POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Bava Metzia 89
1) WHAT WE LEARN FROM THE WORD "B'DISHO"
(a) Answer #3 (to Question 3:a, and Answer #4 to Question 2:b
- Ravina): We do not need an extra verse for man to eat
detached nor for animals to eat attached!
2) IMPROVING THE FOOD
1. "Lo Sachsom Shor b'Disho" - all animals are
included, we learn a Gezeirah Shavah "Shor-Shor"
(b) (Beraisa #1): (The Torah permits an animal to eat
"B'Disho" (while threshing), and we learn to people;)
threshing applies to something that grows from the ground
and a worker may eat - he may eat everything that grows
from the ground:
2. The Torah could have written 'do not thresh with
(something) muzzled' - "Shor" is extra, to equate
the muzzler (man) to the muzzled one (an animal).
3. Just as the muzzler eats attached, also the muzzled
one; just as the muzzled one eats detached, also the
1. One who milks, churns (milk to make butter), or
makes cheese does not eat, for milk does not grow
from the ground.
(c) Question: Why must the Torah write "B'Disho"? We already
know from "B'Cherem Re'echa"!
(d) Answer: One might have thought, the extra "Kamah" (which
includes everything that grows from the ground) includes
even things that do not grow from the ground - "B'Disho"
teaches, this is not so
(e) (Beraisa #2): "B'Disho" - threshing is final processing,
and a worker may eat - he may eat whenever he does final
1. One who weeds among garlic and onions may not eat,
for this is not final processing.
(f) Question: Why must the Torah write "B'Disho"? We already
know from "V'El Kelyecha Lo Siten" (since he does not put
in the owner's vessel, he may not eat)!
(g) Answer: The case is, he removes small garlics and onions
that will never grow big (he puts them in the owner's
(h) (Beraisa #3): "B'Disho" - threshing is before final
processing that is Kove'a for Ma'aser, and a worker may
eat - he always eats before final processing for Ma'aser;
1. One who separates dates and figs that stuck together
may not eat, for they are Kavu'im for Ma'aser.
(i) Contradiction (Beraisa): One who separates dates and figs
that stuck together may eat!
(j) Answer (Rav Papa): That refers to bad dates and figs that
do not ripen on the tree, they are warmed in a vessel to
ripen (they are not Kavu'a for Ma'aser).
(k) (Beraisa #4): "B'Disho" - threshing is before it is
Kavu'a for Chalah, and a worker may eat - he always eats
food before it is Kavu'a for Chalah;
1. One who kneads or arranges the dough may not eat,
for a dough is Kavu'a for Chalah.
(l) Question: Why must we teach this? Since it is Kavu'a for
Ma'aser, we already know that he may not eat!
(m) Answer #1: The Beraisa teaches for Chutz la'Aretz, where
there is no Ma'aser.
(n) Rejection: Nor is there Chalah in Chutz la'Aretz!
(o) Answer #2: The Beraisa teaches the law during the 7 years
of conquest and 7 years of division of Eretz Yisrael;
1. During those years Chalah applied, Ma'aser did not.
(p) Rejection: Permission for a worker to eat does not depend
on whether or not the produce actually must be tithed,
rather, whether the final processing has been done. (The
final processing for each species is the same as what is
Kove'a (produce of that species that must be tithed) for
(q) Answer #3 (Ravina): Beraisos #3 and #4 are extracts from
one Beraisa - it says, threshing is before it is Kavu'a
for Ma'aser and (if it applies) Chalah, and a worker may
eat - he always eats until produce is Kavu'a for Ma'aser
and (if it applies, also) Chalah (even if it is Kavu'a
(a) Question: May a worker roast produce (Rashi - to make it
tastier; Tosfos - if it is unfitting to eat without
roasting) and eat it?
1. Is this like eating grapes with something to season
them (which is forbidden (Tosfos - if it is hard to
eat them by themselves)), or not?
(b) Answer #1 (Beraisa): An employer may give his workers
wine in order that they will not eat many grapes; workers
may dip grapes in brine, in order that they will eat
(c) Rejection: We knew that it is permitted to make oneself
fitting to eat much - the question is only if he may make
the food more fitting.
3) IS SALTING KOVE'A FOR MA'ASER?
(d) Answer #2 (Beraisa): Workers may eat grapes at the ends
of the rows of the vineyard, but they may not roast them.
(e) Rejection: Perhaps it is only forbidden because it
detracts from his work, but if his wife or children roast
them, he may eat them!
(f) Answer #3 (Beraisa): A worker may not roast, put in the
ground (to warm the produce) or break it on a rock and
eat, but he may break it in his hands.
(g) Rejection: Those are forbidden because they detract from
1. Support: That is the only reason to forbid breaking
it on a rock - it does not get more fitting!
(h) Answer #4 (Beraisa): Workers harvesting figs, dates,
grapes or olives may eat without tithing, for the Torah
2. Rejection: It becomes a bit more fitting.
1. They may not eat with their bread unless the
employer permitted them, nor may they dip them in
(i) Rejection: Dipping in salt is surely like eating them
with something else, this is no proof to roasting them.
(a) Contradiction (Beraisa): A worker hired to dig under
olive trees and cover the roots may not eat; if he was
hired to harvest, he may eat without tithing, for the
Torah permitted them;
1. If he stipulated with the employer (R. Chananel - to
eat a certain number), he may eat one at a time, he
may not (gather and) eat two at a time (the
stipulation is like a sale, if he would gather two
together he would have to tithe them (Rashba - and
he has no permission to tithe)).
(b) Answer #1 (Abaye): Dipping in salt is Kove'a for Ma'aser
in Eretz Yisrael, not in Chutz la'Aretz.
2. He may not dip them in salt and eat.
3. Question: In which case is it forbidden to dip in
i. Version #1: If when he stipulated - he may eat
(one at a time) any way he wants!
4. Answer: Rather, when he did not stipulate.
ii. Version #2 (Ra'avad): If when he stipulated -
may he eat any way he wants without concern for
(c) Objection (Rava): If it is Kove'a for Ma'aser in Eretz
Yisrael, it also is Kove'a in Chutz la'Aretz (in those
places where Chachamim enacted Ma'aser)!
(d) Answer #2 (Rava): Both in Eretz Yisrael and Chutz
la'Aretz, salting one at a time (and eating it) is not
Kove'a for Ma'aser, salting two (together) is Kove'a for
1. If he stipulated - whether or not he salts, he may
eat one at a time, he may not gather two together;
(e) (Ra'avad - Abaye and Rava agree that even when dipping in
salt is forbidden, this is only on account of Ma'aser,
not because it helps him eat more - all the more so,
roasting is permitted! Most Rishonim - the question about
roasting is not resolved.)
2. If he did not stipulate: if he does not salt, he may
eat two (or any number) at a time;
i. If he salts, he may eat one at a time, not two
at a time.
(f) Question: How do we know that salting two at a time is
Kove'a for Ma'aser?
(g) Answer (Rav Masnah): "Ki Kibetzam ke'Amir Gorenah:"