1)

TOSFOS DH Trei Zimnei Lo Takinu Lei Rabanan

úåñôåú ã"ä úøé æéîðé ìà ú÷éðå ìéä øáðï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why now there is no suspicion.)

åà''ú àëúé àîøé äàé úí äåà åäàé ãùøé ìéä ìôé ùàéðå øåöä ìèøåç ôòí àçøú

(a)

Question: Still, people will say that it is a Tam, and he permitted (to slaughter it, i.e. he said that it is a Ba'al Mum) because he does not want to toil another time (since he will not be paid for it)!

åé''ì ùìà çééáåäå çëîéí ìøàåú ôòí àçøú àìà ãàí øàåäå ãàéï éëåì ìéèåì òìéå ùëø

(b)

Answer #1: Chachamim did not obligate him to see it another time, just that if he saw it [again], he cannot take more wages for it.

åòåã ãáæä ìà éçùãåäå ìòåìí ùéúéø àú äàéñåø ëãé ìäðöì îèåøç ùì ôòí ùðéä

(c)

Answer #2: They would never suspect him of this, to permit what is forbidden, in order to be saved from the toil of [seeing it] another time.

2)

TOSFOS DH ha'Notel Secharo Ladun Dinav Betelim

úåñôåú ã"ä äðåèì ùëøå ìãåï ãéðéå áèìéí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos resolves this with a source that his verdicts are valid.)

åäà (ãúðï) [ö"ì ãúðéà - ùéèä î÷åáöú, îäøù"à] îëåòø äãééï ùðåèì ùëø ìãåï àìà ùãéðéå ãéï

(a)

Implied question: A Beraisa teaches that a judge who takes wages to judge is repulsive, but his verdicts are valid!

îôøù áôø÷ áúøà ãëúåáåú (÷ä.) áàâø áèìä ãîåëç ùøé

(b)

Answer: It explains in Kesuvos (105a) that Agar Betelah (wages for being idle) that is evident [that he could have earned this amount in the time he judged] is permitted.

3)

TOSFOS DH Mah Ani b'Chinam v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä îä àðé áçðí ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses Heterim for wages for judging and teaching.)

åà''ú åùçã ìà ú÷ç ãëúá øçîðà (ùîåú ëâ) ìîä ìé

(a)

Question: Why do we need "v'Shochad Lo Sikach"? (A bribe is no less than wages to judge!)

åìàå ôéøëà äéà ãúøé îéìé ðéðäå ëãîåëç áøéù ô' áúøà ãëúåáåú (ãó ÷ä.) ãáúåøú àâøà äééðå ùëø èøçå åáúåøú ùåçã äééðå ìäùúãì ìãåðå éôä åìäôåê áæëåúéä ëãàîø äúí àôé' ìæëåú àú äæëàé åìçééá àú äçééá

(b)

Answer: This is not difficult. These are two matters, like is proven in Kesuvos (105a). Wages are for his toil, and a bribe is to try to judge him nicely and seek to vindicate him, like it says there [that a bribe is forbidden] even to acquit the innocent and obligate the Chayav.

åàéï ìúîåä òì ãééðé âæéøåú ùáéøåùìéí ùäéå ðåèìéï ùëøï îúøåîú äìùëä

(c)

Implied question: Judges who made decrees in Yerushalayim used to receive wages from Terumas ha'Lishkah (from the half-Shekalim that all men give every year to buy all Korbanos Tzibur)!

ãáìàå èòîà ãàâø áèìä ãîåëç ùøé äúí ëéåï ãëì òñ÷í äéä òì æä åìà äéå òåñ÷éï áùåí îìàëä ùòì ëøçí öøéëéï ìäúôøðñ

(d)

Answer: Without the reason of Agar Betelah that is proven, it is permitted there, since this was their only occupation. They must get income!

åîä ùðåäâéï òëùéå ììîåã úåøä áùëø àí àéï ìå áîä ìäúôøðñ ùøé åàôé' éù ìå àí äåà ùëø áèéìä

(e)

Pesak: Nowadays, the custom is to learn Torah for wages if he has no way to be financed. It is permitted, and even if he has (a way to be financed), if it is Agar Betelah that is proven.

ãîåëç ùîðéç ëì òñ÷éå åîùà åîúï ùìå îñúáøà ãçùéá îåëç éåúø î÷øðà ãúäé çîøà åù÷éì æåæà

1.

Source #1: It is proven that he abandons all his affairs and business. Presumably, this is considered [Agar Betelah that is] proven more than Karna, who used to smell wine (to tell the owner how long it will last before souring) and take a Zuz. (Surely, Karna could have earned money in the time he judged!)

