Gemara Y17 2016-2017 Unit 5 ‫בס״ד‬

I. Source Sheet #10- If Diamonds are Forever, What are ‫( ?חיטי קורדנייתא‬cont’d)
A. Summary
1. ‫רמב״ם‬: The ability to use ‫ חמץ‬for ‫ קידושין‬is defined by the utility of the ‫חמץ‬
2. ‫ ר״ן‬,‫ כסף משנה‬,‫רש״י‬: The fundamental concept of the ability to use the ‫חמץ‬ ‫חולין שנשחטו בעזרה בשר וחלב פטר חמור‬
depends on the connection of the ‫ דרבנן‬to the ‫דאורייתא‬
B. The Timing and Need for ‫ביטול חמץ‬- Rashi’s Approach ‫ר׳ שמעון‬ ✅ ✅ ✅
1. .‫גמ׳ קידושין נח‬ ‫מותר‬ ‫מותר‬ It’s still alive (‫)מחיים‬
a) The ‫ גמ׳‬gives 3 cases to ask if the ‫ קידושין‬is invalid: ‫בהנאה‬ ‫בהנאה‬
(1) ‫פטר חמור‬
(a) The man uses a firstborn donkey to engage a ‫חכמים‬ ❌ ❌ ❌
woman.
i) It’s a ‫ מצוה‬to redeem it with a sheep and
give the sheep to the ‫כהן‬
ii) If one doesn't want to, he has to kill it.
iii) It’s ‫ אסור‬to derive benefit from that
donkey.
(2) Meat and milk
(3) ‫חולין שנשחטו בעזרה‬
(a) You can only shecht ‫ קדשין‬animals in the ‫עזרה‬
of the ‫בה״מ‬
(b) It’s a ‫ חולין‬animal that was schechted in the
‫ עזרה‬and you can’t get ‫ הנאבה‬from it.
b) ‫ ר׳ שמעון‬says if one was ‫ מקדש‬a woman with a firstborn
donkey, with meat cooked with milk, or ‫חולין בעזרה‬, she
is ‫;מקודשת‬
(1) ‫רש״י ד״ה ר׳ שמעון אומר‬: The case is a living
firstborn donkey, and while it’s still alive, it’s ‫מותר בהנאה‬. Only once you kill it can you not derive benefit from it.
(2) ‫רש״י ד״ה בשר וחלב‬: Rashi says ‫ ר׳ שמעון‬holds meat and milk is ‫מותר בהנאה‬.
(3) ‫ ר׳ שמעון‬only forbids ‫ חולין‬in the courtyard ‫מדרבנן‬, so the ‫ קידושין‬is still valid
(a) This contradicts ‫ ר׳ גידל‬because everyone agrees the ‫ קידושין‬case is at least somewhat ‫דרבנן‬, yet still ‫אסור בהנאה‬.
c) ‫ חכמים‬say she isn’t ‫מקודשת‬.
d) We can infer from here that ‫ ר׳ שמעון‬forbids ‫ חולין בעזרה‬only ‫מדרבנן‬.
2. ‫חידושי הרמב״ן שם ד״ה הא דאקשינן‬
a) ‫ רמב״ן‬asks, Why should the ‫ קידושין‬be counted in the ‫ חולין‬case, even
though it’s only ‫דרבנן‬, because we know that we say in ‫ פסחים‬isn’t valid?
(1) Answer #1: ‫ חמץ‬is different because it has a connection in the Torah,
but ‫ חולין‬is completely ‫ מותר‬on a Torah level and has no connection
(but you still can’t get ‫)הנאה‬.
(a) This only works for ‫ רש״י‬and ‫ר״ן‬/‫כסף משנה‬
(b) For the ‫רמב״ם‬, we say there’s an ‫ עיקר דאורייתא‬because there’s
a ‫ דאורייתא‬concept of ‫איסור חמץ‬.
(2) Answer #2
(a) If the ‫ חולין‬were ‫דאורייתא‬, then certainly you couldn’t use it. But
if it were only ‫דרבנן‬, then it would be open for discussion and
Rabbi Shimon, who says it does count, disagrees with ‫רב‬
‫רב‬/‫גידל‬, who says it doesn’t count.
i) This means that Rabbi Shimon holds that all ‫ איסורי דרבנן‬of
‫ הנאה‬can still be used for ‫קידושין‬.
(3) Answer #3
(a) If the ‫ חולין‬was ‫דאורייתא‬, it would be ‫ אסור הנאה‬and ‫ אסור‬to both schecht and eat.
