Shiur Supplement - Daf 21a-22b

DAF 21a

A. The Mishna discusses two topics:

1. Gaining benefit (hana'a) from chametz.

2. The correct manner to DISPOSE of chametz - bi'ur.

 

            When learning the mishna, pay attention to the examples that are given. Why does the tanna (author of the mishna) mention that it is permissible to feed domestic animals AND wild animals AND birds? It should be sufficient to mention any one of them. One step further - why mention these examples at all? Surely it should be enough to record that one is permitted to benefit from the chametz in general - and ALL types of hana'a would be automatically included. If it is necessary to give certain examples, what is the distinction between feeding animals chametz and selling it to a non-Jew? Could we not have deduced the one law from the other?

 

            Some of these questions will be dealt with directly in the gemara. See if you can come up with any of your own ideas before continuing any further. Then, compare your solutions to those of the gemara.

 

            If you look closely at the mishna, you will see a star (*) next to the word "af" (even). This directs your attention to a comment by the Massoret Ha-Shas, found on the inner margin of the page. He quotes a variant text of the mishna, recorded by the Rif and the Rosh, in which the word "af" does NOT appear. What difference does this emendation make in the understanding of the opinion of Chakhamim? [Hint: Do Chakhamim argue point-blank with R. Yehuda concerning the correct method of bi'ur OR do they simply ADD to his opinion?]

 

            It is worthwhile to spend some time analyzing the mishna BEFORE beginning the gemara as this will enhance your understanding and appreciation of what you are learning, making it far more dynamic.

 

B. Ve-i tanna chaya [lines 38-41]  The gemara explains why it is necessary for the Tanna to explicitly permit one to feed chametz to a DOMESTIC animal, even though he already mentioned that it is permissible to feed a WILD animal: One may have thought that only a WILD animal may be fed chametz as it HIDES whatever it leaves over. A DOMESTIC animal, however, does NOT conceal what remains of its food and it is possible that the owner, by not paying attention to this left-over chametz, will transgress the injunctions against owning chametz on Pesach (bal yera'e u-bal yimatze).

 

            According to Rashi (s.v. Ve-i tanna chaya) although one cannot transgress the prohibition of bal yera'e if the chametz is hidden, he can still transgress the injunction of bal yimatze. According to Tosafot (s.v. Ve-i), however, one cannot transgress EITHER of the injunctions against owning chametz if he does not know where the chametz is.

 

C.  De-tanya Beit Shammai omrim [lines 44-45] According to Beit Shammai, one may NOT sell his chametz to a non-Jew, starting THIRTY days before Pesach. Rashi (s.v. Kodem) explains that a person has an positive obligation to dispose of his chametz by removing it from the world. This obligation begins already thirty days before Pesach.

 

DAF 21b

D. Kutach [line 1] This is a preserve consisting of sour milk, BREADCRUSTS and salt [Jastrow]. It is used primarily as a sauce or relish and, as such, lasts a long time. Thus, it is unlikely that the non-Jew will consume it in its entirety BEFORE Pesach Regular chametz , however, make be given or sold to a non-Jew for Pesach as it will most probably be consumed by the required time.

 

E. Charkho kodem zemano [lines 3-5] If one burned or singed the chametz, thereby changing its status, BEFORE the prohibitions against chametz came into force he may benefit from it even afterwards.

 

            According to Rashi (s.v. Lo tzericha), the chametz must be singed to the extent that it loses its original form and taste. According to Tosafot (s.v. Charkho), however, it must be burned to the extent that it becomes unfit for the consumption of a dog. This represents a more extreme requirement than that of Rashi.