ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS

Prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
daf@dafyomi.co.il    http://www.dafyomi.co.il


Ask A Question

Previous Perek

MA'ASROS PEREK 3

Questions

Mishnah 1

1)
(a) In a case where someone is carrying his figs through his Chatzer to the place where he intends to make Ketzi'os, his wife and children are permitted to eat without taking Ma'asros. Chatzer only fixes the figs for Ma'asros - when it is Nigmerah Melachto, which is not the case here, since he is taking them to make Ketzi'os.
(b) The owner himself however, is forbidden to eat from them - because he is liable to change his mind at any time and decide to eat the figs as they are (see also Meleches Shlomoh).
(c) This reason does not extend to his wife and children however - because they themselves do not have the authority to change the situation, so they rely on his current actions.

2)
(a) The laborers who are transporting the figs together with him ...
1. ... are not allowed to eat automatically - because the work they are doing is not the G'mar Melachah (see Tos. Yom-Tov).
2. ... permitted to eat if he did not undertake to feed them - because when he then allows them to eat it is a Matanah, which does not fix for Ma'asros, as we explained earlier.
3. ... forbidden to eat if he did - because what they then eat during the work is a Mecher, which fixes for Ma'asros (see Tiferes Yisrael).
(b) We do not say here (like we did earlier) that they rely on the owner - because a purchaser is always ready to eat his purchase immediately, in which case it is considered Nigmerah Melachto (see Tos, Yom-Tov and Tiferes Yisrael).

Mishnah 2

3)
(a) The Mishnah discusses a case where laborers are taken out to the field, and the owner permits them to eat (which they are not working with). They are permitted to eat from the fruit without having to Ma'aser it - provided the owner is not obligated to feed them.
(b) If he did undertake to feed them - they are only permitted to eat without Ma'asering if they eat one at a time direct from the tree, but not from the basket, from the box or from the pile.

Mishnah 3

4)
(a) If someone hired a laborer to pick olives and stipulated that his wages constituted the olives that he ate - he would be permitted to eat olives without Ma'asering them ...
(b) ... and the Mishnah which restricts him to eating them one at a time is speaking - where he hired him to dig and weed among the trees (which is not the G'mar Melachah), and not to pick the olives.
(c) The significance of eating the fruit one at a time is - that it is Achilas Arai (casual eating), and it is only Achilas K'va (such as picking a few and eating them) which the Torah forbids once they reach the stage of G'mar Melachah.
(d) The Tana issues basically the same ruling regarding a laborer who is hired to weed a vegetable garden - allowing him to pick one leaf at a time and eat it, but not a few.

Mishnah 4

5)
(a) The Mishnah permits taking Ketzitzos (or Ketzi'os) that one finds on a path running beside a field of fig-trees and eating them. 'Ketzitzos' are - detached figs that have already been placed on reed-mats to dry (see also Tos. Yom-Tov).
(b) There is no question of Gezel - because the owner has given up hope of retrieving them, and they are Hefker.
(c) The finder is - not Chayav to Ma'aser them first (because Hefker is Patur from Ma'aser too).
(d) This Din will even extend to a field of Ketzi'os.

6)
(a) The Tana rules that ...
1. ... figs that one finds underneath a fig-tree that is leaning over into the street - are permitted, like in the previous case.
2. ... olives and carobs that one finds under the same circumstances - are subject to Gezel and must be Ma'asered ...
(b) ... because olives and carobs (unlike figs which become squashed and lose their identity when they fall on to the ground), are still recognizable, in which case people will be able to discern from which tree they fell, and the owner will not despair.
(c) The Tana obligates someone who finds dried figs to Ma'aser them before eating them - if most local residents have already have already 'trodden' their figs (as that is the G'mar Melachah of dried figs). Otherwise, he is Patur.

7)
(a) If someone finds a piece broken off from a cake of figs - the Mishnah rules that he is Chayav (since they have definitely passed the stage of G'mar Melachah).
(b) We do not assume that the owner must have Ma'asered it - because in a case where one is definitely Chayav, we apply the principle 'Ein Safek Motzi mi'Yedei Vadai' (a Safek having Ma'asered cannot detract from a Vadai Chiyuv).
(c) Before taking one's carobs up on to the roof, the owner is allowed to eat them Arai - because placing them on the roof in a pile is the G'mar Melachah.
(d) The Tana ...
1. ... nevertheless forbids him to take carobs elsewhere and eat them (even Achilas Arai) - because even before the G'mar Melachah, one is only permitted to eat them in their place in the field (for fear that, since it cannot be seen that they have not yet reached the stage of G'mar Melachah, he will forget and eat them Achilas K'va).
2. ... then permit him to bring them to his animals to eat (even Achilas K'va) - because, to begin with, carobs are not animal food and (he will remember that they are still pre-G'mar Melachah) and what's more, whatever the animals leave will be returned to where the rest of the batch are drying in the field, an indication that what he ate is Arai (see Tos. Yom-Tov).

