Previous daf

1)

(a) Gilgul Hekdesh, Rava continues, is Patur - meaning that if Hekdesh kneads a dough, it is exempt from Chalah.

(b) The Mishnah in Chalah - obligates taking Chalah in a case where someone declares his dough Hekdesh and then redeems it ...

1. ... both before kneading it ...
2. ... and after having kneading it.

(c) The Tanur exempts the dough from Chalah however - in a case where the owner redeems it after the treasurer of Hekdesh has kneaded it.

(a) Rava asks whether the kneading of a Nochri will also exempt a dough from Chalah. The Mishnah in Chalah - exempts a Ger from Ma'asering a dough that he kneaded before he converted, but obligates him to Ma'aser one that he kneaded after he converted.

(b) Where the Ger is unsure as to when he kneaded it - he is obligated to separate Ma'asros (due to the principle 'S'feika d'Oraysa le'Chumra').

(c) We now query who is the author of this Mishnah. Given that Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah in the Mishnah (in D'mai) that we discussed earlier, learn from the first "Degancha" 've'Lo Digun (Miru'ach) Hekdesh' - they learn from the second "Degancha" that 'Digun Nochri is Chayav (due to the principle 'Ein Miy'ut Achar Miy'ut Ela Lerabos').

(a) Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah include the Digun of a Nochri and exclude that of Hekdesh (and not vice-versa) - because the latter is more similar to that of a Yisrael inasmuch as it too, does not require redemption.

(b) From the two times that the Torah writes "Arisoseichem" in Parshas Sh'lach-Lecha we learn - 've'Lo Iysas Nochri' and 've'Lo Iysas Hekdesh' (unlike the previous Limud, regarding Ma'asros, this Limud refers specifically to the dough belonging to Hekdesh and to the Nochri, and not to a Yisrael [see Shitah Mekubetzes, end of 1).

(c) Alternatively, the author is Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi Shimon, who exempt Digun Nochri from Ma'asros. Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah may well dispute this - because they might learn a 'Gezeirah- Shavah "Reishis Arisoseichem" (Korach) from "Reishis Degancha" (Shoftim written in connection with Terumah).

(d) After requesting a reply through She'eilas Chalom, Rava came to his own conclusion - that whoever exempts Gilgul Akum, exempts Miru'ach Akum, and whoever obligates Gilgul Akum, obligates Miru'ach Akum.

(a) Rav Papa queries Rava from another Beraisa, where the Tana invalidates a Peter Chamor and Chalah that a Nochri designated (permitting him to retain the former, and to feed Zarim the latter).

(b) We extrapolate from there - that if he were to separate Terumah, it would be forbidden to Zarim.

(c) Rav Papa tries to prove from here - that even the Tana who forbids Miru'ach Nochri, permits his Gilgul.

(a) And Ravina queried Rava from yet another Beraisa, where the Tana rules - that the Chalas Eretz Yisrael and Terumas Chutz la'Aretz of a Nochri are not valid (i.e. he does not need to give them to a Kohen, his Chalah may be eaten by Zarim, and his Terumah does not forbid the Chulin into which it falls).

(b) Once again, we extrapolate from there - that his Terumas Eretz Yisrael would be forbidden to Zarim, and would forbid the Chulin into which it fell.

(c) Ravina asks from there on Rava - exactly the same Kashya as Rav Papa did?

(d) We answer these Kashyos - by establishing the Chiyuv Terumah as being mi'de'Rabbanan (but mi'd'Oraysa, the Nochri's Terumah will not be valid, like Rebbi Yossi and Rebbi Shimon, who exempt Digun Nochri from Terumah).

(a) The Tana's reason for the decree is because of 'Ba'alei Kisin', which might refer to rich men, who purchase produce from Jewish merchants - and who might jump to the conclusion that what one buys from Jewish merchants is Patur from Ma'asros (just like what buys from Nochrim).

(b) It might also refer to wealthy land-owners - who, we are afraid, will hand over their fields to Nochrim (see Shitah Mekubetzes 15), to perform the Miru'ach, in order to exempt them from Ma'asros).

(c) The Tana nevertheless permits the Nochri's Chalah (even mi'de'Rabbanan [and is not afraid of Ba'alei Kisin there, too]) - because there, one has the option of baking less than the Shi'ur Chalah (five Reva'im of flour plus), which is Patur from Chalah anyway.

7)

(a) Rebbi Oshaya permits bringing the crops into the house together with the chaff (without having performed Miru'ach) - in which case one will be permitted to feed one's animals (see Tosfos DH 'K'dei' and Shitah Mekubetzes 2).

(b) The reason for this leniency is - either because grain still in its chaff resembles animal food, which is not subject to Ma'asros, or because since the produce is covered with the chaff, it does not 'see' the doorway of the house as it passes through it, and any produce that does not 'see' the doorway is Patur from Ma'asros.

(c) We learn from the Pasuk "Ve'achlu bi'She'arecha Ve'save'u" - that crops are only subject to Ma'asros if they pass through the gate of the Chatzer (but not if they are brought into the house via the roof or via an enclosure [which avoid passing through the Chatzer]).

(d) Nevertheless, we afraid of the Ba'alei Kisin, (in spite of these options of avoiding having to give Ma'asros) - because whereas the option of kneading less than the Shiur Chalah is performed discreetly, the options regarding Ma'asros, are performed in public, and most people would be too embarrassed to employ them.

(a) Our Mishnah describes the way the Omer was prepared in a K'li Shareis. The Kohen first poured some of the oil into the K'li before adding the flour (and placing the Levonah at the side of the K'li [Tif'eres Yisrael]).

(b) Next - he added the remainder of the oil, and mixed it with the flour.

(c) Finally, he performed the Tenufah, the Hagashah - the Kemitzah and the Haktarah (see Tosfos DH 'Yatzak u'Balal').

(d) The Shirayim of the Omer - was eaten by the Kohen (inside the Azarah).

(a) Immediately after the Omer had been brought, they found the markets of Yerushalayim - full of flour made from roasted grains of corn (Kali), that had obviously been cut before the Omer was brought.

(b) According to Rebbi Meir, this was not done with the consent of the Chachamim - who forbid cutting the new corn before the Omer has been brought (in case one comes to eat it).

(c) Rebbi Yehudah - permits it, because he does not suspect the people of eating Chadash before the Omer has been brought.

(a) In the Mishnah in Pesachim, Rebbi Yehudah maintains that, someone who failed to search for Chametz ...

1. ... either on the eve or on the morning of the fourteenth of Nisan - is obligated to do so during the sixth hour of the day.
2. ... even during the sixth hour of the day - is forbidden to search any more, in case he comes to eat the Chametz that he finds.

(b) The Chachamim - permit (even obligate) him to search for Chametz on Pesach itself, if necessary.

(c) The problem with Rebbi Yehudah is - that he appears to contradict himself. There he is afraid that one might come to eat the Chametz at a time when it is forbidden, whereas here he is not worried that one might come to eat the Omer before the Omer has been brought.

(d) Rabah tries to answer the Kashya - by ascribing Rebbi Yehudah's lenient view here to the fact that the Chachamim only allowed cutting the corn before the Omer with one's hands, but not using a scythe (a reminder not to eat it after it has been picked).

(a) Abaye objects to Rabah's answer, on the basis of the fact that the Chachamim also permitted the crops to be ground and sifted - and how does one do *that* with one's hands?

(b) We answer - by suggesting alternative unusual methods regarding those processes (i.e. grinding it in a small hand-mill and sifting it using the back of the sieve.