web analytics
June 19, 2013 / 11 Tammuz, 5773
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post
Bicycle in South Pioneers of the Periphery: Olim of the South

Got that pioneering spirit? You’re invited to help build Israel’s periphery by planting roots in southern soil with Nefesh B’Nefesh.



Daf Yomi


tell a friend
Daf-Yomi-logo

Beware Of The Fruit!
‘A Mis’asek Is Excluded’
(Kerisos 19a)

Our sugya distinguishes between a shogeg and a mis’asek. A shogeg must bring a korban chatas while a mis’asek is exempt. A shogeg is someone who intentionally commits a forbidden act, such as plowing a field in Eretz Yisrael during shemitah, but forgets that doing so is forbidden. In contrast, a mis’asek is someone who, for example, pulls a plow to a storeroom during shemitah, unintentionally plowing his field in the process. In other words, he acted willfully but never intended to do anything forbidden. The forbidden act was a byproduct of his action. The shogeg therefore must bring a chatas as he intended to do a forbidden act, while the mis’asek is exempt as he did not intend to do a forbidden act.

Free Of Sin Or Free Of Penalty?

Most commentators on the Gemara maintain that a mis’asek is completely exempt. He is not obligated to bring a chatas, and he is not guilty of any violation. However, Rabbi Akiva Eiger offers proofs that a mis’asek is considered an unwitting sinner. He may be exempt from bringing a chatas, but he still sinned (Responsa Rabbi Akiva Eiger 1:8).

What are the implications of Rabbi Akiva Eiger’s opinion? First, since the mis’asek sinned, he needs atonement. Second, it has ramifications for the rule of “kim lei bideraba minei –the harsher penalty is adequate.” This rule dictates that that if a person faces two punishments for the same act – for example, the death penalty and a financial penalty – he only receives the harsher penalty. This rule also applies to a shogeg. Even though a shogeg doesn’t receive the death penalty, he can commit sins that, in theory, are punishable by death (if committed intentionally). Thus, this rule can also exempt a shogeg from financial penalties. If Rabbi Akiva Eiger is right, the rule can exempt a mis’asek as well. (It does not, however, concern a mis’asek who did a melachah on Shabbos because to violate Shabbos one must act intentionally; meleches machsheves is required.)

Rabbi Akiva Eiger’s position aroused a great deal of discussion among the Acharonim. Both sides adduced piles of proofs for their position. Is a mis’asek a sinner who needs atonement, or not?

Waking Up A Sleeping Kohen

Rabbi Akiva Eiger’s son, Rabbi Shlomo, brings a proof for his father’s position from his pupil Rabbi M. Yafeh. The halacha is (Rema, Y.D. 374:1) that if a person dies in a home, one should immediately wake up any kohanim in the house and urge them to leave since tumas meis rests in the house. If a mis’asek, however, is regarded as though he did not sin at all, why should we wake up the tired kohanim? After all, they knows nothing, they’re busy sleeping. Can we think of a greater example of a mis’asek? And yet, the halacha is that we do wake up the kohanim. We thus see that a mis’asek is considered to be a sinner even though he acts unintentionally (Responsa Rabbi Shlomo Eiger, kesavim, 20).

Two Types Of Prohibitions

The Gaon of Lissa, author of Mekor Chayim and Nesivos HaMishpat, rejects this proof. He writes that we must distinguish between two different types of prohibitions. Most prohibitions involve an active deed. To violate Shabbos, for example, one must do a melachah. The prohibition for a kohen to become impure, however, involves “avoidance behavior.” The kohen must do everything possible not to become impure. He violates this prohibition not by doing something but by not doing something.

Thus, Rabbi Shlomo’s proof doesn’t work. For even if Rabbi Akiva Eiger’s disputants are correct – and a mis’asek is completely free of sin – we would still have to wake up the kohanim. The category of mis’asek only exempts one from a sin which requires a deed. It doesn’t exempt one from a sin which requires “avoidance behavior.” These kohanim may be doing nothing to become impure, but that is precisely what the Torah forbids – doing nothing.

Rabbi Yisrael Salanter’s Question To Rabbi Akiva Eiger

In Rabbi Akiva Eiger’s old age, a young Rabbi Yisrael Salanter sent him a letter. He wanted to know why a great commotion was made about eating wormy fruit. After all, a person who eats wormy fruit is considered a mis’asek since he intends to eat the fruit and not the worm. And since a mis’asek isn’t even considered a shogeg, there is no reason to forbid eating wormy fruit.

Rabbi Salanter waited a long while but did not receive a reply from Rabbi Akiva Eiger. He eventually met Rabbi Shlomo Eiger who told him that his father did not reply because an elderly rabbi lived in Salant (where Rabbi Yisrael lived), and his father did not want to answer a question which rightfully should have been addressed to Salant’s rabbi. Nonetheless, Rabbi Shlomo Eiger said it is well known that his father maintains that a mis’asek is considered to have sinned; thus, there is no basis for Rabbi Yisrael’s question (see Teshuvos Vehanhagos by Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch 4:190).

Since we are discussing wormy fruit, we should mention that the Acharonim state that eating wormy fruit is prohibited even according to the opinion that a mis’asek is free of all sin (see Imrei Binah on the Bach, end of siman 4; Darchei Teshuvah 84:28; Minchas Shlomo 6; Kovetz Shiurim, Pesachim, os 215 and 117, where he questions Rabbi Akiva Eiger about helam mikdash; Or Sameiach, Hilchos Geirushin 1:17; Eglei Tal, Meleches Kotzer 24:12 and Meleches Ofeh 33:3; and Chazon Ish, Horayos 15, 9).

