THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question about the Daf
MENACHOS 71 - Dedicated in honor of the 80th Birthday of Jean Turkel
Rafalowicz by the Turkel/Linzer Family. Mazal Tov on reaching this
milestone. May you be Zocheh to continue to see Nachas from your children,
grandchildren, and great-grandchildren until 120 years!
1) THE PROHIBITION OF "CHADASH" ON "SHACHAS"
OPINIONS: The Mishnah says that a person may harvest Shachas (grain that has
not yet reached its normal size) and feed it to his animal before the Korban
ha'Omer is brought. Rebbi Yehudah explains that this is permitted only when
the harvesting is started before the grain reached a third of its normal
size. (See TIFERES YISRAEL who discusses the opinion of RASHI that the grain
has not yet reached a third of its normal size, and the opinion of the
RAMBAM that the grain has not yet grown the *last* third of its normal
size). Rebbi Shimon says that one may begin harvesting the Shachas even if
the crops have already reached a third of their normal size.
Why, according to all of the opinions, may grain that has not yet reached a
third of its normal size be harvested for an animal's consumption before the
Korban ha'Omer is brought?
(a) The SHITAH MEKUBETZES explains that the reason this is permitted is
because the grain is being harvested for an animal. If the grain was being
harvested for a person, it would not be permitted even if the grain had not
yet reached this stage of growth. Harvesting for an animal is considered an
unimportant, insignificant form of harvesting, and thus it is permitted
before the Korban ha'Omer is brought.
(b) TOSFOS in Pesachim (23a, DH Kotzer) gives a different reason. The Gemara
there discusses the opinion of Rebbi Avahu who says that whenever the Torah
says "Lo Sochlu" -- "you shall not eat," it is referring to a prohibition
against eating and deriving benefit from the forbidden item. The Gemara asks
that the Torah says "Lo Sochlu" with regard to Chadash (Vayikra 23:14), and
nevertheless our Mishnah says that one is allowed to feed the harvested
Shachas to his animal, implying that one *may* derive benefit from Chadash,
even though the Torah says, "Lo Sochlu." Tosfos asks that this does not seem
to be a question at all. The Mishnah here permits harvesting and using
Shachas since it is not included in the prohibition of Chadash at all! It is
not a contradiction to the view of Rebbi Avahu!
Tosfos answers that the Mishnah is actually saying two different things.
"Kotzer l'Shachas" teaches that there is no prohibition against harvesting
Shachas; "Ma'achil l'Behemah" teaches that one may feed his animal any type
of grain, even *finished* grain which is Chadash, as long as it was picked
in a permitted manner (see RASHI in Pesachim 23a, DH u'Ma'achil). The
Gemara's question on Rebbi Avahu is from the second statement of the
Mishnah, that one may feed finished Chadash grain to his animal.
TOSFOS here (71b, DH Emur) addresses the same question as Tosfos in
Pesachim, but he understands that the Mishnah is teaching only one thing.
Tosfos here answers that the question on Rebbi Avahu was from the opinion
that maintains that the grain is able to be harvested, and fed to an animal,
even after it has reached a third of its size, when the Isur of Chadash does
apply to it. A similar explanation is also found in the second answer of
Tosfos in Pesachim.
The MINCHAS CHINUCH (303:6), KEREN ORAH, and others have difficulty with the
first answer of Tosfos in Pesachim. The Gemara later (71b) says explicitly
that it is forbidden to harvest Shachas for human consumption. If we read
the statement of the Mishnah as a single statement, then it is clear that
the Mishnah is saying that it is permitted to harvest Shachas only for an
animal. According to the way Tosfos reads the Mishnah, though, where do we
see that it is forbidden to harvest Shachas for a person? In addition, what
is the Mishnah's source, according to the way Tosfos understands it, that
Shachas is not forbidden at all by the Isur of Chadash?
The SEFAS EMES asks another question. We see that Shachas is fit for human
consumption. Rashi (71b, DH v'Amar) explicitly states that one can make
Kelayos (roasted grain; see Insights to Menachos 68:1) from Shachas. These
Kelayos are a normal food item. Why, they, are they not included in the
prohibition of Chadash?
1. The Minchas Chinuch suggests two approaches. First, it is possible that
Tosfos in Pesachim is not saying that the Gemara actually holds this way.