åòåã á÷èðéí ùøé îèòí [ö"ì ùëø - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ùéîåø åùëø ôéñå÷ èòîéí ëãîåëç ôø÷ àéï áéï äîåãø (ðãøéí ìæ.)

2.

Source #2: [One who teaches] children it is permitted wages for guarding them, and for teaching the cantillation (musical notes for reading Mikra), like is proven in Nedarim (37a).

4)

TOSFOS DH ha'Mekadesh b'Mei Chatas... Af Al Pi she'Hu Yisrael

úåñôåú ã"ä äî÷ãù áîé çèàú åàôø çèàú äøé æå î÷åãùú àò''ô ùäåà éùøàì

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses why it says "even a Yisrael".)

ôé' ä÷åðèøñ ãçå÷ ùôéøù ãð÷è àò''ô ùäåà éùøàì ãëäðéí øâéìéí áäæàä åá÷éãåù

(a)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): It says "even though he is a Yisrael" because Kohanim normally did Haza'ah. This is a difficult explanation.

åàåîø ø''é ãòé÷øéä ð÷è îùåí øéùà ã÷úðé áøéùà ô''á ã÷éãåùéï (ãó ðç.) äî÷ãù áúøåîä åîòùøåú åáîúðåú áîé çèàú åàôø çèàú ëå'

(b)

Explanation #2 (Ri): [These words] were taught primarily for the Reisha. The Reisha taught in Kidushin (58a) one who is Mekadesh with Terumah, Ma'aseros and Matanos, with Mei Chatas and Efer Chatas (ashes of Parah Adumah)...

5)

TOSFOS DH Heichi Azil l'Beis ha'Peras d'Rabanan d'Amar Rav Yehudah v'Chulei

úåñôåú ã"ä äéëé àæéì ìáéú äôøñ ãøáðï ãàîø øá éäåãä ëå'

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses the Heterim for going through a Beis ha'Peras.)

îùîò òì éãé ðéôåç ùøé ìéìê ìäòéã àáì î''î èîà äåà ëã÷úðé îèîàäå îúøåîúå

(a)

Explanation #1 - Inference: Through blowing [on the dust to reveal any bones that might be there] one may go to testify, but in any case he is Tamei, like it teaches "he was Metamei him from [eating] his Terumah."

å÷ùéà îëàï )ìôéøåùå( [ö"ì ìôé' - ãôåñ åéðéöéä] ø''ú ãîôøù ãðéôåç îåòéì ìëì ãáø

(b)

Question: This is difficult for R. Tam, who explained that blowing helps for everything!

îùåí ã÷ùéà ìéä àäà ãàîøéðï áôñçéí áô' äàùä áñåôå (ãó öá.) áéú äôøñ ìà äòîéãå ãáøéäí áî÷åí ëøú

1.

Question #1 (R. Tam): It says in Pesachim (92a) that Beis ha'Peras - Chachamim did not enforce their words in a case of Kares! (We do not prevent someone from fulfilling Korban Pesach due to the decree about Beis ha'Peras.)

ëãúðï áîñ' àäìåú (ôé''ç î''ã) åùåéï ùáåã÷éï ìòåùé ôñç åàéï áåã÷éï ìàåëìé úøåîä

i.

Source (Ohalos 18:4 - Mishnah): They agree that we check [a Beis ha'Peras] for one who needs [to pass through] to do Pesach, and we do not check for one who [wants to] eat Terumah.

îàé áåã÷éï àîø øá éäåãä îðôç ëå'

ii.

Citation (92b) Question: How does one check [a Beis ha'Pras]? Rav Yehudah says, he blows...

åäùúà îàé ÷àîø îàé áåã÷éï åäìà äáãé÷ä îôåøùú ùí áîùðä

2.

Summation of question: What was the question "how does one check"? The Bedikah is explicit there in the Mishnah!

ã÷úðé ñéôà åìðæéø á''ù àåîøéí áåã÷éï åá''ä àåîøéí àéï áåã÷éï ëéöã äåà áåã÷ îáéà àú äòôø ùäåà éëåì ìäñéèå åðåúï ìúåê ðôä ùð÷áéä ã÷éï àí ðîöà ùí òöí ëùòåøä èîà

i.

The Seifa teaches "and for a Nazir, Beis Shamai say, we check. Beis Hillel say, we do not check. How does he check? He brings the earth that he can move (through walking) and puts it in a fine-holed sieve. If a bone the size of barley seed is found there, he is Tamei."

åòåã ãîùîò ãå÷à ìòåùé ôñç îäðé ðéôåç åäà àôé' ìùàø îéìé ðîé îäðé ëãàîø áô' áëì îòøáéï (òéøåáéï ì:) (ìëäï ááéú ä÷áøåú) [ö"ì åìëäï ááéú äôøñ - äá"ç] ãàîø øá éäåãä ëå'

3.