Mishnah 5

8)
(a) The Mishnah now discusses which type of Chatzer fixes for Ma'asros. According to Rebbi Yishmael, it is a Chatzer Tzuris (the type of Chatzer that they had in Tzur) - which had a guard (see Tiferes Yisrael).
(b) Rebbi Akiva precludes a Chatzer that is owned by two people from the Din of a Chatzer - if Reuven has the right to object to Shimon closing his gate.
(c) Rebbi Nechemyah requires people - not to be too ashamed to eat in the Chatzer for it to be considered a Chatzer in this regard.
(d) According to Rebbi Yossi, a Chatzer where a stranger is able to walk around without being challenged does not fix for Ma'asros. Rebbi Yehudah rules that where there is a Chatzer within a Chatzer - the inner one is Chayav Ma'asros, whereas the outer one is Patur (see Tiferes Yisrael) - because, since the inner one must pass through the outer section of the Chatzer, it is not properly guarded.
(e) We rule like all the Tana'im Lehachmir (see Tiferes Yisrael).

Mishnah 6 & 7

9)
(a) The Mishnah rules that fruit which the owner placed in a Tz'rif (a hut in the shape of a tent) - does not become fixed for Ma'asros.
(b) And the same applies, says the Tana, to fruit that he placed in a Burgan, an Alketi'a or a Succas Ginusar (see Tiferes Yisrael note 45). Alketi'os are summer huts ...
1. ... Burganin - a type of dove-cot in a field where they stored food (see also Tiferes Yisrael), and ...
2 ... Succos Ginusar - huts near the Sea of Kineret, where people would stay throughout the summer season, in order to enjoy the luscious fruit that grew in that region.
(c) We would have thought that the latter might fix the fruit for Ma'asros - because the Tana is speaking even where there is a mill and chickens (see Tiferes Yisrael).

10) (a) Succas ha'Yotzrim (a potter's hut) actually comprised two huts - the inner one where the potter lives and stacks his pots, the outer one where works and sells his pots.
(b) The inner one fixes for Ma'asros - the outer one does not.
(c) Based on his own principle - that whatever is not inhabited summer and winter is Patur.
(d) Consequently, he holds - that the inner hut does not fix for Ma'asros either.

11)
(a) According to Rebbi Yehudah, a Succah on Succos fixes fruit for Ma'asros - because he requires the Succah to be a permanent dwelling (and is even Chayav a Mezuzah) ...
(b) ... whereas the Rabbanan require it to be a temporary one.

Mishnah 8

12)
(a) The Tana Kama permits eating from a fig-tree that is growing in a Chatzer one at a time only (see Tos. R. Akiva Eiger) - because Chatzer fixes for Ma'asros.
(b) Rebbi Shimon, who is more lenient - permits even three, one in his right hand, one in his left and one in his mouth.
(c) The Tana permits a laborer picking figs at the top of the tree - to 'to fill his lap with figs' and to eat them.

Mishnah 9

13)
(a) Regarding fruit-trees growing in a Chatzer, Rebbi Akiva permits a laborer only to eat one grape, one pomegranate pit or one sliver at a time (like we learned in the second Perek with regard to a sale). Rebbi Tarfon - permits him to pick a bunch of grapes, an entire pomegranate or the whole watermelon, and to eat from it (see Tos. Yom-Tov).
(b) If a coriander plant is growing in a Chatzer - Rebbi Akiva permits the laborer to pick only one leaf at a time and eat it (see Tiferes Yisrael).
(c) The Mishnah rules that the plants Sa'ah (wild rosemary), Eizov (hyssop) and Kurnis, all of which tend to grow wild - are Patur from Ma'asros, unless they are growing in a field which is guarded.

Mishnah 10

14)
(a) The Mishnah rules that a laborer ...
1. ... is permitted to eat from the branch of a fig-tree which protrudes into the garden, even though the trunk grows in the Chatzer.
2. ... is forbidden to eat from the branch of a fig-tree which protrudes into the Chatzer, even though the trunk grows in the garden.
3. ... Chutz la'Aretz, but whose trunk grows in Eretz Yisrael, or vice-versa - we always go after the trunk to determine whether the tree is subject to Ma'asros or not ...
(b) ... because the tree's Kedushah is determined by where it nurtures from.
(c) The Tana also rules that if the branch of a tree that grows over the wall of a walled city -- even though the tree is growing inside the city -- the branch follows the trunk, and the owner who sold it is permitted to redeem it only up to one year after the sale.

15)
(a) When the Tana states that regarding Arei Miklat, everything goes after the branch, he means - that if the 'murderer' reaches the trunk of a tree which is outside the wall, the Go'el ha'Dam is not permitted to kill him, because the branch of the tree is inside (and he could certainly not kill him once he reached it).
(b) This does not mean that, in the reverse case, where the 'murderer' had reached the branch of the tree that was outside, the Go'el ha'Dam would be permitted to kill him, even though the trunk was inside - because, when the Tana says that we go after the branch, he means (not that we go after the branch exclusively, but) that we also go after the branch. But we certainly go after the trunk.
(c) Finally, the Tana says (in connection with Ma'aser Sheni) that if the branch of a tree that is growing inside Yerushalayim protrudes over the outer wall, or vice-versa - we go after the branch (which here too, means also after the branch).
(d) The ramifications of this ruling with regard to a tree that grows ...
1. ... outside, but whose branch is inside are - that just as, once he reaches the branch he is no longer permitted to redeem it, so too, when he reaches the trunk.
2. ... inside, but whose branch is outside are - that just as, once he reaches the branch, he is not permitted to eat it because he is still considered to be outside, so too, is he forbidden to eat by the trunk, even though he is already inside the walls.

Next Perek

Main Review Questions and Answers Page for Seder Zeraim


Sponsorships & donations  •  Readers' feedback
 •  Mailing lists  •  Archives  •  Ask the Kollel
 •  Dafyomi weblinks  •  Calendar
 •  Hebrew material