web analytics
August 21, 2014 / 25 Av, 5774
Israel at War: Operation Protective Edge
 
 
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post
Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat (L) visits the JewishPress.com booth at The Event. And the Winners of the JewishPress.com Raffle Are…

Congratulations to all the winners of the JewishPress.com raffle at The Event



Home » Judaism » Parsha »

Does The Halacha Rewrite The Facts?

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

This week’s parshah, Parshas Metzora, discusses the halachos pertaining to a metzora (one who has tzara’as). The Torah details the process of purification, which a metzora must perform after his tzara’as has been healed. The pasuk (Vayikra 14:4) says that he must bring two live tahor birds, one that must be slaughtered and the other to be set free at the conclusion of the purification process. The Gemara, in Chullin 140a, derives from this pasuk that both birds must be kosher.

The Gemara, in Kiddushin 57b, searches for a source to confirm that the bird that is to be set free is permitted to be eaten after the process is concluded. Rava says it is a sevarah (logical). How can the Torah require that a bird that cannot be eaten be sent into the wilderness where another person may innocently find it and unknowingly eat it? Obviously, from the fact that this bird is to be set free, it must be permitted to be eaten.

The Steipler Gaon brought a proof from this Gemara to answer a fundamental question raised on the Rambam’s opinion – which we will soon address.

A man takes ma’aser from his animals by making a narrow opening in a corral and allowing the animals to exit one at a time. Every tenth animal that exits will become ma’aser. The Gemara, in Bava Metzia 6b, cites a braisa that says that safek animals may be entered into a corral in order to take ma’aser from them. The Gemara asks what the nature of their safek is. If it is that we are unsure whether they are bechoros, which are already kadosh, then how can we enter them into the corral for ma’aser purposes when the Torah says that in order to become ma’aser this must be the animal’s first kedushah (Vayikra 27:33)? (This animal may have had previous kedushah.)

The Shev Shemaisa (1:3) says that this Gemara questions the opinion of the Rambam, who opines that a safek mi’de’oraisa is permitted mi’de’oraisa (and only forbidden mi’de’rabbanan). For if a safek is permitted mi’de’oraisa, then why would an animal that is a safek bechor be a problem for ma’aser? According to the Rambam such an animal should be considered as if it is a regular animal and thus be permitted to be counted for ma’aser, the same way that we are permitted to use the animal for any other mundane purpose. The Shev Shemaisa concludes that this Gemara indicates that a safek is forbidden – even mi’de’oraisa.

The Steipler Gaon, in his sefer, Kehilas Yaakov Bava Metzia (8), suggests an answer for the Rambam. It is based on the Gemara in Kiddushin mentioned above. He says that although the Rambam says that a safek is permitted mi’de’oraisa, its original safek nevertheless remains unanswered. In other words, even if we allow a safek bechor animal to be used for mundane purposes it remains a safek bechor. There is always a chance that it was a bechor. The Rambam opines that an animal about which we are uncertain whether it is a bechor may be used for mundane purposes, even though the possibility remains that it may in fact be a bechor.

The Steipler says that we see this from the Gemara in Kiddushin, where Rava says that it is sevarah that the Torah would not command us to set free a forbidden bird (in which the finder would be unaware of its prohibition). The Steipler says that when someone finds such a bird he will surely be able to rely on the Torah’s law of rov, which dictates that this bird is a regular bird that is not forbidden. This rov should permit the finder to eat the bird. So the Steipler asks: What then is the problem of setting it free, even if it is actually forbidden, as the finder will be permitted to eat the bird by applying the halacha of rov? The Steipler says that we see from here that even when the Torah permits something that is a safek, it does not rewrite history and change the safek to one that is now permitted.

About the Author: For questions or comments, e-mail RabbiRFuchs@gmail.com.


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

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Does The Halacha Rewrite The Facts?”

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
An IDF patrol along the Gaza border.
Ground Op on Horizon with Emergency Orders to 10,000 IDF Reservists
Latest Judaism Stories
Weiss-082214-Beloved

Hashem recalls everything – nothing is hidden from His eyes.

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

According to Rabbi Yishmael one was not permitted to eat such an animal prior to entering Eretz Yisrael, while according to Rabbi Akiva one was permitted to eat animals if he would perform nechirah.

Lessons-Emunah-logo

An interview was overheard in which an Arab asked a Hamas commander: “What’s the problem? Why aren’t you hitting your targets? Don’t you know how to aim?” To which he was answered: “We know how to aim very well. We are experts. But their G-d moves the missiles.”

Daf-Yomi-logo

Discretion
‘Vendors Of Fruits And Clothing…May Sell In Private’
(Mo’ed Katan 13b)

Question: The Gemara in Berachot states that the sages authored our prayers. Does that mean we didn’t pray beforehand?

Menachem
Via Email

If a man sins and follows his inclinations, he will find comfort in this world – but when he dies, he will go to a place that is all thorns.

Nothing is more effective to diminish envy than gratitude.

The first prayer of Moshe was Vayechal, where Moshe’s petition was that no matter how bad bnei Yisrael were, the Egyptians were worse.

“We’re leining now, and shouldn’t be talking,” Mr. Silver gently quieted his son. “At the Shabbos table we can discuss it at length.”

If we regard pain and suffering as mere coincidence, we will feel no motivation to examine our lives

Culture is not nature. There are causes in nature, but only in culture are there meanings.

Rabbinic law is pivotal but it’s important to understand which laws are rabbinic and which biblical.

We give slave gifts? If he wants to stay, we pierce his ear?!

A bit of (non-Jewish) history can help us understand this week’s Torah portion: In the early 1500s, the Catholic church was being fundamentally challenged by movements which claimed it had monopolized religious power and used to enrich the church and its officials. The most radical of these movements were a particular sect of Anabaptists. Anabaptists […]

“When a mother plays with her child there is an acute awareness of the child. But even when the mother works at a job or is distracted by some other activity, there is a natural, latent awareness of her child’s existence.

More Articles from Rabbi Raphael Fuchs
Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

According to Rabbi Yishmael one was not permitted to eat such an animal prior to entering Eretz Yisrael, while according to Rabbi Akiva one was permitted to eat animals if he would perform nechirah.

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

Tosafos there takes issue with Rashi’s view that the letters that are formed in the knots of the tefillin are considered part of the name of Hashem.

The Rambam says that in order to honor Shabbos, one must wash his hands, face, and feet with warm water on Friday.

The talmid is not allowed to speak up due to any fear. If he remains silent, he is in violation of this prohibition.

It is apparent from the Maharsha that he does not see galus as atoning for killing accidentally; otherwise, this Gemara would not bother him.

There are several rules that one must adhere to when making a neder.

We need to understand why Moshe Rabbeinu decided to ask that his sons inherit his position after this new halacha was introduced.

If it is not prohibited when there is a purpose for inflicting the tza’ar, why was Bilam chastised for tza’ar ba’alei chaim?

    Latest Poll

    Do you think the FAA ban on US flights to Israel is political?






    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/parsha/does-the-halacha-rewrite-the-facts/2014/04/03/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: