POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by R. Yakov Blinder
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Moed Katan 3
MOED KATAN 3 (1 Cheshvan) - dedicated by Reb Mordechai Rabin
(London/Yerushalayim) l'Iluy Nishmas his father, ha'Ga'on Rav Gedalya
Rabinowitz (Manchester, England)
1) WHY DOES THE MISHNAH PERMIT WATERING ON SHEMITAH? (cont.)
(a) Answer #2 (Rava): Even the Chachamim (who say Shemitah is
mid'Oraisa nowadays) would permit watering, although it
is a derivative of either "Plowing" or "Sowing". This is
because only the four things mentioned in the Torah are
prohibited on Shemitah (mid'Oraisa): Harvesting (grain,
etc.), Picking grapes, Sowing and Pruning. All other
types of working the land are mid'Rabanan and they were
lenient in cases of loss, as above, 6a.
7) DOES ONE GET MALKOS FOR PLOWING ON SHEMITAH?
(b) Question on Rava: A Beraisa derives from the Torah that
the following are forbidden on Shemitah: Weeding, Hoeing
around a tree, Cutting (not uprooting) weeds, Pruning,
Thinning branches, Supporting a tree, Fertilizing,
Removing stones from soil around tree base, Covering
exposed roots with dirt, Smoking out pests from leaves.
So there are actually many things that are forbidden
(c) Answer: This derivation is only an Asmachta; all these
activities are actually mid'Rabanan.
(d) Question: The above Beraisa also specifically permits
Kishkush (see below), Hoeing around a tree [in
contradiction to 6c - see Rashi], Filling ditches with
water, and Digging circles in the ground around the base
of a vine. But another Beraisa prohibits Kishkush [and
Removing stones from a vineyard]!
(e) Answer: Kishkush can mean two things: Plugging cracks in
trees, which is permitted (to prevent loss), and Hoeing
to improve the tree's quality, which is forbidden.
(a) The Amoraim argue whether or not plowing on Shemitah is
punishable with Malkos *mid'Oraisa*.
(b) Question: Why shouldn't one get Malkos mid'Oraisa for
(c) First answer: R. Ila'a's rule: When there is a Kelal
u'Perat u'Chelal, but the Kelalim are positive (here: "A
Shabbos Shabbason shall be for the land") and the Perat
is negative (here: "You shall not sow, etc."), it is not
judged as a Kelal u'Perat u'Chelal but as a Kelal
u'Perat. This means that only the four things mentioned
specifically are liable to Malkos, but not other labors.
The opinion that rejects Malkos for plowing agrees to R.
Ila'a's rule, the other opinion disagrees.
(d) Second answer: Everyone disagrees with R. Ila'a's rule,
but there's another reason to excuse one from Malkos:
Picking grapes is derivable from Harvesting grain, and
Pruning is derivable from Sowing; the Torah therefore did
not have to mention these two. Since it did mention them,
this shows that it is only these two derivatives (Toldos)
that are forbidden mid'Oraisa, but not other Toldos.
Similarly, one does not receive Malkos for Avos that are
not mentioned in the verses.
1. Question: How can we say other Toldos are not
forbidden by the Torah? There is a Beraisa (quoted
above, 6c) that deduces that many other Toldos are
forbidden by the Torah.
2. Answer: These are only Asmachta'os, as in 6d.
8) THE ADDITIONAL FACET OF SHEMITAH, WHICH IS NOT PUNISHABLE WITH MALKOS
(a) Rav Dimi, while in Eretz Yisrael, heard something about
an "additional facet" of Shemitah, that there is a
derivation from a Pasuk to teach that one is Patur for
violating it. But he couldn't remember the details. Two
possible interpretations are offered:
(b) Answer #1 (R. Elazar): The "additional facet" of Shemitah
is Plowing, which is seemingly prohibited because of the
Kelal u'Perat u'Chelal discussed above. But in fact it is
derived from a Pasuk that there is no punishment for
Plowing, as above 7b.
(c) Answer #2 (R. Yochanan): The "additional facet" of
Shemitah refers to the additional periods of time before
Shemitah during which agricultural labors are forbidden
(orchards are forbidden after Shavu'os; wheat fields
after Pesach). But there is a derivation from a Pasuk
(see below, 8b2) that shows that there is no punishment
for violating these additional periods.
(d) R. Shimon ben Pazi... says that Raban Gamliel's court
abolished these additional periods.
1. Question: A court cannot abolish a ruling of an
earlier court unless it is superior in wisdom and
2. Answer: The enactment was orignally made with the
explicit proviso that it could be nullified in the
3. Question: The additional periods are in fact more than
a Takanah, they are (as R. Asi... said) Halachah
l'Moshe mi'Sinai! How, then, could Raban Gamliel
4. Answer: The Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai forbids work
only after Rosh Chodesh Elul. The early rabbis made
a Takanah (with a proviso permitting future
annulment) to extend this period to Pesach or
Shavu'os. It was this rabbinical extention that R.
5. Question: The additional periods are in fact more than
Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai; they are derived from a
Pasuk (for Rabbi Akiva derived it from: "You shall
rest from Plowing and from Harvesting"). Why did R.
Asi... say that it is a Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai?