Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
P. 1
Untitled

Untitled

Ratings: (0)|Views: 351|Likes:
Published by outdash2

More info:

Published by: outdash2 on Mar 07, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/01/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Basar B’chalav
S1/ Feb 1- (W) B1 S”A 87
1) Shemos
(23,19) (p1), 2)
Shemos
(34,26) (p2-3), 3)
Devarim
(14,21) (p4-5): pesukimof “lo tevashel g’di bachalev emo,” the source for basar b’chalav.
Chullin
(115b)/
Pesachim
(21b) says that there are 3 important issurim in BBC:1) achilah, 2) hana’ah, and 3) bishul.The meat of a kosher animal, whether basar 
shechutah or neveilah
, would be able toobtain the issur of BBC.
Counting the number of issurim in BBC
Q1) If the Torah wanted to create three different issurim why use the lashon of “bishul”three times? Why doesn’t the Torah use the lashon of “achilah” or “hana’ah?”Q2)
Rambam
(Sefer HaMitzvos) (p8) (Lavim 186,187) and the
Sefer HaChinuch
counts BBC as 2 mitzvos, a) the lav of bishul and b) a lav of achilah/hana’ah. Why don’tthey count it as 3 or 1 issur?[Even though there is generally no N”M whether a person did one or two issurim in onemaaseh, but there is a N”M in this case.]
Sefer HaChinuch
(p6)/
Rambam
-A1)
Pesachim
(24b-25a) (p13) is the sugyah of “lo k’derech achilah” where BBC andKHK are exceptions to the rule
b/c the Torah doesn’t use the lashon of achilah
, butbishul. The lashon of “bishul” was used to teach that BBC eaten in a shelo k’derechmanner is
still assur.
[We saw the machlokes Kresi/ Chavas Daas on this gemara by NTLby BBC.]A2)
Pesachim
(21b) (p10)- whenever the gemara uses the lashon of “achilah” it does
not
only include an issur achilah davkah, but achilah is just the most common example of getting hana’ah from a food item, and therefore the lashon of achilah also includes
anyform of hana’ah
(unless the Torah tells us differently ex: neveilah where the Torahexclicitly says that you are allowed to have hana’ah). This is the reason why the Rambamincluded both achilah and hana’ah under the same issur. (The Rambam also says thissvara).
Q) Then why do we need 3 pesukim, just have bishul twice, once for bishul and oncefor achilah including hana’ah?
A) Chinuch
(p6-7) [lav 113] says, by BBC where the issur of achilah isn’t mentionedanywhere (rather bishul needs to be written twice to include achilah b/c of the drashafrom “shelo k’derech,” the Torah chooses to write a third issur of bishul to includehana’ah.[Av: why don’t we say bishul twice and then the lashon of hana’ah for the third source?Naftali Lavenda- in order to show that the issur hana’ah is connected to the issur achilahwe use the same lashon of “bishul” to teach me the issur hana’ah as well...?]
 
Malkos on an issur hana’ah
Rishonim discuss that
eating
a kzais of bbc gets malkos, but what if you get
hana’ah
from bbc (or urlah/khk) which has an issur achilah, would you get malkos?
This is a major machlokes Rishonim.
Ramban
(Sefer HaMitzvos- [shoresh sheni]) (p14) - says that you
do
get malkos b/c lotochal means lo teheneh as well.
Chinuch-
you
don’t
get malkos [b/c it is a lsbm].
Aside: Machlokes b/t Rambam and Chinuch about lav sheain bo maaseh (lsbm)Sefer HaChinuch-
you
don’t
get malkos by a LSBM if efsahr b’davar acher.
Rambam
(on baal yerueh and yimetzeh by Pesach)- says that if you have chametz inyour house before pesach then it is a LSBM, but if you bought the chametz on pesachthen you did a maaseh
and you should get malkos
.
Svara
: The Rambam says that you only get malkos if “
you actually did a maaseh
 
