Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) SECONDARY HEKDESH (cont.)

(a) Question (Rav Ashi): Why does the Tana assume that a Tamei animal is always initial Hekdesh? Perhaps it is intermediate Hekdesh (it was used to redeem Hekdesh, later, it will be redeemed, for it is not fitting for the Mikdash)!
(b) Answer (Ravina): He calls it initial Hekdesh because it cannot be final Hekdesh, this is why the added fifth does not apply to it.
(c) Question (Rav Acha mi'Difti): But when it is intermediate Hekdesh, there should be an added fifth for it!
(d) Answer (Ravina): Intermediate Hekdesh is like final Hekdesh (something offered in the Mikdash) - just as there is no added fifth for the latter (it is not redeemed), also for the former.
(e) Question (Mar Zutra brei d'Rav Mari): Why do you compare intermediate Hekdesh to final Hekdesh, and not initial Hekdesh?
(f) Answer (Ravina): It is preferable to learn Hatfasah (imbuing with Kedushah of existing Hekdesh) from Hatfasah, and not from initial Hekdesh.
(g) Question (Mar Zutra): Just the contrary! It is preferable to learn something which can be redeemed from something which can be redeemed, not from final Hekdesh!
(h) Answer: As Rava taught - "Ha'Olah" - the first burnt-offering - similarly, "Ha'Teme'ah", the first!
(i) Support (for R. Yehoshua ben Levi - Beraisa): Reuven said 'This cow or garment is (Hekdesh) in place of this Hekdesh cow', it is redeemed, and Hekdesh has the upper hand (if the redemption is worth more than the Hekdesh, the redemption stands; if it is worth less than the Hekdesh, Reuven must give the difference to Hekdesh).

1. 'This cow or garment should be as 5 Shekalim in place of (i.e. to redeem) this Hekdesh cow', - even if it is not worth five Shekalim, it is redeemed (Rashi - and Hekdesh has the upper hand; Tosfos - here, he need not add anything, for he intended to redeem onto this cow or garment even if it is worth less than the Hekdesh);
2. He adds a fifth when redeeming initial Hekdesh, not secondary Hekdesh.

(a) (Mishnah): The threshold of Ona'ah is four (Ma'os of) silver (per Sela); the oath of partial denial is only when the claim was at least two (Ma'os of) silver, and the admission was at least a Perutah;
(b) A Perutah is the required quantity for five things: the admission; money to Mekadesh a woman; benefit from Hekdesh to transgress Me'ilah; the value of a found object that obligates the finder to announce it; and one who stole a Perutah and swore that he did not - he must return it, even if the owner is overseas.
(c) (Gemara) Question: A Mishnah (49B) already taught this - the threshold of Ona'ah is four Ma'os per Sela, a sixth of the purchase!
(d) Answer: The Chidush is the next case, the oath of partial denial requires a claim of two Ma'os and an admission of a Perutah.
(e) Question: That is also taught in another Mishnah - the oath of partial denial requires a claim of two Ma'os and an admission of a Perutah!
(f) Answer: The Chidush is that a Perutah is the required quantity for five things.
(g) (Mishnah): A Perutah is the required quantity for five things...
(h) Question: It should also list, the threshold of Ona'ah is a Perutah!
(i) (Rav Kahana): The omission teaches that Ona'ah of Perutos is not Ona'ah (only Ona'ah of Isarim, silver coins).
(j) (Levi): Ona'ah applies to Perutos.

(a) Levi taught in his Tosefta: A Perutah is the quantity for five things: Ona'ah; the admission; money to Mekadesh a woman; theft; and a claim to obligate judges to judge the case.
(b) Question: Why didn't our Tana teach a claim to obligate judges to judge the case?
(c) Answer: He already taught theft.
(d) Question: Even so, he also taught a found object - if so, he could also teach a claim to obligate judges to judge the case!
(e) Answer: Each of those had a Chidush:

1. Theft - one who stole a Perutah and swore that he did not, he must return it, even if the owner lives overseas;
2. A found object - if it was worth a Perutah when he found it he must announce it, even if it declined in value to less than a Perutah.