Question #2 (R. Tam): It connotes [there] that blowing helps only for one who does Pesach. It helps also for other matters, like it says in Eruvin (30b) [that we are Me'arev] for a Kohen in a Beis ha'Pras, for Rav Yehudah says, he blows...!

åàåîø ø''ú ãìà âøéñ îàé áåã÷éï àìà âøñ àîø øá éäåãä ëå' åîéìúà áàôé ðôùä äéà åîåòéì ðéôåç ìëì ãáø

4.

Answer (R. Tam): The text does not say "how does one check"? Rather, it says "Rav Yehudah says..." and it is a matter unto itself, and blowing helps for everything;

àáì áãé÷ä ùì îùðä ìà îäðéà áùåí î÷åí àìà ìòåùé ôñç

i.

However, the Bedikah of the Mishnah does not help anywhere, except for one who does Pesach.

åéù ìôøù äà ãùîòúéï ìôéøåù ø''ú ãîèîàäå îúøåîúå äééðå ùäåìê áìà ðéôåç åäëé ÷àîø äéëé àæéì åîùðé ááéú äôøñ ãøáðï ãàîø øá éäåãä ëå'

(c)

Answer - Explanation #2: We can explain our Sugya "he was Metamei him from his Terumah", i.e. he goes without blowing. It means as follows. How can he go? It answers in a Beis ha'Peras mid'Rabanan, for Rav Yehudah said...

îãøá éäåãä ÷à îééúé (ãîåøé) [ö"ì øàéä - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ãàéñåø áéú äôøñ ìàå ãàåøééúà àìà îãøáðï (îùøå) [ö"ì îãùøå - ùéèä î÷åáöú ëúá éã, ç÷ ðúï] ìëì ãáø áðéôåç

1.

From Rav Yehudah [the Gemara] brings a proof that Beis ha'Peras is not mid'Oraisa, rather, mid'Rabanan, since he permits for anything through blowing;

ëï ôéøù''é (åëï) áñåó ô''á ãëúåáåú (ãó ëç:) âáé àìå ðàîðéï ìäòéã áâãìï îä ùøàå á÷èðï

i.

So Rashi explained in Kesuvos (28b) regarding "the following are believed to testify in their adulthood about what they saw when they were minors." (He is believed about Beis ha'Peras, for it is mid'Rabanan.)

åìôé æä äéä îåúø áìà ðéôåç áëì îöåú ëîå ìäòéã

(d)

Consequence: According to this, it is permitted without blowing for all Mitzvos, e.g. to testify.

å÷ùéà ãìà îùîò äëé áô' îé ùäåöéàåäå (òéøåáéï îæ.) îãð÷è ììîåã úåøä åìéùà àùä åìãåï åìòøòø áéï äòåáãé ëåëáéí îôðé ùäåà ëîöéì îéãí

(e)

Question: It does not connote like this in Eruvin (47a), since it said [that one may become Tamei through Chutz la'Aretz or Beis ha'Peras] to learn Torah, marry a woman, or go to judgment and claim from Nochrim, for this is like saving [one's money] from them;

îùîò ãå÷à äðé ùäï îöåú [ö"ì âãåìåú - äá"ç] ëãîùîò áîâéìä (ãó ëæ.)

1.

Inference: Only these [are permitted], which are big Mitzvos, like it connotes in Megilah (27a)!

ãàîøéðï ììîåã úåøä åìéùà àùä ùàðé ãàîø âãåì úìîåã úåøä ëå' ìéùà àùä ìà ìúäå áøàä ëå'

i.

We say that to learn Torah or marry a woman is different, for learning Torah is great... marrying a woman is [is great], for "Lo l'Sohu Bera'ah..." (Hash-m created the world to be populated).

àå îùåí ëáåã äáøéåú ëãàîø áô' îé ùîúå (áøëåú éè:)

2.

Or, for Kevod ha'Beriyos it is permitted (without blowing), like it says in Brachos (19b).

åé''ì ãìòåìí ä''ä ìëì äîöåú åäà ãð÷è ììîåã úåøä îùåí ãôìéâé äúí äéëà ãîåöà îîé ììîåã åìéùà àùä ð÷è àò''ô ùîåöà àùä áà''é

(f)

Answer: Really, the same applies to all Mitzvos. It mentioned to learn Torah because they argue there about when he finds from whom to learn (here). And it mentioned to marry a woman, even though he could find a wife in Eretz Yisrael.

åáùàìúåú ãøá àçàé îúéø ìéèîà ááéú äôøñ ìëì äîöåú ëîå ìöàú ì÷øàú îìëéí

(g)

Pesak: She'altos of Rav Achai permits to become Tamei through Beis ha'Peras for all Mitzvos, just like to go out to greet kings;

(åîôøùéí) [ö"ì åîôøù - áàøåú äîéí] îä çéìå÷ áéï ðæéø åòåùä ôñç ìùàø îöåú ãìòðéï ôñç äåìê åèäåø ò''é ðéôåç åìùàø îöåú äåìê åèîà

1.

