Shabbos Chart #11
Chart for Shabbos Daf 61b
WHAT MAKES A KAMEI'A OR DOCTOR "MUMCHAH?"
| (A) HEALED ONLY ONE PERSON |
(B) HEALED THREE PEOPLE |
||
| WRITTEN BY ONE DOCTOR | |||
| 1 | SAME KAMEI'A THREE TIMES | Kamei'a: Yes (2) (3) Doctor : No (4) |
Kamei'a: Yes (2) Doctor : No (4) |
| 2 | THREE DIFFERENT KAMEI'AS (1) | Kamei'a: No Doctor : Safek (5) |
Kamei'a: No Doctor : Yes |
| WRITTEN BY THREE DOCTORS | |||
| 1 | SAME KAMEI'A THREE TIMES | Kamei'a: Yes (2) Doctor : No |
Kamei'a: Yes Doctor : No |
| 2 | THREE DIFFERENT KAMEI'AS (1) | Kamei'a: No Doctor : No |
Kamei'a: No Doctor : No |
==========
FOOTNOTES:
==========
(1) According to RASHI, "Kamei'a" refers to the text that is written in the amulet. Even if it was written in three different amulets, it is considered one Kamei'a. According to TOSFOS (DH Ad), "Kamei'a" refers to the actual parchment upon which the text is written. If the identical text was written on another parchment, it is not considered the same Kamei'a. (See Insights)
(2) Even though one doctor wrote it, and he wrote it for only one sick person, we do not attribute the success to the doctor's expertise but rather we attribute it to the Kamei'a. It is more logical that the cure is connected to the Kamei'a, since its success is more scientific and less attributable to luck (RASHI 61b DH Mazlei, RAN) or because it is the primary healing agent (because without the Kamei'a, there is nothing that the doctor or sick person could do; RITVA. See also TOSFOS 61a, DH Af Al Gav the first and 61b, DH Cha). (See Insights).
(3) However, the TOSFOS HA'ROSH writes that according to Rashi, in this case the Kamei'a does not become Mumchah, since its success could be attributed to a combination of two Mazals -- either that of the doctor or that of the sick person. Only when the cure could be attributed to only one other possible source, then we go ahead and attribute it to the Kamei'a. (See Insights.) Rashi's source for such a ruling could be Rav Papa's statement that if a Kamei'a was written three times for "three" sick people, it becomes a Mumchah. This implies that if it was written for just one sick person three times, it is not a Mumchah, see Tosfos DH Chad.
(4) This is because we attribute the success to the Kamei'a (see earlier, footnote 2). However, RASHI writes that nonetheless the doctor becomes Mumchah for this Kamei'a (Rashi, 61b, DH v'Ha, and DH Gavra Lo Ismechi, and this is also the intention of Rashi 61a, DH d'Mumchah). It is difficult to understand, though, what use is the doctor's Mumchah-status for this Kamei'a, if, anyway, the Kamei'a itself is Mumchah for every doctor who writes it? Perhaps his Mumchah-status helps that if the Kamei'a were to lose its status of Mumchah by being used three consecutive times by other doctors without success, it would still be considered Mumchah when written by this doctor who has Mumchah-status for writing this Kamei'a. (M. KORNFELD -- See Insights.)
(5) This is Rav Papa's question (61b) that is not answered.