(f) Question: Why didn't Levi teach a found object?
(g) Answer: That is included in theft.
(h) Question: But he taught theft and a claim to obligate judges to judge the case!
(i) Answer: That was needed to exclude the opinion of Rav Katina.

1. (Rav Katina): Beis Din must judge a case of less than a Perutah.

(j) Question: Why didn't Levi teach Me'ilah?
(k) Answer: He only lists Perutos of Chulin.
(l) Question: Out Tana lists Perutos of Hekdesh - why did he omit Ma'aser?
(m) Answer: He rules according to the opinion that it can only imbue Kedushah to a coin if its fifth is worth a Perutah (i.e. it is worth four Perutos).
(n) Question: Why didn't he teach, the fifth of Ma'aser must be a Perutah (in order that the Ma'aser can put Kedushah on a coin)?
(o) Answer: He does not speak of fifths, just principal.
(p) (Rav Katina): Beis Din must judge a case of less than a Perutah.
(q) Objection (Rava - Beraisa): "Asher Chata Min ha'Kodesh Yeshalem" - this includes less than a Perutah, that it must be returned to Hekdesh.

1. It must be returned to Hekdesh - but not to a commoner (so Beis Din would not judge the case)!

(r) Correction (Rav Katina): If Beis Din started judging a case of a Perutah, they must give a verdict, even if the claim changed and it is now less than a Perutah;

1. The beginning of the case must be for a Perutah, not the verdict.

(a) There are five added fifths:

1. A non-Kohen who unintentionally eats Terumah, Terumas Ma'aser of (definite) Tevel or Demai, Chalah or Bikurim, he adds a fifth to what he ate and gives it to the Kohen;
2. One who redeems his fourth-year produce or Ma'aser Sheni;
3. One who redeems his Hekdesh;
4. One who unintentionally benefits from a Perutah of Hekdesh, he adds a fifth when paying back Hekdesh;
5. One who stole and swore falsely, when he admits his sin, he adds a fifth to the theft.

(b) (Gemara - Rava): R. Elazar was bothered - why is there an added fifth for Terumas Ma'aser of Demai - did Chachamim really strengthen their enactment as Torah law?!
(c) (Shmuel): The Tana is R. Meir, who holds that indeed Chachamim strengthened their enactments as Torah law.

1. (Beraisa - R. Meir): A messenger brought a Get from abroad; he did not say 'It was written and signed in front of me' - if she remarried using this Get, she must leave her husband, any children she had are Mamzerim;
2. Chachamim say, the child are not Mamzerim;

i. To make the Get valid, he should give it again in front of two witnesses and say 'It was written and signed in front of me'.

(d) Question: Does R. Meir say that because he did not say 'It was written and signed in front of me', she must leave her husband any her children are Mamzerim?! (Mid'Oraisa, the Get is valid!)
(e) Answer: Yes, this is as he holds in general.

1. (Rav Hamnuna): R. Meir holds that a woman who remarried using a Get that deviates from what Chachamim enacted, she must leave her husband, the children are Mamzerim.

(f) Question (Rav Sheshes - Mishnah - R. Meir): Ma'aser Sheni of Demai - one may redeem silver (coins) onto silver or copper, copper onto copper or food (even outside of Yerushalayim), and he may redeem the food again;
(g) Chachamim say, he must take the food to Yerushalayim.

1. Question: But one may not redeem silver onto copper!

i. (Mishnah): A Sela of Ma'aser was mixed with a Sela of Chulin - he brings a Sela's worth of coins and says that the Ma'aser is redeemed onto the coins; he then redeems the coins onto the better of the two Sela'im;
ii. This is because one may only redeem silver onto copper when forced, it should not be left that way.

2. Summation of question: We see one may only redeem silver onto copper when forced - the previous Mishnah allowed this l'Chatchilah by Demai!

(h) Answer (Rav Yosef): Even though R. Meir is lenient regarding redemption of Ma'aser of Demai, he is stringent regarding eating it.