Meoros Hadaf Hayomi Newsletters are published by the Sochachover Kollel of Bnei Brak, led by Rabbi Chaim Dovid Kovalsky. Meoros Hadaf Hayomi Newsletters in Hebrew and/or English, are available for dedications for simchas as well as memorials (yahrzeiten, shloshim, etc.). They are distributed by e-mail: dafyomi@hadaf-yomi.com.

Pages: 1 2 All Pages
tell a friend

About the Author: RABBI YAAKOV KLASS, rav of Congregation K’hal Bnei Matisyahu in Flatbush, Brooklyn, is Torah Editor of The Jewish Press. He can be contacted at yklass@jewishpress.com. RABBI GERSHON TANNENBAUM, rav of Congregation Bnai Israel of Linden Heights, Boro Park, Brooklyn, is the Director of Igud HaRabbanim – The Rabbinical Alliance of America.


You might also be interested in:


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

no comments

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Latest Judaism Stories
YU-061413

The Rambam, therefore, adds a second component: by getting angry, Moshe misled the people as to the nature of God. The masses felt that Moshe’s anger was reflective of God’s anger.

Leff-061413

One of the most complex Tanach personalities is the central figure of this week’s Haftorah: Yiftach, the Shofet, Judge.

Business-Halacha-logo

“I saw an advertisement for group swimming lessons during the summer,” Mr. Leiner said to his wife. “I think it would be good for our Pinchas.”

Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis

She is my first child to reach this stage and, frankly, I’m worried.

Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin
‘Transgressing Bal Tigra’
(Eruvin 100a)

Question: As Shavuot is fast approaching – a holiday on which we dwell on the story of Ruth and the origins of the royal house of David – I was wondering if you could help me resolve something. The Mishnah never makes any mention of the Hasmonean kings, the mitzvah to light a Chanukah menorah, or the miracle of the oil that lasted eight days. Some people say that Rabbi Yehudah HaNassi – the redactor of the six orders of the Mishnah and a scion of King David – omitted these topics because the Hasmoneans improperly crowned themselves, ignoring the rule that all Jewish kings are supposed to come from the tribe of Yehudah. They argue that this is also why the Talmud does not include a separate tractate on Chanukah. Is this true?

Menachem
(Via E-Mail)

In this week’s parshah the Torah discusses many halachos of tumah. One halacha is that a person who is tamei may not enter the Mikdash. Doing so makes him liable for kareis.

The highway was packed with bumper-to-bumper traffic, and there I sat with hands gripped tightly on the steering wheel, begging the cars to move. My heart swelled at the thought of seeing my son, who was just coming back from his year of learning in Eretz Yisrael. How I had missed him! Though I was used to him being away (if you can ever really get used to a child being away), a special space in my heart was empty – as I waited for him.

No one lives in a vacuum. No, that doesn’t mean we didn’t get sucked up through a vacuum cleaner hose in the pre-Pesach cleaning frenzy, it means that whether we like it or not, our environment—the people and things around us—makes a big impact on who we are.

According to biblical law, once an area has been converted in to a reshut hayachid by enclosing it with a halachically acceptable eruv, one may carry inside the enclosed area. But according to rabbinical law, it is simply not enough to enclose an area in which one wants to carry with an eruv. This alone will not permit carrying from the home into the street or vice versa. Neither will it alone permit carrying from a condominium apartment into the lobby or other common areas.

Yidsville had a small but dedicated Jewish community. There was one Orthodox synagogue, led by Rabbi Well, a day school, women’s mikveh, kosher butcher shop, pizza store and restaurants.

In this week’s parshah the Torah tells us that Hashem told Aharon to redeem every firstborn child. This is known as pidyon haben. The Rema, in Yoreh De’ah 305:10, rules in the name of the Rivash that one may not appoint a shaliach to perform pidyon haben. Many Acharonim argue with this ruling and posit that one can appoint a shaliach to perform pidyon haben.

Dear Readers:

You may remember how we once did an experiment with a story (about a monster fire in Arizona) without Jewish protagonists, but containing a universal lesson that I believed worthy to record for the readers of Chodesh Tov. We are there yet again, this time directly north in Wisconsin.

Please bear with me as we once again record a story we investigated in the hope that the lesson is unique and worthy of our attention. It is going to take us five full columns to complete the tale, and I thank you in advance for your patience.

Elevated Train Tracks And Eruvin
(Eruvin 94b)

(Please note: The question has been modified to reflect amendments suggested by a reader, Yisrael Levi, in last week’s column.)

More Articles from Rabbi Yaakov Klass and Rabbi Gershon Tannenbaum
Daf-Yomi-logo

Rabbeinu Tam Tefillin
‘Transgressing Bal Tigra’
(Eruvin 100a)

Daf-Yomi-logo

Elevated Train Tracks And Eruvin
(Eruvin 94b)

Whose Fridge?
‘If the Owner Retains a Holding There’
(Eruvin 85b)

Detached Or Unrelated
‘He Made An Asheirah Tree Into a Ladder…’
(Eruvin 78b)

Summer Eruvin
‘A Separate Contribution From Each’
(Eruvin 72b)

Spreading the Wealth
‘Giving to Only One Poor Person’
(Eruvin 63a)

A Sage View
‘It Needs A Partition To Divide It’
(Eruvin 47b-48a)

Twin Cities
‘A City Is Given A Karpif’
(Eruvin 57a)

    Latest Poll

    Female, Orthodox, Halachic Deciders and Spiritual Leaders (Maharat)









    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/halacha-hashkafa/daf-yomi-27/2012/04/05/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online:

Close