(b) If it’s only ‫דרבנן‬, you can get ‫ הנאה‬from it.
i) Since it’s a ‫דרבנן‬, there’s an ‫ איסור‬of ‫ אכילה‬but no ‫ איסור‬of ‫הנאה‬.
ii) However, in the ‫ פסחים‬case, there is an ‫ איסור‬of ‫הנאה‬, so the ‫ קידושין‬is not valid.
iii) There’s only an ‫ איסור‬of ‫ אכילה‬and not ‫ הנאה‬because the ‫ חכמים‬were nervous that someone would see the
animal shechted in the ‫ בה״מ‬and think it’s a ‫ קרבן‬still being eaten. Therefore, you can’t eat it, but you can still get
‫ הנאה‬from it.
3. ETC stuff on 12/22
a) On a ‫ דאורייתא‬level, when you are ‫ מקדש‬the ‫חיטי קורדניתא‬, the status of that ‫ חמץ‬is ‫ מותר בהנאה‬and the ‫ קידושין‬is ‫ודאי‬.
b) However, on a ‫ דרבנן‬level were you’re ‫ מקדש‬it’s ‫ אסור בהנאה‬and therefore it’s ‫ אין חוששין‬and it’s invalid.
4. Analysis of ‫חיטי קורדנייתא‬
a) According to the ‫תורה‬, the ‫ קידושין‬is valid, yet because of the ‫דרבנן‬, we override and invalidate the ‫דאורייתא קידושין‬.
How could the ‫ דרבנן‬override the ‫?דאורייתא‬
(1) ‫ רש״י‬on ‫ד״ה אפילו בחיטי קורדנייתא‬:
(a) suggests that when someone is ‫ מקדש‬a woman, they do it under ‫דעת חכמים‬
i) (After all, we say ‫)”הרי את מקודשת לי בטבעת זו כדת משה וישראל‬

Yonatan U. Kurz 1
 (b) Therefore, when a person does ‫קידושין‬, they’re not only creating an agreement between husband and wife but also
with through the ‫חכמים‬.
(c) If one does ‫ קידושין‬with something that’s ‫אסור מדרבנן‬, it’s uprooted because since the ‫ חכמים‬didn’t approve it, it
never reached ‫ דאורייתא‬level.
i) The ‫ חכמים‬have the ability to make one’s property ownerless, so essentially the man was ‫ מקדש‬with something
that wasn’t necessarily in his ownership.
(d) Summary: We need the ‫’חכמים‬s approval to get ‫קידושין‬, & they have permission to uproot it if they don’t approve.
b) ‫ ד״ה דאמר רב גידל‬.‫חידושי הריטב״א ז‬
(1) ‫ חיטי קורדנייתא‬is a proof that we ignore the ‫ קידושין‬on all levels (not just ‫)דרבנן‬, and even ‫ לחומרא‬a ‫ גט‬isn’t needed.
(2) The reason behind this is the fact that the ‫ קידושין‬isn’t conditioned on the ‫’חכמים‬s approval, according to the ‫בעל הטור‬,
but due to the fact that since the ‫ חכמים‬make it worthless, the ‫ תורה‬looks at the value of the item and sees that it doesn’t
have the value of a ‫פרוטה‬, which invalidates the ‫קידושין‬.
(3) Summary: The ‫ תורה‬values the ‫ חטה‬as worthless and therefore ‫ קידושין‬doesn’t take effect
(4) Our ‫ גמ׳‬focuses more on the fact that we’re using ownerless objects and less on the fact that it’s valueless
(5) Also, why wouldn’t we make distinctions between the ‫ חמץ‬being ‫ חל‬vs the ‫ חמץ‬not being ‫?חל‬
c) Why wouldn’t we make distinctions between the ‫ חמץ‬being ‫ חל‬vs the ‫ חמץ‬not being ‫?חל‬
(1) When they create ‫איסורים‬, the ‫ חכמים‬are addressing us and instructing us what to do. With ‫חמץ דרבנן‬, they change the
‫גברא‬, of what you can do, but not the actual status of the ‫חמץ‬.
(2) The ‫ חכמים‬didn’t define the item during the 6th hour and necessarily make it ‫חמץ‬, they just issued an ‫ איסור גברא‬and
told us not to eat it and we have to listen because “‫”לא תסור מן הדבר אשר יגידו לך ימין ושמאל‬
(3) Furthermore, our perspective towards the ‫ חמץ‬is the deciding factor as to whether it’s ‫חל‬
(a) Example: If a 600$ iPhone is in your hands but you can’t unlock it, it’s valueless to you but has a value.