He explains the difference between a Nazir and one doing Pesach, and other Mitzvos, that regarding Pesach, he goes and he is Tahor through blowing, and for other Mitzvos he goes and he is Tamei.

îùîò ãøåöä ìåîø ãìëì ãáø áòéðï ðéôåç åî''î (ùîà) [ö"ì èîà - äá"ç] ìëì ãáø çåõ îôñç

2.

Inference: He wants to say that for everything, he must blow, and even so he is Tamei for everything other than Pesach.

åãáø úéîä äåà áääéà ãáøëåú ùîåúø ìéìê òí äàáì ãøê áéú äôøñ ìëáåã äàáì îä ëáåã ùäåìê åîðôç àçøéå åöøéê äàáì ìäîúéðå ìëì ôñéòä

(h)

Question: This is astounding! In the case in Brachos (19b) it is permitted to go with the Avel through a Beis ha'Peras, for the Avel's honor. What honor is it, that he goes and blows after [the Avel], and the Avel must wait for him for each step?!

åùîà øåöä ìåîø äùàìúåú ëì ùàø äîöåú áìà ðéôåç ðîé ùøé åääéà ãáëì îòøáéï àé îòøáéï ìãáø äøùåú îééøé ò''é ðéôåç åàé àéï îòøáéï àìà ìãáø îöåä îééøé àôéìå áìà ðéôåç

(i)

Answer: Perhaps the She'altos means that for all other Mitzvos, also without blowing is permitted, and the Gemara in Eruvin, if we are Me'arev for Reshus (not a Mitzvah), it is permitted through blowing. And if we are Me'arev only for a Mitzvah, it is permitted also without blowing.

åìôø''ú ÷ùéà ìøáé îääéà ãçâéâä ôø÷ áúøà (ãó ëä:) ãàîøéðï äúí îåãéí áéú ùîàé åáéú äìì ùáåã÷éï ìòåùé ôñç [ö"ì åàéï áåã÷éï ìàåëìé úøåîä - äá"ç] îàé áåã÷éï àîø øá éäåãä ëå' îðôç àãí ëå'

(j)

Question (Tosfos' Rebbi, against R. Tam): In Chagigah (25b) we say that Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel agree that we check for one who does Pesach, and we do not check for one who eats Terumah. How do we check? Rav Yehudah said... one blows...

[ö"ì åäãø ÷àîø - äá"ç] ìòåùé ôñç ìà äòîéãå ãáøéäí áî÷åí ëøú ìàåëìé úøåîä äòîéãå ãáøéäí áî÷åí îéúä

1.

And later it says that for one who does Pesach [Chachamim] did not enforce their words in a case of Kares. For one who eats Terumah, they enforced their words in a case of Misah [bi'Ydei Shamayim, for a Tamei who eats Terumah];

(îùîò áäãéà ëãîñé÷ ìå ìäôñé÷ áîéìúéä ãøá éäåãä ã÷àé àîúðé' ãàé ìà) [ö"ì åäãø îéáòéà ìäå áã÷ ìôñçå îàé ùéàëì áúøåîúå ëå' åàé àáãé÷ä ãîúðé' ÷àé åìà - äá"ç] âøñéðï îàé áåã÷éï ìà äéä ìå ìäôñé÷ áîéìúéä ãøá éäåãä

2.

And later it asks if one checked for Pesach, may he eat his Terumah? If this refers to the Bedikah of our Mishnah, and [like R. Tam says] the text does not say "how do we check", it should not have interrupted with Rav Yehudah's teaching!

åðøàä ìøáé ãâøñéðï îàé áåã÷éï åáãé÷ä äîôåøùú [ö"ì áîùðä - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ìàçø ùòáø [ö"ì åîåòéì - äá"ç] ìëì ãáø

(k)

Explanation #3 (Tosfos' Rebbi): It seems that the text says "how do we check", and the Bedikah explicit in our Mishnah is after he passed through, and it helps for everything. (This Dibur continues on Amud B.)

29b----------------------------------------29b

àáì ìùåï áåã÷éï îùîò ìëúçìä ëãé ìòáåø åìòùåú ôñç åìäëé áòé îàé áåã÷éï ãîä äéà àåúä áãé÷ä

1.

Distinction: However, the wording "they check" connotes l'Chatchilah, in order to pass and do Pesach. Therefore, we ask "what is Bodkin?" - what is the Bedikah?

