Shiur Supplement #19 Daf 10b-14a
A. Mai ta'ama de-Rabbi Yehuda [lines 46-52] In the mishna, R. Yehuda designates THREE times to search for chametz - the evening of the 14th, the morning of the 14th And the time when chametz is to be removed. It is unclear from the mishna, however, whether R. Yehuda requires one to check at ALL three of these junctures or at ANY ONE of the above-mentioned time-periods. R. Chisda and Raba b. R. Huna are of the opinion, that according to R. Yehuda, it is obligatory to check for chametz THREE times, in keeping with the thrice-repeated command to rid oneself of chametz.
According to R. Yosef, though, R. Yehuda requires one to check only at any ONE of the three time-periods. If, however, one did NOT check by the time that it is forbidden to eat chametz (ie. The final time-period mentioned by R. Yehuda) he SHOULD NOT check thereafter, as we are concerned that one may actually find chametz and, perhaps, EAT it. Thus, it is preferable not to check at all.
Chakhamim, who PERMIT one who has not done bedika by the appointed time, to check for chametz even afterwards, are NOT concerned with the possibility that one may eat the chametz he finds.
B. U-mi gazar R. Yehuda [ DAF 10b line 52 - DAF 11a line 7] Background: The Torah states [Vayikra 23:10-14] that on the 16th of Nissan, the "omer" - first of the barley harvest - must be brought as a communal offering. Until this has been offered in the sanctuary or Temple, it is forbidden to eat grain from the current year's harvest. This law is referred to as "chadash" and, according to many opinions, is still in force today. [Although the Temple has been destroyed one should wait until the 16th of Nissan has passed before partaking of the current year's grain. Ask your local posek what to do.]
The gemara calls into question the assumption that R. Yehuda forbids certain actions as we are concerned that one may, thereby, partake of forbidden foods: R. Yehuda PERMITS the current year's grain to be sold in the marketplace BEFORE the omer has been offered and is unconcerned that the people may, thereby, eat it before it is permissible.
Rava answers that we cannot compare the case of chametz to that of barley: Since it is forbidden to reap the grain normally (one may only pluck a little at a time - kittuf) it is unlikely that he will forget and eat the new grain. However, there is no special reminder not to eat chametz and, thus, R. Yehuda does not allow one to check for chametz once it is forbidden to eat it.
The gemara further explains (in answer to Abaye) that even when one is grinding (techina) and sifting (harkada) he will remember that it is forbidden to eat the new grain as these processes must be carried out differently to their normal pattern (only a HAND-mill may be used for grinding and one may sift only with the TOP of the sieve.)
D. Rashi s.v. Ve-shel beit ha-amakim Even BEFORE the omer is offered, it is permissible to reap the current year's grain that is growing in an artificially irrigated field (beit ha-shlachin) or in the valley (beit ha-amakim). However, one may not reap grain that is growing in a regular field - it may only be plucked. The reasoning is as follows: The restriction of reaping is restricted to grain which is fitting to be offered as the omer. Grain that grows in beit ha-shlachin and beit ha-amakim may NOT be offered. Nonetheless, it is forbidden to eat ANY of the above grain before the omer is offered on the 16th of Nissan.
E. MISHNA R. Meir, R. Yehuda and R. Gamli'el argue as to when the rabbinic injunction against eating chametz begins on the 14th of Nissan. The gemara compares the opinions of R. Meir and R. Yehuda to a similar disagreement between the two regarding acceptance of conflicting testimony in court (ie. When one witness contradicts the other with regard to the actual time that the event occured). In both instances, the issue at hand is the extent to which people err in calculating the time of day.
F. Eidut she-i ata yachol le-hazima [line 25] The Torah [Devarim 19:15-21] rules how witnesses are to be cross-examined. If is found that the witnesses could not have been present at the scene of the crime (two other witnesses claim that they saw them elsewhere at the time the crime was allegedly perpetrated) they are considered "eidim zommemin" and receive the same punishment that they wished to inflict upon the defendant. Testimony that cannot be disproved in such a manner - eidut she-i ata yachol le-hazima - (eg. No specific time is given) is unacceptable in beit din.
Next week's shiur will deal with the beginning of the SECOND perek - starting from daf 21a.