(4) If you make an assumption as to what is ‫ חל‬or ‫ חושש‬and determine the value based on that assumption, all of the sudden
it makes sense to say that a ‫ דרבנן‬can override a ‫ דאורייתא‬here
(5) The actual status and value of the ‫ חמץ‬decides whether it will be ‫חל‬
(a) If you argue on either of these 2 assumptions, you would conclude that the ‫ רבנן‬isn’t even ‫חל‬.
i) You would argue that the ‫ חכמים‬can define an object & also maybe the ‫ קידושין‬is decided by whether you get
use from the object.
II. Source Sheet #11- ‫ ביטול‬on ‫שבת יום טוב‬- That’s the Way We Roll
A. The case of ‫תלמיד יושב לפני רבו‬
1. .‫גמ׳ פסחים ז‬
a) Case given: If one was sitting in a Beis Medrash and
remembered that he has ‫ חמץ‬in his house, he should
be ‫ מבטל בלבו‬and this law applies to ‫ שבת‬or ‫ויו״ט‬.
(1) The ‫ גמ׳‬explains that it’s fine to do ‫ ביטול‬on ‫שבת‬,
because ‫ שבת‬can fall out ‫ערב פסח‬, but on ‫יו״ט‬, it’s
obviously already ‫ !אסור‬How can one do ‫ביטול‬
then?
(2) It’s important that this case doesn’t talk about if he
has time to go back, as opposed to the ‫ משנה‬on
‫מט‬.
(a) Maybe the ‫ גמ׳‬doesn't mention it because
he’s already doing a ‫ מצוה‬or it’s known that
on ‫ שבת ויו״ט‬you can’t burn ‫חמץ‬, so he
couldn’t burn it.
b) ‫ ר׳ אחא בר יעקב‬gives the case of a student in front of
his Rebbi who remembered that he has kneaded
dough in his house and fears that it will become ‫חמץ‬.
(1) ‫רש״י ד״ה עיסה מגולגלת‬: He’d bake it, but since
it’d be disrespectful for him to leave his rebbi,
he’s ‫ מבטל‬before it becomes ‫ חמץ‬since it’s not
‫ אסור‬yet and it’s in his ‫רשות‬.
(2) The Gemara is making the assumption that you can do ‫ ביטול‬on something that isn’t ‫ חמץ‬yet.
(a) We can say that this is a different case because:
i) the dough is something that will become ‫חמץ‬, you can turn anything into dirt, and ‫ הפקר‬works on any object so
it doesn't need to be ‫חמץ‬
c) However we can also infer that since it was taught that he was sitting in the Beis Medrash, ‫שמע מינה‬
(1) If it didn’t say that he was sitting in a ‫בית מדרש‬, he’d be obligated to destroy it or bake it before it ferments.
(2) If it discussed ‫ חמץ‬after it is forbidden [and ‫ ביטול‬was possible], ‫ ביטול‬would be as good as as any other method of ‫!ביעור‬
2. ‫רש״י ד״ה דיקא נמי‬:
a) With the quasi-‫חמץ‬, if he could’ve left he would’ve done something that wasn’t ‫ביטול‬. h
b) If it were talking about regular ‫חמץ‬, why would we care if he’s in the Beis Medrash- what else could he do? The only option he
has is ‫ביטול‬.
c) We must be talking about a case where there’s something he could’ve done if he was available, like baking it.
d) The idea of ‫ עיסה מגולגלת‬only applies to on ‫יו״ט‬, but regarding ‫שבת‬, it’s talking about real ‫ חמץ‬when he could only do ‫ביטול‬,
and can’t bake it. He can do ‫ ביטול‬because it’s ‫ערב יו״ט‬, and there’s no difference on ‫ שבת‬where he is.
B. The Medium of ‫ביטול‬

Yonatan U. Kurz 2
 1. ‫ ד״ה והתניא‬.‫ריטב״א ז‬
a) The ‫ ריטב״א‬says that the real definition of ‫ ביטול בלב‬is
that you should speak so quietly that it’s as if you’re
doing ‫ביטול בלב‬.
(1) This goes against ‫רש״י‬, who says that you can just do
‫ ביטול‬mentally.
(2) This might mean verbalizing the words without
making it audible to your own ears
b) An effective ‫ ביטול בלב‬involves whispering it to the point
that you can’t hear it, or moving your lips without making
a sound.
(a) You can’t just think of ‫ביטול‬, because ‫ ביטול‬is
‫הפקר‬, and ‫ הפקר‬requires words to be effective.