åäùúà éù ùìùä òðéðéí ááéú äôøñ ìòåùé ôñç ìëåìé òìîà åìðæéø ìáéú ùîàé îðôç åèäåø

(l)

Conclusion: Now, there are three laws in Beis ha'Peras. For one who does Pesach according to everyone, and for a Nazir according to Beis Shamai, he blows and he is Tahor;

åììîåã úåøä åìéùà àùä åìãåï åìòøòø åìëáåã äáøéåú ùøé ìéèîà áìà ðéôåç

1.

To learn Torah, marry a woman, go to judgment and claim [from Nochrim], or for Kevod ha'Beriyos, one may become Tamei without blowing;

åìùàø îöåú ëâåï òãåú ãäëà ùøé òì éãé ðéôåç åèîà åëï áòéøåá (àåîø) [ö"ì àé - ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí] àéï îòøáéï àìà ìãáø îöåä ùøé ìéèîà ò''é ðéôåç

2.

And for other Mitzvos such as testimony, here it is permitted through blowing, and he is Tamei (lest a bone remained), and the same applies to Eruv, if one may be Me'arev only for a Mitzvah. One may become Tamei [and pass through] through blowing;

(åèîà) åàé îòøáéï àó ìãáø äøùåú éù ììîåã îùí ãòì éãé ðéôåç ùøé àôéìå áìà îöåä àìà îãáøéäí åèîà

i.

Possibility #1: And if one may be Me'arev even for Reshus, we may learn from there that it is permitted through blowing even without a Mitzvah, and he is Tamei.

[ö"ì åùîà - öàï ÷ãùéí] àé ðîé îòøáéï [ö"ì àó - äá"ç] ìãáø äøùåú àéëà ìàå÷åîé äîùðä ëùòéøá ìãáø îöåä ùøâéìåú äåà ìòøá ìãáø îöåä ëã÷úðé áøéù ëéöã îùúúôéï (òéøåáéï ôá.) åëì îé ùéìê ìáéú äàáì àå ìáéú äîùúä å÷àîø äúí ãàåøçà ãîéìúà ÷úðé

ii.

Possibility #2: And perhaps even if one may be Me'arev even for Reshus, we can establish our Mishnah when he was Me'arev for a Mitzvah, for it is common to be Me'arev for a Mitzvah, like it teaches in Eruvin (82a) "[this Eruv is] for anyone who will go to the Avel's house or the [nuptial] feast", and it says there that it teaches a common case.

åäà ãáòé áçâéâä (ãó ëä:) äáåã÷ ìôñçå îäå ùéàëì áúøåîúå àáãé÷ä ãøá éäåãä ÷àé åìà àîúðé' åìôé' ø''ú àéôëà

(m)

Observation: [According to Explanation #3,] in Chagigah (25b) it asks "one who checks for Pesach - may he eat Terumah?" about Rav Yehudah's Bedikah, and not about that of our Mishnah, and according to R. Tam it is opposite.

åòåã äééðå éëåìéï ìôøù ãëì äáãé÷åú ìòåùé ôñç àìà ãáãé÷ú äîùðä ìàçø ùòáøå (ìãøá) [ö"ì åøá - ùéèä î÷åáöú, øù"à åòåã] éäåãä áà ìäùîéòðå îàé áåã÷éï ëãé ìòáåø

(n)

Explanation #4: We could say that all the Bedikos are for one who does Pesach, but the Bedikah of our Mishnah is after he passed through, and Rav Yehudah comes to teach how we check in order to pass through;

åôéøåù ëîå àîø øá éäåãä îàé áåã÷éï ëääåà ãáøéù àìå îöéàåú (á''î ëà.) åëîä àîø øá éöç÷ ÷á áàøáò àîåú åáôø÷ ìà éçôåø (á''á ëá:) åëîä àîø øá ééáà çîåä ãàùéàï ëîìà çìåï

1.

It is as if Rav Yehudah said 'what is "we check"?...', like the case in Bava Metzi'a (21a) "and how much (Peros may be scattered, and the finder may keep them)? Rav Yitzchak said, a Kav in four Amos", and in Bava Basra (22b) "how far [must one distance a wall from a window, so that it will not block the light? Rav Yeiva the father-in-law of Ashi'an said, like the width of the window." (Also there, the one who answered the question, he asked the question.)

6)

TOSFOS DH v'Rav Yehudah bar Ami mi'Shmei d'Rav Yehudah...

úåñôåú ã"ä åøá éäåãä áø àîé îùîéä ãøá éäåãä àîø áéú äôøñ ùðéãù èäåø

(SUMMARY: Tosfos points out that elsewhere this was said in another's name.)

áôø÷ áúøà ãçâéâä (ãó ëä.) âøñ øá çééà áøáé àîé îùîéä ãòåìà

(a)

Observation: In Chagigah (25a) the text says R. Chiya bar Aba in the name of Ula.

