- This topic has 9 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
On the first daf of Pesachim, rashi says that the reason why we do bedikas chametz is so that we are not oiver on bal yeraeh u’val yematzei- a lav that is midioraisa. Tosafos disputes this Rashi cause he claims that midioraisa, bittul chametz is enough.
Later on daf 4a, there is a question whether one who rents a house must do bedikah, or if the original maschir must do it. The gemara tries to draw a parallel to a Gemara in bava metziah that says the renter must put up a mezuzah- not the maschir. However, Rashi says you can’t compare them since mezuzah is dioraisa and bal yeraeh bal yematzei d’rabanan!! He even says bedikah is davka not enough, and we need bittul, as the Gemara says later. What gives??!!!!!
B”N I’ll answer after Shabbos.
rationalfrummie,
I am admittedly a beginner at learning gemara. From the way I have understood of bedikas chometz and bittul chometz, I personally do not see a contradiction in the Rashis you provided.
1. Nullification is sufficent to fulfill the d’oraisa requirement regarding chometz (Tosafos above)
2. If nullification is done alone, however, there is a risk that the person will later come across some chometz that he finds very difficult to consider nullified, so a bedika should be done as well as nullification derabbanan. (1st Rashi)
3. No contradiction in the 2nd Rashi if he sees the bedika as d’rabbanan.
4. On the other hand, bedika should not be done alone, because it would be very difficult to be sure you got everything (2nd Rashi).
Does this make sense, or am I not understanding something correctly?
Have a good Shabbos!
rational frummie, with all due respect, you are misreading the rashi on 4a. Rashis point is not that bal yeiraeh is midrebanan, but that bedikas chametz is. His point is that the Socher (according to the Gra thats who Rashi was concerned for being over on the lav of bal yeraeh) doesnt need to be worried about getting rid of the issur of bal yeraeh because he could simply do that by doing bittul chametz. Tosafos as well does not mean to say that bal yeraeh is only drabbanan. The gemara in pesachim 5b clearly explains that both bal yeraeh and bal yimatzei are assur min hatorah (and the rembam counts them as two seperate issurim). But to say that anyone at all, from a newborn baby to moshe rabbeinu, would suggest that bal yeraeh is an issur drabbanan, is not true and has no basis in any source.
theres a ran (on the Rif) at the beginning of the masecta who wants to explain shittas rashi as follows: there are two way of min hatorah fulfilling ones obligation regarding tashbisu, either through bittul or through bedika/biur. the rashi on the mishna, explains the ran, is referring to one who doensnt do bittul, therefore his bedikas chametz is fulfilling a din d’oraisa. (how the ran says that no bittul was done is based on the fact that the gemara introduces the din that habodek tzarich sh’yivatel in the nmameof r’ yehuda in the name of rav, which makes it a chiddush from the gemara and not from the mishan itself). however the gemara on 4a already assumes that one must do bittul, and so his bedika is d’rabbanan. however the truth is, the halacha that bedika is d’rabannan doesnt mean to say that it isnt min hatorah. what it means is that since one can fulfill his obligation simply through bittul, the obligation to do bedika in spite of that is d’rabannan. so in the case of the rented house, the obligation to do bedika is only d’rabannan because the renter can simply do bittul, but still, chazal obligation someone to do a bedika on this house, the question is now who.
hope this helps. either way, look at the ran inside. it becomes pretty necessary to understand like him throughout the whole first perek
Rashi is explaining from where the idea of Bedika originates. It is because of Bal Yera’eh. In practice, once we are Mevatel there is no need to do a Bedika Mede’oraysa, and it is Mederabanan that we are Bodek anyhow.
Tosafos also explains that Bedika is necessary because of the Chomer of Pesach that we see in the Torah.
im kind of learning it now. otherwise i doubt id be of much help to you.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.