2. ‫ ד״ה ענין ביטול‬:‫רמב״ן ד‬
a) “‫ ”מבטלו בלבו‬teaches that you must be ‫ מבטל חמץ‬both
mentally and verbally so the ‫ ביטול‬can be effective (‫)אפילו מבטל בלבו‬.
(1) This is because if you aren’t ‫ מבטל‬it verbally then the possibility exists that you don’t truly believe in nullifying the ‫חמץ‬.
b) However, ‫ רמב״ן‬finds this statement to be unclear and states that it is only mental nullification that is required to do ‫ביטול‬
(1) (He draws this as a parallel to ‫ביטול ע״ז‬, where you ‫ מבטל‬an object’s status through your heart)
C. ‫ ביטול‬on ‫שבת ויו״ט‬
1. ‫ ד״ה ענין ביטול‬:‫( רמב״ן ד‬cont’d)
a) You need to do ‫ אמירה‬for a proper ‫ הפקר‬because ‫ דברים דלב‬aren’t necessarily for the ‫ ענין‬of ‫הפקר‬.
b) ‫ ביטול‬isn’t ‫הפקר‬, it’s ‫ תשביתו‬and all about transformation/devaluating (This goes well with the opinion of ‫ רמב״ם‬that ‫ ביטול‬is
done mentally)
c) He also questions how you could permit doing ‫ ביטול‬on ‫ שבת‬because ‫ ביטול=הפקר‬and we see in a ‫ משנה‬in ‫ מסכת ביצה‬that
‫(מקדש‬make something hekdesh), ‫( מעריכין‬designate the value of something), and ‫( מחרימין‬declare something a ‫ )חרם‬are
‫ אסור‬on ‫ שבת‬as a ‫ גזירה‬because it’s similar to ‫( ממקח וממכר‬and therefore ‫ הפקר‬applies as well).
(1) ‫ מעריכין‬,‫מקדש‬, and ‫ מחרימין‬are all good proofs because they aren’t classic examples of ‫ ממקח וממכר‬because they’re one
party transactions.
2. ‫ ד״ה וע״כ‬.‫ריטב״א ז‬
a) ‫ ריטב״א‬permits ‫ ביטול‬on ‫ שבת‬so that way one can avoid violating ‫איסורי חמץ‬
(1) This implies that there is a fundamental problem on ‫ שבת‬with ‫ ביטול‬but the ‫ התר‬must override the ‫איסור‬.
(a) It’s certainly possible that ‫ ריטב״א‬thinks ‫ ביטול‬is ‫ הפקר‬and should be ‫ אסור‬but doesn’t prohibit it because ‫ממקח‬
‫ וממכר‬is a ‫דרבנן‬.
i) This goes well with his opinion that ‫ ביטול‬needs ‫אמירה‬.
b) Since he says that ‫ ביטול‬doesn't need to be heard, maybe the slight difference with actual ‫ הפקר‬and ‫ ביטול‬is that ‫ הפקר‬does
need to be heard, but ‫ ביטול‬doesn't.
c) Additionally, the ‫ ריטב״א‬disagrees with ‫ רש״י‬in that Who receives it ‫ שנים של שמיטה‬Name of priestly
he believes that the ‫ שבת‬case is also taking about an % gift
‫ עיסה מגולגלת‬because the ‫ פשט‬is that it’s an ‫עיסה‬
‫ מגולגלת‬in both cases. ‫כהן‬ 1/40, 1/50, 1/60 1-6 ‫תרומה גדולה‬
d) The problem with this is that you can’t bake on ‫שבת‬
‫לוי‬ ⅒ 1-6 ‫מעשר ריאשון‬
and therefore the isa had been put into the oven
before ‫שבת‬, so it’s for sure already ‫ חמץ‬by the time
‫לוי←כהן‬ ⅒ :‫מעשר ריאשון‬ 1-6 ‫מעשר שני‬
he realizes the next day.
