16,374
edits
Klalei Halacha: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Safek Safeka with Chezkat Isur
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==Safek Safeka== | ==Safek Safeka== | ||
# Some say that safek safeka is only permitted after the fact.<Ref> The Reem on Smag Megillah writes that safek safeka is only permitted after the fact. See Rosh Bechorot 9a</ref> Many others disagree.<ref> Rav Ovadia in Chazon Ovadia 1:202 citing Perach Shoshan EH 3:2, Kol Eliyahu YD 2:2, Rosh A"Z 2:35</ref> | # Some say that safek safeka is only permitted after the fact.<Ref> The Reem on Smag Megillah writes that safek safeka is only permitted after the fact. See Rosh Bechorot 9a</ref> Many others disagree.<ref> Rav Ovadia in Chazon Ovadia 1:202 citing Perach Shoshan EH 3:2, Kol Eliyahu YD 2:2, Rosh A"Z 2:35</ref> | ||
==Safek Safeka MShem Echad== | |||
# A safek safeka that both sefakot rely on the same leniency isn't a safek safeka and is termed safek safeka mshem echad.<ref>Tosfot Ketubot 9a</ref> If one of the sefakot permit more than the other it is a valid safek safeka.<ref>Shach Klalei Safek Safeka n. 12. His proof is Tosfot Avoda Zara 38b with regards to Stam Kli Eino Ben Yomo.</ref> | |||
==Safek Derabbanan Lkula - Safek Eched Deoritta Safek Eched Derabbanan== | ==Safek Derabbanan Lkula - Safek Eched Deoritta Safek Eched Derabbanan== | ||
# Rashba Brachot 31a cites a dispute regarding something which is a Biblically forbidden but there’s a doubt if it is forbidden and additionally another reason why it might not be a Biblical prohibition but would be a rabbinic one. Do we say safek safeka in such a case? | # Rashba Brachot 31a cites a dispute regarding something which is a Biblically forbidden but there’s a doubt if it is forbidden and additionally another reason why it might not be a Biblical prohibition but would be a rabbinic one. Do we say safek safeka in such a case? | ||
# The Gemara Pesachim 9a implies that a case where there’s a doubt if it was checked for chametz and additionally there’s a doubt if bitul chametz occurred it must be checked again. That seems to prove that it isn’t a safek safeka and is forbidden. The Rashba answers that chametz might be more serious than other prohibitions. The Tosfot HaRash Pesachim 9a answers that the case was where there was no bitul. They’re both assuming that we would apply safek safeka in such a case. | # The Gemara Pesachim 9a implies that a case where there’s a doubt if it was checked for chametz and additionally there’s a doubt if bitul chametz occurred it must be checked again. That seems to prove that it isn’t a safek safeka and is forbidden. The Rashba answers that chametz might be more serious than other prohibitions. The Tosfot HaRash Pesachim 9a answers that the case was where there was no bitul. They’re both assuming that we would apply safek safeka in such a case. | ||
# Do we follow that answer of the Rashba or Rash? Locally in Brachot 31a this question which the Rashba was discussing affects a case of food brought into the house unprocessed whether it is exempt from trumah altogether. The Gra YD 331:84 writes that we follow the strict opinion in that discussion and accordingly we’d be lenient to consider it a safek safeka. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Derech Emunah Maaser 3:63 holds that the Rambam is lenient and if so we’d be strict about the safek safeka. | # Do we follow that answer of the Rashba or Rash? Locally in Brachot 31a this question which the Rashba was discussing affects a case of food brought into the house unprocessed whether it is exempt from trumah altogether. The Gra YD 331:84 writes that we follow the strict opinion in that discussion and accordingly we’d be lenient to consider it a safek safeka. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Derech Emunah Maaser 3:63 holds that the Rambam is lenient and if so we’d be strict about the safek safeka. | ||
# | # Shach Klalei Safek Safeka YD 110:16 writes that is a safek safeka. A proof for this can be found in Rama YD 122:9 and Shach 122:8. | ||
# Application: Rabbi Akiva Eiger OC 184 says it about if a woman isn't sure if she said birkat hamazon that she doesn't have to repeat it. | |||
# How it works: The [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=19550&st=&pgnum=33 Teshuva Mahava 234] explains that seemingly it is a safek that isn't mithapech since one safek is whether it is Biblical or rabbinic. Either way according to that safek it is forbidden. He explains that on a Biblical level it is a safek safeka that is mithapech. | |||
==Safek Safeka With Kulot that are Soter One Another== | ==Safek Safeka With Kulot that are Soter One Another== | ||
| Line 25: | Line 29: | ||
# Rabbi Akiva Eiger megillah 5b s.v. nitkashti seems to be assuming unlike tosfot bk 11 as he’s trying to explain why the gemara ask on rebbe who did melacha maybe it was because of safek derabbanan. There he backs down because of pri chadash that safek dvar shyesh lo matirin doesn’t apply to a machloket haposkim. See R’ Yitzchak Yosef’s article on tartei dsatrei bderabbanan in Ayin Yitzchak Shulchan Marechet p.55 who quotes his father’s answer (Chazon Ovadia 1:13:198) to this R’ Akiva Eiger based on tosfot bk 11 and nidah 27 and the yerushalmi megilah. | # Rabbi Akiva Eiger megillah 5b s.v. nitkashti seems to be assuming unlike tosfot bk 11 as he’s trying to explain why the gemara ask on rebbe who did melacha maybe it was because of safek derabbanan. There he backs down because of pri chadash that safek dvar shyesh lo matirin doesn’t apply to a machloket haposkim. See R’ Yitzchak Yosef’s article on tartei dsatrei bderabbanan in Ayin Yitzchak Shulchan Marechet p.55 who quotes his father’s answer (Chazon Ovadia 1:13:198) to this R’ Akiva Eiger based on tosfot bk 11 and nidah 27 and the yerushalmi megilah. | ||
# With respect to tefillah see tosfot brachot 2a and kehilat yakov that avid kmar is unique because of elu velu. | # With respect to tefillah see tosfot brachot 2a and kehilat yakov that avid kmar is unique because of elu velu. | ||
==Safek Safeka with Chezkat Isur== | |||
# Some poskim disallow a safek safeka if it contradicts a chezkat isur,<ref>Shach 110:27, Taz 110:15</ref> while others permit it.<ref>Rama 110:9, Pri Chadash safek safeka 16. See Rashba teshuva 401</ref> Everyone agrees that a safek safek safeka works even if there's a chezkat isur.<ref>Shach 110:28</ref> | |||
==Safek Safeka Lheter against a Safek Safeka Lisur== | |||
# If there are three safekot to permit something and only two to forbid it it is still considered a safek safeka and it is permitted.<ref>Rama 96:4 since it might not be cut with a non-kosher knife and the food might not be charif and the knife was eino ben yomo. The knife being eino ben yomo itself is a safek safeka. </ref> | |||
==Sources== | ==Sources== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