7)

TOSFOS DH k'Po'el Batel Shel Osah Melachah

úåñôåú ã"ä ëôåòì áèì ùì àåúä îìàëä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos concludes that there is no compensation for his toil for the Mitzvah.)

ôéøù á÷åðèøñ îàåúä îìàëä ãáèì îéðä

(a)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): [We view him like a worker Batel] from that Melachah that he neglected doing;

ãàí äéä ðå÷á îøâìéåú ùòáåãúä ðåçä ìòùåú åùëøå îøåáä åàí àåîøéí ìå èåì ëê åëê åáèì äéåí îîìàëä àéðå ôåçú îùëøå àìà ãáø îåòè ùäøé ðåçä åàéï áä èåøç

1.

If he was piercing pearls (to put a string through them), which is an easy job and a great wage, and if we tell him "take this amount and be idle from work today", he would deduct only a little from his wage (i.e. he would demand almost his full wage before consenting to be idle), for it is easy, and there is no toil;

åàí îìàëä ÷ùä äéà ëâåï ðâø àí àåîøéí ìå àúä ðåèì òëùéå â' æåæéí èåì æåæ åäáèì äéåí îàåúä îìàëä ìòñå÷ áîìàëä ÷ìä ðéçà ìå ìäáèì (ìéèåì) [ö"ì åìéèåì - ãôåñ åéðéöéä] æåæ òã ëàï ìùåï ä÷åðèøñ

2.

And if the job was difficult, e.g. a carpenter, if they tell him "now, you receive three Zuz. Take one Zuz and be idle from that job, to engage in light work", he is pleased to be Batel and receive one Zuz. Until here is from Rashi.

åìà äéä ìå ìôøù ùéèåì ùëø áèìä îàåúä îìàëä ìòñå÷ áîìàëä ÷ìä ëæå ãà''ë äéä ðåèì [ùëø] ìãåï åìäòéã ìäæåú åì÷ãù

(b)

Objection: He should not have explained that he takes wages for being idle from that job, to engage in light work like this", for if so he receives wages to judge, testify, sprinkle or be Mekadesh!

àìà äéä ìå ìôøù ùðåúðéï ìå ùëø áèìä îàåúä îìàëä [ö"ì ëéåùá - ùéèä î÷åáöú] åáèì ìâîøé åàéðå òåùä áùåí îìàëä

(c)

Explanation #2: Rather, he should have explained that they give to him wages of being idle from that job, like one who sits and he is totally idle and does not do any work.

åëòðéï æä öøéê ìôøù áñåó àìå îöéàåú (á''î ìà:) âáé äùáú àáéãä ãúðï äéä áèì îñìò ìà éàîø ìå úï ìé ñìò àìà ðåúï ìå ùëøå ëôåòì [ö"ì åîôøù áâîøà ëôåòì - ùéèä î÷åáöú] áèì îàåúä îìàëä

(d)

Support #1: Like this we must explain in Bava Metzi'a (31b) regarding Hashavas Aveidah. A Mishnah teaches that if he was Batel from a Sela [that he could have earned while he engaged with the Aveidah], he does not say "give to me a Sela." Rather, he gives to him his wage like a worker, and the Gemara explains like a worker idle from that job.

åâí ùí ôéøù á÷åðèøñ ëòðéï ùôéøù ëàï

(e)

Remark: Also there, Rashi explained like he explained here.

åà''à ìåîø ëï ãà''ë äéä ðåèì ùëø òì äùáú àáéãä

(f)

Rejection #1: One cannot explain so, for if so he receives wages for Hashavas Aveidah!

åàôé' ìøáðï ãàîøé èòéðä áùëø ìà àîøé àìà îùåí ãà''ë ìëúåá øçîðà èòéðä åìà áòé ôøé÷ä

(g)

Rejection #2: And even according to Rabanan, who say that loading is for wages (one who helps another to load his animal may demand to be paid for it), say so only because the Torah should have written loading, and it would not need to teach unloading (all the more so one must help to unload, for it also saves the animal from pain! Rather, it wrote both, to teach that loading is for wages, but unloading is for free.)

åáøéù äëåðñ (á''÷ ðå:) àîøéðï ùåîø àáéãä ëùåîø çðí ãîàé äðàä àéú ìéä

(h)

Rejection #3: In Bava Kama (56b) we say that a Shomer Aveidah is like a Shomer Chinam, for what benefit does he get?!

àìà öøéê ðîé ùí ìôøù ìéåùá åáèì ìâîøé

(i)

Conclusion: Rather, also there one must explain that [we estimate what one would want to receive] to sit totally idle.

