ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafEruvin 37
ERUVIN 37 - was generously dedicated by an anonymous donor
in Los Angeles.
(a) If one buys wine from the Kutim - one needs to separate Terumah,
Ma'aser Rishon (from which one will later separate Terumas Ma'aser) and
Ula, who prefers to disregard Ayo in face of our Mishnah - quotes the
opinions in the Beraisa of 'Halokei'ach Yayin' in pairs: Rebbi Meir and
Rebbi Yehudah permit drinking before having Ma'asered, and Rebbi Yossi and
Rebbi Shimon forbid it'. In this way, Rebbi Yehudah is consistent with his
opinion in our Mishnah i.e. 'Yesh Bereirah'.
(b) The Beraisa (of 'ha'Lokei'ach Yayin') speaks when he has no vessels
into which to pour out the Ma'asros - which explains why the Tana has to
come on to Bereirah, in order to designate them.
(c) The Ma'aser Sheni that he designates must be redeemed on a coin that
he sets aside for this purpose.
(d) Rebbi Meir, who holds 'Yesh Bereirah' - permits one to do this.
(a) Rebbi Yossi rules - that if two women purchased the four birds for
their Korban Leidah together, or who gave the money for their birds to the
Kohen, then the Kohen is permitted to sacrifice whichever birds he likes
as Olos and whichever he likes as Chata'os. This suggests that Rebbi Yossi
holds 'Yesh Bereirah', clashing with his opinion in the Beraisa of
(b) The Chidush of Rebbi Yossi, according to Rabah, in whose opinion the
Mishnah in Kinin speaks when the women made a prior condition (see Tosfos
DH 'ke'she'Hisnu') - is that if the women did not specifically designate
the birds when they originally picked them, then it is only the Kohen who
can subsequently designate them for their respective roles, when he
sacrifices them, and that this cannot be done verbally, on the part of
either the owner or the Kohen (thereby corroborating Rav Chisda, who
issues this ruling independently).
(a) If a Chaver buys two bundles of vegetables, one for himself, and one
on behalf of an Am ha'Aretz - according to the Chachamim in the Beraisa,
he is obligated to Ma'aser the bundle of the Am ha'Aretz, before giving it
to him - because they hold 'Ein Bereirah'. And since it is possible that
the bundle that he later gives to the Am ha'Aretz is his (the Chaver's)
own (which he is now selling to him in exchange for the other bundle,
which belongs to the Am ha'Aretz), he is obligated to Ma'aser it, because
a Chaver is forbidden to sell un'Ma'asered fruit to an Am ha'Aretz.
(b) Rebbi Yossi holds - that the Chaver is permitted to give the bundle to
the Am ha'Aretz without taking Ma'asros, because he holds 'Yesh Bereirah'.
(c) In order to reconcile Rebbi Yossi here with his opinion by
'ha'Lokei'ach Yayin', where he holds 'Ein Bereirah' - the Gemara switches
the opinions of Rebbi Yossi and the Rabbanan (in the case currently under
discussion): Rebbi Yossi rules 'Tzarich le'Aser', and the Chachamim, 'Ein
(a) Since we have just established that Rebbi Yossi holds 'Ein Bereirah' -
we have no choice but to amend the Beraisa (where he says that if someone
redeems his Ma'aser Sheni on the coin that comes to hand, and then takes
out a coin, the Ma'aser is duly redeemed), to make it read that the
Ma'aser Sheni is *not* redeemed.
(b) The Gemara is forced to switch Rebbi Yossi's opinion in the Beraisa of
Ma'aser Sheni (in spite of the fact that this also entails switching it in
the previous Beraisa - of Agudas Yerek) - because of the Seifa of the
Beraisa, which says that Rebbi Yossi concedes that if he said 'Ma'aser
she'Yesh Li be'Soch Beisi Yehei Mechulal al Sela Chadashah she'Ta'aleh
be'Yadi min ha'Kis (and there was only one new coin in the purse)
she'Chilal'. This clearly implies that in the Reisha, Rebbi Yossi holds
'Lo Chilal' - because he holds 'Ein Bereirah'.
(a) Eruv is different than all the other cases of Bereirah quoted above -
inasmuch as it is purely mi'de'Rabanan, as we already mentioned earlier,
and that is what prompts Rava to ask who the Tana could possibly be, who
holds even by Eruv 'Ein Bereirah'; whereas all the Tana'im mentioned
earlier refer to cases which are d'Oraysa (Tevel, Ma'aser Sheni etc.).
(b) Rav Nachman did not answer that the Tana concerned is Tana de'Bei Ayo
- because he was unaware of the Beraisa that quotes Ayo.
(c) The Rabbanan of Rebbi Shimon say - that if someone places his Eruv for
all the Shabbasos of the year, with the express intention of deciding each
week whether he will make use of the Eruv or not, then as long as he
decides before nightfall that he wishes to use the Eruv, it becomes valid,
but not if reaches his decision after nightfall - because they hold 'Ein
Bereirah' (even by Eruv).
(a) Rav Yosef reconciles Rebbi Shimon's opinion with the Rebbi Shimon whom
we quoted earlier (in the Beraisa of 'Halokei'ach Yayin mi'Bein ha'Kutim')
as holding 'Ein Bereirah - by switching the opinions of Rebbi Shimon (who
will now hold that the Eruv is *not* an Eruv, and the Rabbanan, who hold
that it *is*.
(b) Rav Yosef did not answer that Eruv is different, because it is
de'Rabbanan - since, in his opinion, those who hold 'Yesh Bereirah', hold
like that even by Bereirah d'Oraysa, whereas those who disagree, hold 'Ein
Bereirah', even by Bereirah de'Rabbanan.
(a) When Rava, explaining Rebbi Shimon, requires 'she'Shireha Nikarin' -
he means that Rebbi Shimon requires that one takes one's Ma'asros *before*
drinking the wine, in order to fulfill the condition of 'Shireha Nikarin',
that when one has separated the Terumah, the remainder of the produce is
immediately distinguishable (which is not the case by 'ha'Lokei'ach
Yayin', since there, when he declares the remaining wine Terumas Ma'aser
etc, it is not distinguishable.
(b) According to Rava, asks Abaye, why does the Beraisa say 'Terumas
ha'K'ri ha'Zeh u'Ma'asrosav Besocho ... Rebbi Shimon Omer, Kara Hashem'? -
There too, at the time when he declares the Ma'asros, there is no
distinction between them and the crops that remain, until such time as he
actually separates them?
(c) Rava answers - that here too, it is 'Shireha Nikarin' - since he
specifically said *Besocho*, and the outer section of the crops, is
definitely distinguishable from the middle, which is the section that he
declared to be Ma'aser.
(a) The Gemara finally quotes from another Beraisa - that Rebbi Shimon's
reason (for prohibiting Ma'asering the wine that he purchased from the
Kutim in advance, is not because he holds 'Ein Bereirah', but out of
concern that, after he has declared the various Ma'asros on the wine in
the jar, the jar may just break, with the result, that all the wine that
one drank is Tevel (retroactively) - since it now transpires, that what he
separated is retroactively not valid.
(b) Although Rebbi Shimon himself holds of 'Reishis, she'Shireha Nikarin'
(which is sufficient reason to forbid drinking the wine without first
separating the Ma'asros), he nevertheless presented Rebbi Meir with the
reason of 'perhaps the jar will break open', as if to say: even though you
disagree with the principle of 'Reishis, she'Shireha Nikarin', won't you
at least admit to the suspicion that the jar might break open?