top of page

Parshas Beshalach (Shabbos Shirah) 5784

בבא קמא עט:

The Mishnah states: "אין מגדלין בהמה דקה בארץ ישראל" - "one may not raise small animals in א"י." Rashi explains this תקנה was instituted out of concern for ישוב א"י, since small animals wander off and eat the vegetation of other fields, it was decreed to not own them. The Gemara later (.פ) records that there was a חסיד whose heart was hurting (גונח מלבו). His doctor prescribed that he be יונק hot milk from a עז (goat) every morning. To facilitate this, he tied a goat to his bed to have it readily available to him. When his חברים came in to be מבקר חולה, they saw the עז and turned to leave, declaring there is a armed robber in this house (referring to the goat)and we are entering to visit? The שיטה brings the מאירי who holds this חסיד was a חולה שיש בו סכנה and even though we know אין דבר עומד במקום סכנת נפשות and this חסיד should be מותר to own the עז as his cure, the מאירי says from this story we see that a איסור that is אסור משום תקנה because of a חשש הפסד to others, it is "ראוי להחמיר" not be oiver even בסכנת נפשות. The מהרש"א wonders why his חברים were upset at him if he did this for רפואה? He therefore says that maybe he was a חולה שאין בו סכנה and therefore had no היתר to own the עז. The הגהות מהר"ב רנשבורג (on the Daf), mentions both פשטים of the מאירי and the מהרש"א and also brings the Gemara [כתובות ס.] that says explicitly that a גונח מלבו is מותר to be יונק on שבת from a עז because it’s only מפרק כלאחר יד and במקום צער לא גזרו רבנן. He says on theמהרש"א – "ודבריו תמוהים קצת", how can the מהרש"א learn he was not בסכנה and that’s why the חברים were upset at him, the Gemara says that one may be oiver a רבנן even if it’s only במקום צער, so why would they be upset?

The שו"ע [חו"מ שנח, סי' ד'] says that if one is in a מצב of סכנת נפשות and the only way to save himself is by stealing from someone, he may do so, but must have in mind to pay him back. [קובץ שיעורים אות פח] ר' אלחנן quotes the same Gemara [כתובות ס.] that the מהר"ב רנשבורג brings and says that it seems from there that a גונח בלבו is not a סכנה and so it seems from our Gemara as well, otherwise the חברים would not have gotten upset at the חסיד, because we know nothing stands in the way of פיקו"נ. R’ Elchonon brings the above מאירי that says he was a מסוכן and because it was a תקנת חכמים because of פסידה to others, it is ראוי להחמיר. R’ Elchonon says ותימה! It is certainly permissible for one to steal in order to save his life (see above מחבר). The [עירובין כא:] תורת חיים comments on the story about when ר' עקיבא was being held in prison for teaching Torah in public, he chose to use his only water for נטילת ידים and said "מוטב אמות מיתת עצמי ולא אעבור על דעת חבירי", we see from here that if one chooses, he may be מחמיר and be מוסר נפש not to be עובר a איסור. He says this is apparent from our Gemara also, as we see the חברים expected the איש חסיד to be מוסר נפש and not be עובר a תקנת חכמים. ר' זילברשטיין [חשוקי חמד] brings that a בן תורה complained to ר' חיים קנייבסקי זצ"ל that he was גונח בלב and Rav Chaim told him to be יונק חלב עזים, and he was cured. ר' זילברשטיין says he asked ר' חיים from a תשובת מהרי"ל who writes not to use any רפואות from the Gemara because one may not administer it exactly and when it doesn’t cure him he will be מוציא לעז על החכמים. עיי"ש.


--- Click here to view the PDF version ---


bottom of page