|(Permission is granted to redistribute this material as long as the Kollel
header and the subscription info at the end are included.)
CHARTS FOR LEARNING THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Email - firstname.lastname@example.org
Nazir Chart #7
Nazir Daf 4b
WHAT ARE THE SOURCES FOR THE PRINCIPLES OF
"HETER MITZTAREF L'ISUR" AND "TA'AM K'IKAR?"
HETER MITZTAREF L'ISUR
||ALL: Gi'ulei Akum(1)
NAZIR: "Mishras" (2)(3)
OTHERS: Meh Matzinu
|(KODSHIM: "Yikdash"(6) )
(1) Rebbi Akiva learns from Gi'ulei Akum that "Ta'am k'Ikar" applies to all
Isurim. He holds that the Halachah of Gi'ulei Akum is not a "Chidush" since
the verse is referring to pots that are "Bas Yomo," which are not "Nosen
(2) Rebbi Akiva does not learn from Mishras that the principle of "Heter
Mitztaref l'Isur" applies to all other Isurim, because he holds that Nazir is
*not* a Chidush and therefore it was not necessary to write the principle of
"Heter Mitztaref l'Isur" in the Parshah of Kodshim (since it could have been
learned from the laws of Nazir). Since the Torah *does* write it in the
Parshah of Kodshim, we have "Shnei Kesuvin ha'Ba'im k'Echad" teaching Heter
Mitztaref l'Isur, and we cannot apply it to any Isurim other than those for
which the Torah teaches explicitly that it applies.
(3) Rebbi Elazar holds that "Heter Mitztaref l'Isur" applies even to the
Isurim of Haktaras Se'or, and Achilas Chametz and Se'or on Pesach. He learns
this from the word "Kol" written in the Torah regarding these Isurim.
Nevertheless, he does not learn that this Halachah applies to all other
Isurim as well (because they are "Shnei Kesuvin ha'Ba'im k'Echad," as in
(4) The text printed in the Vilna Shas (37b) incorporates two incompatible
Girsa'os. The Gemara seems to say that the Rabanan learn from "Yikdash"
*both* Heter Mitztaref l'Isur *and* Ta'am k'Ikar. Obviously, though, if
"Yikdash" teaches one of those two Halachos, it cannot teach the other as
well. The ROSH, though, clarifies for us that only one of these two Girsa'os
are correct; *either* we should be Gores the first half of the Gemara (from
"v'Rabanan, Tzerichi" until "v'Rabanan Amrei Lach"), and the Rabanan learn
from Yikdash Ta'am k'Ikar, *or* we should be Gores the second half of the
Gemara (from "v'Rabanan Amrei Lach" until ""Amar Lei Rab Ashi"). The ROSH
himself, as well as TOSFOS (Pesachim 45a, DH v'Rabanan; Chulin 99a, DH Gali)
are Gores the first Girsa, that the Rabanan learn from Yikdash the Halachah
of "Ta'am k'Ikar" by Kodshim. They point out that this is also the approach
of the Gemara in Chulin 99a. (The Gemara in Pesachim 45a, however, preserves
the second Girsa, according to which the Rabanan learn from "Yikdash" that
Heter Mitztaref l'Isur by Kodshim.)
(5) The Rabanan (according to our Girsa; see previous footnote) hold that we
learn "Ta'am k'Ikar" from Nazir to all other Isurim. They hold that the verse
of Nazir and the verse of Kodshim are *not* considered "Shnei Kesuvin
ha'Ba'im k'Echad," even though both teach "Ta'am k'Ikar," since it was
necessary for the Torah to teach "Ta'am k'Ikar" with a separate verse, aside
from the verse of Nazir. We would not have been able to learn Ta'am k'Ikar
from Nazir alone since Nazir is a "Chidush." Hence, we learn "Ta'am k'Ikar"
to all other Isurim (aside from Nazir and Kodshim) through a Mah Matzinu.
(6) This is true according to the Girsa of the Gemara in Pesachim 45a, but
not according to the Girsa of Tosfos in our Gemara; see footnote #4.
According to this Girsa, the Rabanan do not learn from here that Heter
Mitztaref l'Isur by all other Isurim, because of the rule that "[the laws of]
Chulin cannot be learned from [the laws of] Kodshim." (Rebbi Akiva, too,
agrees that we cannot learn "Heter Mitztaref l'Isur" from Chatas for this
reason. Nevertheless, he learns from a separate verse that it applies to
Nazir.) According to this Girsa, learn Ta'am k'Ikar from Nazir to all other
Isurim. They do not consider Nazir to be a Chidush.
For questions or sponsorship information, write to email@example.com