inthis case
,” but if you didn’t then
you don’t get malkos
. The Chinuch says that if there is
any possible case that you could have an issur hana’ah w/o doing a maaseh,
then it isnot ever a chiuv maaseh even if you happened to do the action with a maaseh [b/c it is“efshar bli maaseh.”]
Machlokes Chinuch/ Rambam about why you don’t get malkos by issur hana’ahSvara for the Sefer HaChinuch
(p7)- says that you don’t get malkos for the issur hana’ah b/c it is a lav sheain bo ma’aseh and ain lokin (ie to sell the urlah). We learn theissur of malkos from “lo tachsom shor,” (not to muzzle a shor). According to the
Chinuch
this lav
always
has a maaseh.
Svara for the Rambam
(p11)
why don’t you get malkos for an mere issur hanaah byshaar issurim
(w/o a maaseh)
?
A1)
Magid Mishnah
- the reason why you don’t get malkos is b/c you aren’t eating thefood, but you are using an ochel for another purpose and
that is shelo k’derech!!
b/c thedavar ochel is meant to eat. This is why there is no malkos.(Av: But if you do a maaseh then you do get malkos and that is also not the ‘prime issur’)A2)
Mishna L’Melech
- says that hana’ah is not written b’perush, but achilah is writtenb’perush so there is no malkos by issur hana’ah.
N”M
- What about BBC? According to the Magid Mishna you would get malkos (b/c thehana’ah is k’derech) and according to the Mishna L’melech it is written b’perush so you
wouldn’t
get malkos---?
Ramban
- says that BBC you get malkos even though BBC wasn’t written.
Rambam’s Nekudah Nifla’ahChullin
(113b-114a) (p16)- cooking milk and fat (chalav b’chelev) seems to be regular BBC, except that chelev has its own issur. There is a machlokes in the gemara.Q) Do we say that there is also an issur of BBC on the issur chelev (concerning theachilah) OR// is this
ain issur chal al issur (AIC)
and b/c there is already an issur on the
 
chelev there can’t be an issur of BBC? [Ex: kohen marrying a zonah vs. a zoneh and agerusha: how many sets of malkos does he get?]A) In the gemara, everyone agrees that there is no issur achilah of BBC on chelev andchalav b/c there is no issur on the ‘meat component’ of the chelev mixed with the milk,the gemara’s question is whether there is another issur on the bishul.[There are 3 exceptions to the rule of AIC: a) the second issur is more inclusive, b) morechamur, c) if the 2 issurim happen at one time.)]Q) Even though there can’t be on the ‘achilah,’ why can’t there be an issur of BBC on thechelev at the ‘bishul’ stage?There is a machlokes when you get malkos based not upon AIC, but: the person who saysthere is a chiuv malkos would hold that there is only one issur on the bishul, while theone who says that AIC is relying upon a gezeras hakatuv that the pasuk used the lashonof bishul.
Rambam
[M”Asuros (9,6)] (p17-8)- paskins that even though the meat being
cooked
with milk is
neveilah or chelev
the Rambam says that you
would get malkos on the
bishul 
,
 
although you would NOT get an issur of BBC on the
achilah
(b/c of AIC).
This
Rambam doesn’t say if there is an issur hana’ah on issur meat (neveilah or chelev)and milk.
Perush Mishnios
(Kerisus Mishna 13b) (p19)-
nekudah nifla’ah
-[relevant by dog food/ issur hana’ah]If you are madkish an animal and then you eat the chelev of that animal, did you getchelev or also the issur of hekdesh? The mishna says that you get both issurim. Thereason why one would get both issurim (the problem being ain issur chal) is that thesecond issur is an issur mosif (ie it adds an issur hana’ah to the issur achilah.)The Rambam says that the issur of BBC would not add an issur hana’ah on an issur of neveilah if the neveilah is cooked with milk (and therefore only one issur would betransgressed).Why? The Torah said BBC was assur for achilah and hana’ah, but the issur hana’ahstems from the issur achilah, therefore if the principle of AIC applies to the issur achilah(which is already assur b/c of the issur neveilah) then the issur of hana’ah can’t beconsidered an issur mosif either (b/c the issur hana’ah is directly linked to the issur achilah).Rambam would therefore say that a person who bought neveilah cooked with chalav-there is an issur of neveilah on the achilah, b/c there is no issur on the hana’ah (b/c thereis no issur BBC on the achilah) and you can give your animal food that has BBC!!What about kudshim?A1)
R’ Elchanan
(p22)- says that this is why the Sefer HaMitzvos/ Chinuch said thatthere are 2 mitzvos by BBC. Achilah/ hana’ah are one issur and achilah is discussed b/c itis the prime example of hana’ah. The issur hana’ah is the
subordinate
lav and the issur achilah is the
primary
lav.A2)
Rav Soloveichik 
(p27)- says that issur achilah is separate to the issur hana’ah.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->