גריד” and on, the גמרא is asking a question on רבינא. They understand that רבינא was proving from a שדה מטוננת that doing something that doesn’t require טירחא is allowed on חול המועד even for הרווחה. This is based on the fact that he understood that the reason שדה מטוננת is allowed is because a wet field doesn’t need much water. The גמרא said back that שדה מטוננת was only allowed because of a loss, whereas תרביצא is similar to a שדה גריד in that it would not get ruined if not watered, and the only purpose to water it is הרווחה which is forbidden. Since רבינא does not reply, the הלכה must be like רבי אלעזר בן יעקב.

*******************************

Click here to download maarei m’komos by Rabbi Asher Millman (in PDF)

Click here to download Shaklya v’Tarya Summary by Rabbi Yaakov Blumenfeld (in PDF)