e) How could you do it on ‫ שבת‬without ‫ ?סקילה‬If you N/A: ‫אכילה בירושלים‬ ⅒ 1,2,4,5 ‫תרומת מעשר‬
had a ‫ שפחה‬who hadn’t immersed in the ‫ מקווה‬yet,
3. ‫א׳‬:‫משנה שבת י״ח‬ ‫עני‬ ⅒ 3, 6 ‫מעשר עני‬
a) One may move 4-5 baskets of straw/grain on ‫ שבת‬to
‫כהן בבה״מ‬ First fruits 1-6 ‫ביכורים‬
make room for guests/have space the Beis Medrash,
but not the entire storehouse (to avoid a ‫)טירחא‬. ‫אסור‬ ‫מותר‬
b) One may remove pure ‫ תרומה‬and ‫( דמאי‬produce that may not have had
‫ מעשר‬taken from it- unsure), and ‫ מעשר ריאשון‬from which ‫ תרומת מעשר‬has ‫טבל‬ ‫תרומה טהורה‬
been taken, and ‫ מעשר שני‬and ‫[ הקדש‬things that are declared to be
‫מעשר ריאשון שלא נטלה‬ ‫דמאי‬
sacred] that have been redeemed, and legumes, since these are food for
the poor. ‫מעשר ראשון שנטלה תרומתו מעשר שני והקדש שלא נפדו‬
c) But one may not move move ‫[ טבל‬produce from which priestly gifts hasn’t
been taken], or ‫ מעשר ריאשון‬from which the ‫ תרומת מעשר‬hasn’t been ‫לוף‬ ‫מעשר שני והקדש שנפדו‬
taken; nor ‫ מעשר שני‬or ‫ הקדש‬which have not been redeemed; or onions
‫חרדל‬ ‫תורמוס היבש‬
or mustard seeds. ‫ רשב״ג‬permits onions [to be moved] since it is food for
ravens, but ‫ הלכה‬doesn’t follow him.
(1) ‫ תרומה גדולה‬and ‫ תרומת מעשר‬are the ones that affect the being of all the other produce givings (‫)טבל‬
d) Analysis: It appears that the practical difference here between ‫ מותר‬and ‫ אסור‬is whether you can eat it or not.
e) But why is ‫ דמאי‬allowed? You can’t eat it, & if you make it allowed on ‫שבת‬, then you’re switching statuses, which is ‫מוקצה‬.
4. :‫גמ׳ שבת קכז‬
a) Statement: We said that a person can’t move ‫ דמאי‬on ‫שבת‬

Yonatan U. Kurz 3
 b) Question: Since if he would make his property ‫הפקר‬, he’d be a poor person and eligible to eat ‫דמאי‬, and since he has the
capability to be able to eat it, he can move it without being ‫מפקיר נכסים‬.
c) The ‫ משנה‬says that we may feed ‫ דמאי‬to a poor person or a soldier passing by [because they are always traveling. Because
there’s a ‫ספק‬, we’re lenient in a time of great need.
d) ‫ בית שמאי‬says we can’t feed ‫ דמאי‬to a poor person or a soldier passing by, but ‫ בית הלל‬allows it.
5. Giving away your produce
a) ‫ תרומה גדולה‬and ‫ תרומת מעשר‬are the ones that affect the being of all the other produce givings (‫)טבל‬
6. ‫מאירי ספר מגן אבות ענין י״ח ד״ה ומה שהקשה‬
a) ‫ מאירי‬expresses his surprise when he sees that the ‫ רמב״ן‬says that you can’t do ‫ הפקר‬on ‫שבת‬, because the ‫ גמ׳‬in ‫ שבת‬implies
that you would be allowed to do so
b) Additionally, even according to logic, ‫ הפקר‬should be allowed on ‫ שבת‬because it does not compare to the ,‫ מעריכין‬,‫מקדישין‬
‫ מחריבין‬in that ‫משנה‬, because when one does all those things, Hashem receives it. With ‫הפקר‬, no one receives it- you’re just
giving up your ownership of the item, and this shows a fundamental difference between ‫ הפקר‬and those three cases.
(1) On the other hand, ‫ רמב״ן‬holds that with ‫הפקר‬, the item is given to everyone because it is a two-party
7. ‫ ספק טבל‬vs ‫( חולין מתוקנין‬which is permissible to eat but requires a ‫ תקנה‬to be ‫ מפריש‬as well)
a) ‫ ספק טבל‬has a ‫ חפצה של איסור‬attached to it
8. ‫ חולין מתוקנין‬has a ‫ חפצה של היתר‬to be ‫מפריש‬
a) The ‫ רמב״ן‬would say that Gemara is saying that’s it’s not really ‫איסור‬, it’s just an added thing. This is proved by the fact that
‫ עניים‬can eat ‫דמאי‬. Therefore, these things are a ‫ דבר של התר‬and not ‫ מוקצה‬on ‫שבת‬, regardless if one is ‫ מפקיר‬or not.
b) He could also say that even though you can't be ‫ מפקיר‬on it on ‫שבת‬, you can move it because you could’ve done it before.

Yonatan U. Kurz 4