åøáéðå çððàì ôéøù ùí (ëîå) [ö"ì ëâåï - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ùáùàø éîåú äùðä àéï ðåúðéï áúôéøú áâã àìà çöé ñìò åäåà òúä áùòú äøâì åúåôø áâã áñìò

(j)

Explanation #3: R. Chananel explained there, e.g. during the rest of the year they pay for sewing a garment only half a Sela, and now at the time of the festival he sews a garment for a Sela;

[àéï] àåîøéí ìå ÷áì ùëø ëîä ùúðåç ìîìàëä æå ùàúä î÷áì òìéä ñìò [àìà] ëàåúå ùëø ùàúä äééú ðåèì ëîåúä áùàø éîåú äùðä ùìà äééú ðåèì òìéä àìà çöé [ö"ì ñìò - ùéèä î÷åáöú] îôðé äùáú àáéãä

1.

We do not say to him "take wages like what you abandon this Melachah, for which you receive a Sela, rather, like the wage you would receive like it during the rest of the year, that you would get only half [a Sela, and you neglect it] due to Hashavas Aveidah."

åôéøåùå úîåä ãàéï äìùåï îùîò ëï

(k)

Objection #1: This is astounding! The words do not connote like this.

åâí àéï ëàï ùåí (äëéøà) [ö"ì ñáøà - öàï ÷ãùéí] ìéèåì áùòú äøâì ëùàø éîåú äùðä åäåé ëäìëúà áìà èòîà

(l)

Objection #2: There is no reason to receive at the time of the Regel like during the rest of the year. This is like a Halachah without a reason.

åòåã úðéà áøéù äùåëø àú äàåîðéï (á''î òå:) äùåëø àú äôåòìéí åäèòå àú áòì äáéú ëå'

(m)

Support #2 (for Explanation #2 - Citation - Bava Metzi'a 76b - Beraisa): If one hired workers and they tricked the employer [or vice-versa, the hurt party has only complaints...];

àáì äìëå çîøéí åìà îöàå úáåàä äìëå ôåòìéí åîöàå ùãä ùäéà ìçä ðåúï ìäí ùëøí îùìí àáì àéðå ãåîä äáà èòåï ìäáà øé÷í òåùä îìàëä ìéåùá åáèì

1.

However, if donkey-drivers went and there was no grain [to carry] or workers went and the ground was wet [and unworkable, the employer] pays their full wage. However, there is a difference between coming carrying a burden and coming empty, and between doing work and sitting idle.

å÷àîø äúí úðé úðà ÷îéä ãøá ðåúï ùëøå îùìí à''ì çáéáé àîø àé äåàé äúí (äåä éäéáðà ìéä) [ö"ì ìà äåä éäéáðà ìéä àìà - öàï ÷ãùéí] ëôåòì áèì

2.

It says there that a Chacham taught [the above Beraisa] in front of Rav "he pays them their full wage." [Rav] said that R. Chiya said "if I were there, I would pay him only like an idle worker!"

àìîà ÷øé ìéä ôåòì áèì åîùîò ìâîøé ëîå (ùôéøù) [ö"ì ùôéøùúé - öàï ÷ãùéí] åìà ëîå ùôéøù (øù''é åø''ç ëìì) [ö"ì åø''ç ëìì åâí ìà îîù ëôé' ä÷åðèøñ - ùéèä î÷åáöú]

3.

Inference: He calls him an idle worker. This connotes like I explained, and not like R. Chananel explained at all! It is also not totally like Rashi explained.

(åîéäå) [ö"ì åòåã - ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí] ÷ùéà îäà ãúðï áôø÷ àéæäå ðùê (ùí ñç.) àéï îåùéáéï çðååðé ìîçöéú ùëø àìà à''ë ðåúï ìå ùëøå ëôåòì áèì

(n)

Question: Another difficulty [for Rashi] is the Mishnah in Bava Metzi'a (68a). Ploni may not appoint a grocer [to sell Ploni's merchandise] for half the profit, unless he pays him wages like an idle worker. (The Seifa says that the same applies if he gave to him money to buy goods);

åîôøù áâîøà ëôåòì áèì ùì àåúä îìàëä ãáèì îéðä åöøéëà

1.

The Gemara explains like a worker idle from the job he neglected. It was needed to teach this in both cases;

ãàé àùîòéðï øéùà çðååðé îùåí ãìéú ìéä èøçà àáì ñéôà ãàéú ìéä èøçà àéîø ìà ñâé ìéä ëôåòì áèì

2.

Had it taught so [only] in the Reisha regarding a grocer, [one might have thought that] this is because there is no toil, but in the Seifa, that he has toil, it does not suffice like an idle worker.

åàîàé ñ''ã ãìà úñâé ìéä ëôåòì áèì åäìà (ëì æä ëãéðå) [ö"ì æäå ëì ãéðå - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ùðåúðéï ìå éåúø ìôé îä ùäåà èåøç

3.

