(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Gitin 61

GITIN 61 - dedicated by Mr. Avi Berger of Queens, N.Y. in memory of his parents, Pinchas ben Reb Avraham Yitzchak and Leah bas Michal Mordechai


(a) (Mishnah): (One may not take from) traps for animal, birds or fish...
(b) All agree that it is absolute theft to take from a net (because the owner of the net acquires what is trapped);
(c) Regarding hooks: Chachamim say that it was enacted that one may not take from them, for the sake of Shalom; R. Yosi says, also this is full theft.
(d) (Mishnah): What a deaf person, lunatic or minor finds...R. Yosi says, this is absolute theft.
(e) (Rav Chisda): R. Yosi means, it is absolute theft mid'Rabanan.
1. R. Yosi says that Beis Din makes him return it; Chachamim say, Beis Din does not force him.
(f) (Mishnah): A poor man in an olive tree knocking down olives - what is below...
(g) (Beraisa): If the poor man held the olives in his hand before casting them down, all agree that this is absolute theft.
(h) [Version #1 (Rashi): Rav Kahana was going to Hutzal; he saw a man throwing sticks to knock down dates; Rav Kahana ate some of them.
1. The man: I threw them down with my hands!]
(i) [Version #2 (Tosfos): Rav Kahana was going to Hutzal; he saw a man throwing down branches of a date tree. Rav Kahana thought that the man only wanted the wood; he ate some of the dates.
1. The man: I threw them down with my hands (I want the dates - it is full theft to take them)!]
2. Rav Kahana: Because he is from R. Yoshiyah's region, he knows the law well.
(j) (Mishnah): We do not protest by Nochrim that take Leket, Shichchah and Pei'ah, for the sake of Shalom.
(k) (Beraisa): We support poor Nochrim along with poor Yisraelim, we visit sick Nochrim along with sick Yisraelim, and we bury Nochrim as well as Yisraelim - all this is for the sake of Shalom.
(a) (Mishnah): Leah is suspected of transgressing Shemitah - Sarah may lend her a sifter, grinder or oven, but she may not sift or grind with her;
(b) Sarah, the wife of a Chaver (a trustworthy man, regarding tithes or Taharah) may lend Leah (the wife a commoner) a sifter, and she may sift and grind with her, but once she adds water (e.g. to knead), she may not, for we do not assist transgressors;
1. What is allowed was only permitted is for the sake of Shalom.
(c) We encourage Nochrim working in Shemitah, but not Yisraelim, and we may greet Nochrim with 'Shalom', for the sake of Shalom.
(d) (Gemara) Question: What is the difference between the first and second cases of the Mishnah (in the second case, she may help sift and grind)?
(e) Answer #1 (Abaye): Most commoners tithe properly.
(f) Answer #2 (Rava): The second case refers to helping (the wife of) a Chaver regarding tithes who is a commoner regarding Taharah;
1. Since the prohibition to make Chulin Tamei in Eretz Yisrael is only mid'Rabanan, we are more lenient.
2. (Beraisa - R. Meir): A commoner is one who does not eat Chulin in Taharah; Chachamim say, it is one who does not tithe properly.
(g) Question: The end of the second clause says, once she adds water, Sarah may not help her - this implies, the beginning of the second clause is unrelated to Taharah!
(h) Answer: Both parts of the second clause pertain to Taharah: the beginning deals with Tum'ah of Chulin - this only involves a Rabbinical prohibition;
1. The end of the clause deals with Tum'ah of Chalah, which is mid'Oraisa.

(i) Contradiction (Beraisa): We may grind our food or deposit it by people that eat Shemitah produce or eat their produce in Tum'ah, but we may not grind the food or take deposits from such people.
(j) Answer (Abaye): The Beraisa speaks of a Kohen that eats Terumah in Tum'ah, which a Torah prohibition.
(k) Question: If so, why may we deposit our food by him?
1. Contradiction (Beraisa): We may deposit Terumah by a Yisrael commoner, but not by a Kohen commoner, for he feels free to touch it.
(l) Answer #1 (R. Ilai): We may deposit in a sealed earthenware vessel.
(m) Objection: We should be concerned, perhaps his wife will move it when she is Nidah!
(n) Answer #2 (R. Yirmeyah): We may deposit food which was not Huchshar (prepared, by having liquid put on it) to become Tamei, but not food which was Huchshar.
(o) Contradiction (Mishnah): One who takes wheat to be ground by a Kusi or a commoner - it keeps its status regarding tithes and Shemitah, but not regarding Taharah.
(p) Answer: We already answered this - we may deposit food which was not Huchshar, but not food which was Huchshar!
1. Question: Why was the question even asked?
2. Answer: This Mishnah was brought in order to ask a different question.
(a) This Mishnah said, it keeps its status regarding tithes and Shemitah - we are not concerned that the food was switched;
1. Contradiction (Mishnah): One who deposits food by his mother-in-law (who is suspected regarding tithes) must tithe what he deposits by her and takes back, for she is suspected to switch spoiling produce.
2. Answer: As R. Yehudah explains - she is suspected to switch, for she wants her daughter to eat good food, but is embarrassed to tell her son-in-law that his food was spoiling.
(b) Question: Is it really true that commoners are not suspected of switching?
1. (Mishnah): One who deposits food by an innkeeper - he must tithe what he gives her and what he receives back, because she switches.
(c) Answer [Version #1 (Rashi): There, she rationalizes - I will a favor for the Talmid, he will eat my warm bread, I will eat his cold bread.]
(d) [Version #2 (Tosfos): There, she rationalizes switching - he should eat warm bread, and I, who toil for him, should eat cold?!]
(e) Question (Beraisa) [Version #1 (Rashi): Sarah, the wife of a Chaver may grind with Leah, a commoner's wife when Sarah is Teme'ah (then she is careful not to eat), but not when she is Tehorah (lest she forget, and eat);
1. R. Shimon ben Elazar says, even when she is Teme'ah she may not, for Leah will give her, and she will eat.]
(f) [Version #2 (Tosfos): Sarah, the wife of a Chaver may grind with Leah, a commoner's wife when Leah (knows that she) is Teme'ah (then she is careful not to touch the grain), but not when she (thinks she) is Tehorah (lest she give some to Sarah to eat);
1. R. Shimon ben Elazar says, even when Leah is Teme'ah Sarah may not help, perhaps another woman (a commoner's wife) will give to Sarah to eat.]
2. (Summation of question): If a commoner's wife is suspected of stealing, all the more so she is suspected of switching!
(g) Answer (Rav Yosef): There also, she rationalizes - an ox eats as it works, also Sarah is entitled to eat!
Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,