Rather, Tosfos was bothered with why the Gemara does not try to defend Rebbi
Avahu by suggesting this difference. Tosfos is not saying that this is in
fact what the Mishnah here means.
2. Alternatively, the Minchas Chinuch suggests that Tosfos derives this from
the Halachah that the Korban ha'Omer does not permit grain which did not
reach a third of its normal size before the Omer was brought. If the Omer
does not permit such grain, it is possible to infer that grain which has not
yet reached this stage is not subject to the Heter necessary by the bringing
of the Omer, and therefore is not included in the prohibition of Chadash.
2) REDEEMING GROWTHS OF "HEKDESH"
QUESTION: The Gemara says that the people of Yericho did three things
(according to Rebbi Yehudah) against which the Rabanan protested. One of
these three things was that they used to use small, for their personal
benefit, branches and other things that grew from trees that their ancestors
had dedicated as Hekdesh. The Gemara in Pesachim (56b) explains their
reasoning. They held like the opinion that says that the prohibition of
Me'ilah does not apply to things that grow from a tree that was dedicated as
Hekdesh (see Me'ilah 13a). They explained that their forebears had dedicated
these trees in order to supply beams to Hekdesh, and not in order that the
growths be Hekdesh as well. The Chachamim argued that although such things
are not actually forbidden as Me'ilah, nevertheless it is forbidden to
derive personal benefit from growths of Hekdesh.
TOSFOS (DH u'Matirin) asks that the people of Yericho could have easily
circumvented the problem of using growths of Hekdesh. The Gemara in Erchin
(29a) says that when there is no Beis ha'Mikdash, one may redeem the
Kedushah of a large amount of Hekdesh on a small coin. Why, then, did the
people of Yericho not simply redeem all of the growths of the trees of
Hekdesh on a small coin, thereby permitting the growths to be used according
to all opinions?
(a) TOSFOS answers that the trees were originally made Hekdesh with the
using the expression of "Konam." Hekdesh made in this manner cannot be
redeemed. (Tosfos adds that this must also be the case in the Gemara in Bava
Metzia (6b), where the Gemara discusses a case of Hekdesh that apparently
could not be redeemed.)
(b) Alternatively, Tosfos explains that the Gemara in Erchin does not mean
that it is permitted to redeem items of Hekdesh that are very valuable on a
single coin. Rather, it means that only the person who made the item Hekdesh
may redeem it in such a manner. What is the reason why the original owner of
the item may redeem it in such a manner, and no one else may redeem it?
1. The TUREI EVEN in Megilah (23b) explains that because the owner is the
one who made the item become Hekdesh, he has the power to remove the status
of Hekdesh from the item by redeeming it on any coin.
2. Alternatively, the Turei Even explains that we know that a person may ask
a Beis Din to release him from his pledge to Hekdesh. Since it is in the
owner's power to ask Beis Din and achieve this release, it is as if he still
has some degree of ownership on the item. He therefore has the additional
power to redeem the items for less than their true value.
The Turei Even presents a difference between these two reasons. If the item
was already given to a treasurer of Hekdesh, then the pledge may no longer
be released by Beis Din. However, the first reason would still apply, and
therefore a person would still be allowed to redeem his item for a
3. The DEVAR AVRAHAM (#15) points out that Tosfos says that "it is not
logical that everyone can go redeem his friend's Hekdesh for a negligible
sum and *take it for himself*." This implies that the original owner has the
right to stop people from enriching themselves by redeeming someone else's
valuable donations to Hekdesh for a negligible sum of money. Why, though,
may the original owner himself redeem the Hekdesh in this manner?
The father of the Devar Avraham, in his commentary MISGERES ZAHAV, explains
that a person who dedicates something to Hekdesh does so while retaining his
right to redeem the item on a smaller sum. Since he retains this right, no
one else has the right to redeem it in this manner.
Why, though, may no one else redeem it? Others should be able to redeem it,
but with the risk of being brought to Beis Din by the original owner. Why
should their redemption not work at all? The Misgeres Zahav explains that
part of the rights of the owner is that the redemption of any other person
does not work; this is in order that he not be troubled to go to Beis Din to
collect his losses. (Y. Montrose)