Summation of question: Why would one think that it does not suffice like an idle worker? This is his entire law, that they give to him more, according to his toil!

åòåã ãááøééúà ôìéâé äúí ëîä äåà ùëøå áéï îøåáä áéï îåòè ãáøé ø' îàéø ø' éäåãä àåîø àôéìå ìà èáì òîå àìà áöéø ëå' ø' ùîòåï àåîø ðåúï ìå ùëøå îùìí

(o)

Strengthening of question: Further, in a Beraisa there [Tana'im] argue. How much is his wage? R. Meir says, it is much or a little. R. Yehudah says, even if he merely dipped [his bread] with him in [the employer's] brine. R. Shimon says, he gives to him his full wage;

åäùúà îúðé' ø' ùîòåï ùæäå ùëøå îùìí åáúåñôúà îùîò ãîúðé' ëø' îàéø ã÷úðé äîåùéá çáéøå áçðåú ìîçöéú ùëø ðåúï ìå ùëøå ëôåòì áèì ãáøé ø' îàéø

1.

Now, our Mishnah is R. Shimon, that this is his full wage. The Tosefta connotes that our Mishnah is R. Meir, for it teaches that one who appoints a grocer for half the wages, he pays him wages like an idle worker. R. Meir says so!

åòåã ÷úðé ñéôà [ö"ì ãúåñôúà - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ø' ùîòåï àåîø ðåúï ìå ùëøå îùìí àéðå ãåîä òåùä îìàëä ìéåùá åáèì éåùá áçîä ìéåùá áöì

2.

Also, the Seifa of the Tosefta teaches, R. Shimon says, he gives to him his full wage. One who works is unlike one who sits idle. One who sits in the sun is unlike one who sits in the shade.

åìôéøåù ä÷åðèøñ ãùîòúéï åãááà îöéòà ÷ùéà

3.

According to Rashi in our Sugya and in Bava Metzi'a, this is difficult!

àáì ìôé îä ùôéøùúé ãëôåòì áèì äééðå áéåùá åáèì ìâîøé ðéçà åìà ÷ùä îéãé äà ã÷àîø öøéëà [ö"ì áâîøà - ùéèä î÷åáöú]

(p)

Observation: However, according to what I explained, that like an idle worker means that he sits totally idle, it is fine. (R. Meir says like an idle worker, for he does not consider what he does now. R. Shimon gives more based on the toil of what he does now. This is why he says "one who works is unlike one who sits idle...") And it is not difficult at all what it says in the Gemara "we need to teach both [the Reisha and Seifa]."

åáéï îøåáä áéï îåòè ã÷àîø ø' îàéø äééðå áéï äéä òåñ÷ áîìàëä îøåáä áéï äéä òåñ÷ áîìàëä îåòèú [ö"ì ìòåìí ðåúï ìå ëôåòì áèì - ùéèä î÷åáöú, öàï ÷ãùéí]

1.

And R. Meir said "whether much or a little", i.e. whether he was [until now] engaged in a great Melachah or a small Melachah. Always, he pays him like an idle worker.

åø' ùîòåï àåîø ðåúï ìå ùëøå îùìí ùàåîãéí ëîä äéä øåöä ìéèåì åìáèåì îîìàëä ëáéãä ùäéä òåñ÷ áä åéòñå÷ áîìàëä [ö"ì ÷ìä - öàï ÷ãùéí] ëæå ãäééðå èôé îãøáé îàéø

2.

R. Shimon says, he gives to him his full wage. We estimate how much he would want to take and be idle from the heavy Melachah he was engaged in, and engage in a light Melachah like this. This is more than R. Meir's [opinion];

åéåùá åáèì ãúåñôúà ìàå áèì ìâîøé àìà îàåúä îìàëä äçîåøä

3.

"He sits idle" of the Tosefta is not totally idle, rather, from the severe [hard] job.

(åøáéðå çððàì) [ö"ì åø"ú - äâø"à] ôéøù ùí ëôåòì áèì ëâåï àãí áèì ùàéðå îåöà îé éùëéøðå åäåìê åáèì åäéä îùúëø á÷ì

(q)

Explanation #4: R. Tam explained there "like an idle worker", like an idle man who does not find someone to hire him, and he is Batel, and he would be hired easily (for a small amount);

åìà éúï ìå ëîå ùôåòìéí äåìëéí òëùéå ùäí áéå÷ø äøáä îùëéøéï ëâåï ùäéä ðùëø òëùéå áùúé ñìòéí åáàåúä ùòä äéä áèì ìà éäéä ðåèì àìà ñìò:

1.

He does not give to him like workers go (are hired) for now, that they are hired for very much. E.g. if he was hired now for two Sela'im, and when he was Batel, he would receive only a Sela.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF