Page 274 - Tzurba M'Rabanan Volume1

272 · Hilchot Purim Tzurba M’Rabanan

and therefore the sender fulfills his obligation. sender fulfills the mitzva.
The Pri Chadash on the other hand held like the A similar logic to the Korban Netanel’s expla-
former reason; that the purpose is that every per- nation of the Rema can be found in a different
son should have what to eat at the meal and that’s context altogether, but highlights the same prin-
why mechila won’t help. ciple. The first Mishna of Bava Batra states that
13
According to the Chatam Sofer’s explanation if two neighbors share one garden they can force
of the Rema (namely the purpose is to strength- each other to build a fence or wall in order to
en bonds of friendship), similarly in our scenario prevent the other from seeing into their portion
of diabetes there doesn’t have to be an actual giv- (this is called hezek r’iya, damage through sight,
ing as long as there is a stronger bond of friend- and is equivalent to physical damage). The Rosh
14
ship. As long as the recipient who has diabetes is states that if the two neighbors were mochel each
pleased that his friend gave him mishloach manot, other they can’t change their mind later on and
even though he cannot eat it, the sender has ful- demand building the wall, while other Rishonim
filled the mitzva. disagree. Rabbi Elchanan Wasserman asks:
15
However the Korban Netanel has a different mechila should only work when someone owes
9
explanation of the Rema, and explains his ruling the other something due to a prior reason such as
even according to the reason for mishloach manot
being that every person should have what to eat a loan or caused physical damage, and once there
for the meal. The Mishna in Nedarim states that is mechila the debt is gone. In our case though,
10
if one took a vow not to enjoy anything from his every moment there is new damage through
friend unless that friend accepts a certain gift sight, and therefore every moment there is a new
from him, if the gift is not accepted then the vow debt, so how does mechila help? The answer ac-
applies and the person is not allowed to enjoy an- cording to Rabbi Elchanan is that the Rosh un-
ything from his friend. derstood that mechila is an acceptance of the debt
However, the friend could say that it is as if he and an immediate return of it as a gift. This way, if
received the gift and then the vow does not apply. the neighbors were mochel, it is as if the money to
The reason behind this is that since the friend build the separating wall was given and returned,
11
could actually accept the gift and immediately re- hence they can’t demand it again even though
turn it, there is no need for all the back and forth, there is new damage every moment. The Rishon-
12
and it is as if the gift was accepted. According to im who argue with the Rosh hold that mechila is
this explanation the Rema is also understanda- plain forgiveness and so would only help in a sit-
ble: Since regarding mishloach manot the recip- uation where the debt is a one-time obligation.
ient could actually accept the mishloach manot Accordingly we have given two definitions of
and return it immediately, there is no need for all mechila:
the back and forth. By being mochel, it is as if the 1. An acceptance and return of the object
recipient accepted the mishloach manot, and the (Rosh)

9. Korban Netanel on Megilla 1:7:6
10. Mishna, Masechet Nedarim 63b
11. Chidushei HaRashba, Nedarim 24a (brought also by the Ran there)
12. Hafuchei mitarta lama li
13. I heard this idea from Rabbi Doron Befler.
14. Rosh, Bava Batra 1:2
15. Kovetz Shiurim, Bava Batra Siman 1

This volume is not to be distributed. Copies are for the personal use of purchaser only.