[Avodah] Kol DePorish MeRubbah Porish

[Rabbi Meir G. Rabi]

R Micha argued that according to Tosafos (Chullin 95a "sefeiqo assur")
qavua is when the item that is assur isn't niqar.

Now let’s think about this
The classic case of KaVuA is where Chaim enters a butcher shop
1 of 10 in the city
9 of which are K and one is non-K
Chaim is thinking about a complicated RaMBaM all the while
And later as he is strolling down the street with his shopping
can no longer recall if he bought snags from the non-K for the dog
Or from the K shop for the family
This is KaVuA, 50/50 and Assur
Even though most of the shops are K.

Now in what sense and at what time
Are the snags not Nikker?
R Micha, Why do you suggest they are not Nikker?

Compare that to that very bag of snags
Dropped by Chaim in horror when he realised he may be carrying non-K snags
[although any clear minded person would have just decided to use those
snags for the dog – oif a MaAseh one asks no Qs]
Now Dovi finds that very bag of snags and is advised by his Rabbi
That they are K bcs it is Porish, and most of the shops are K.
I would suggest that THESE are not Nikkar.


R Micha also advises that RAE [Tesh 136] defines qavua
when the issur was once observed.
I do not know what that means
The very same bag of snags was certainly observed by SOMEBODY

I think R Micha means to say
Rov applies when those who find it
NEVER knew/could have known its true status
Qavua applies when those who have it
KNEW or could have known its status

R Micha’s you describe
Safeiq in metzi'us vs safeiq in din
to differentiate KaVua fron Kol DePorish
Is it not simpler and more elegant to say
One is a TaAroves – that is Kol DePorish and we follow the majority
It is as though all the shops are unidentified and mixed
The other is not a TaAroves – that is KaVuA and we CANNOT follow the
majority
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20240908/4a979bc6/attachment.htm>