More Discussions for this daf
1. The Beraisa which lists the Toldos 2. Toldah of Betzirah 3. Who needs a verse if there is a Halachah
4. Clearing rocks to plant grass 5. Idur 6. Zorayah
7. Charishah 8. תוד"ה אין דנין
DAF DISCUSSIONS - MOED KATAN 3

Ben Sugerman asked:

Harav Kornfeld,

Please continue the great work.

Two questions from the beginning of Moed Katan.

1. 3a Rashi D"H LO YIKASHKESH TACHAS HAZEISIM V'LO YE'ADER. Rashi notes a discrepancy in the B'raiysa, the B'raiysa forbids IDUR and then permits it. Rashi asserts that there are two types of IDUR, hoeing, done to a ground that has never been hoed before which is assure and hoeing to ground that has previously been hoed before which would be mu tar. Rashi tells us that such a distinction is made on 4b albeit in a different context. This seems problematic, looking at the gemorah on 4b, the CHILUK of HA BRACHA V'HA B'ATIKI is made in the context of CHOL HAMOED where such a distinction is understood as Rashi there himself explains, if it is virgin soil it would require extra effort and thus forbidden on CHOL HAMOED. However here on 3a the B'raiysa is discussing Shmitah and there would seem to be no basis for such a distinction. Does a TIRCHA Y'SEIRA make something ASSUR in SH"NAS HASHMITA?

2. 4a Rav Ashi explains the relationship between the HALACHA L'MOSHE M'SINAI and the TAKANAH of R' Gamliel. The HL"M extends only as long as the Temple is up , after which there is a TAKANAS CHACHAMIM which R' Gamliel lifted. R Ashi proves his point from the fact that ESER N'TIYOS is learned next to ARAVAH and NISUCH HAMAYIM which also are only while the Temple is up. Tosfos explains that these three HL"M were taught to Moshe together for exactly this reason. The Bach points out that Rashi in Sukkah 34 seems to disagree, Rashi there asserts that the three Halachos were bunched together because recording Tanah happened to hear these halochos in the Beis Medrash together. How would Rashi learn the proof of Rav Ashi in our Gemorah?

Ben Sugerman

Boca Raton, FL

The Kollel replies:

1) Interestingly, there are many versions of Rashi, and quotes of Rashi's opinion on this matter, that state that our Gemara's text of "v'Lo Ye'ader" is incorrect (due to your question). Our version of Rashi seems to be difficult. One answer is that this version of Rashi holds alike the Ritva (unlike an explicit Yerushalmi) that Tircha Yeseira is indeed forbidden on Shemita (for more information, see footnote #182 and #71 on the Mossad Harav Kook Ritva).

2) This is merely the classic style of Rashi, who does not change the simple explanation of the Gemara (that they were all taught in the Beis Medrash together) because there is an opinion in a different Gemara which implies that there could be a different explanation. It is very possible that Rashi agrees that Rav Ashi understands that this is why they were put together in the same Beraisa. However, as Rav Ashi is not even discussed in the Gemara in Sukah (34a), Rashi does not confuse the student with anything other than the simple explanation.

All the best,

Yaakov Montrose