More Discussions for this daf
1. Methods of irrigation 2. Watering a Beis ha'Ba'al 3. Isur Chol ha'Mo'ed Min ha'Torah
4. Work On Chol ha'Moed 5. לימוד עניני אבלות וכדומה 6. רבי היא שאמר זה דבר השמיטה שמוט
7. חרשיה לצורך כלאים
DAF DISCUSSIONS - MOED KATAN 2

Yitzchok Kahn asked:

On Moed koton 2b Tosfos D'H Im Kain says (on 2nd

small line) that it's clear from R' Yehudahs words that

he only allows mlachah bmakom psaidah.

What bothers me is,if so, how can the gemarah on 2b (the 1st 3 lines) have a hava aminah that R' Yehudah would permit watering a bais habaal from an old spring on chol hamoed?! Isn't a bais habaal a clear case of harvachah - something Tosfos deduced from R' Yehudahs very own words that he would never matir?

The Kollel replies:

The Gemara's deduction of what R' Yehudah holds is based on his Halachah that one may water only a Beis ha'Shalchin and not a Beis ha'Ba'al from a new spring. The Gemara offers two alternative readings to this Halachah: 1) That a Beis ha'Ba'al cannot be watered even from an old spring. 2) That a Beis ha'Shalchin cannot be watered only from a new spring, but from and old spring even it may be watered; in other words Harvachah is Mutar b'Makom Peseidah. The only proof the Gemara brings to the first reading is that if we choose the second reading we will be left without a Tana for our Mishnah which holds that Harvachah is Asur even without Tircha.

Tosefos asks, once we anyway are forcing a reading into the words of R' Yehudah for lack of another Tana for our Mishnah, although his words do not necessitate this interpretation, we could just as well have chosen R' Elazar and forced our interpretation on him. To this Tosefos answers that R' Yehudah's Halachah according to the first reading will have two of the necessary components for the Tana of our Mishna, and therefore the Gemara chose R' Yehudah. However, the Gemara's point is still valid, we are not forced to say that R' Yehudah does not allow Peseidah where there is no Tircha.

Dov Zupnik

Yitzchok Kahn responds:

Thank you for your reply. In it you write " in other words that Harvachah is mutar bmakom psaidah".

That gets to the crux of what I don't understand. Mimanafshach, is it harvachah, or is it psaidah? How can it be both?! the 2 are oposites in terms. So I still don't understand how the gemarah can have a hava amina R' Yehudah matirs a bais habaal in light of Tosfos.Its harvachah! You answer me that is harvachah bmakom psaidah . That sounds like some type of middle ground. What is it exactly?

Thank you.

Yitzchok Kahn

The Kollel replies:

I'm very sorry. The line you mention should read Harvachah b'Makom TIRCHA. I hope it is now understood.

Dov Zupnik