The Torah prohibits the wanton destruction of things that have value.
כי־תצור אל־עיר ימים רבים להלחם עליה לתפשה לא תשחית את עצה לנדח עליו גרזן כי ממנו תאכל ואתו לא תכרת כי האדם עץ השדה לבא מפניך במצור
Incomprehensible Gemara in Shabbos 140b.
ואמר רב חסדא: האי מאן דאפשר ליה למיכל נהמא דשערי ואכל דחיטי קעבר משום ״בל תשחית״. ואמר רב פפא: האי מאן דאפשר למישתי שיכרא ושתי חמרא — עובר משום ״בל תשחית״. ולאו מילתא היא — ״בל תשחית״ דגופא עדיף.
I once used this in Reb Moshe's house. The rebbitzen, my wife's grandmother, was pushing desert, and I was full, so I declined. She said "I will have to throw it out, and that is bal tashchis!" Having experienced this conversation many times with my mother, I responded to the Rebbitzen with something that had stood me in good stead at home - "״בל תשחית דגופא עדיף and explained what I meant. Reb Moshe smiled and took my side.
But let's go back to the Gemara.
It is very hard to believe that Rav Chisda and Rav Pappa would hold that it is bal tashchis to spend extra unless there is an objective nutritional or medicinal benefit to be gained from the more expensive item, that paying more for a more enjoyable food is bal tashchis.
And even if you say that Rav Chisda did not mean you're oiver on a deoraysa, and he was saying it derech mussar, it is still asking too much. Does Rav Chisda mean that if you are not Reb Yehuda HaNasi, who famously said that he never ate anything for pleasure, only because it was necessary for kiyum haguf or to demonstrate his authority (כתובות ק"ד: לא נהניתי אפילו באצבע קטנה. תוס'- דאמרינן במדרש עד שאדם מתפלל שיכנס תורה לתוך גופו יתפלל שלא יכנסו מעדנים לתוך גופו ומייתי הא עובדא דרבי) then you are doing an avla, you have מדות מגונות?
And worse. The Gemara answers לאו מילתא היא, "That's not true at all. Harm to the body is worse than waste of money." Does that mean that the Gemara accepts Rav Chisda's philosophy, but says it does not apply here because the health benefit outweighs the monetary cost? Does that mean that Rav Chisda disagreed, and held that the health benefit is not that important, so spending extra is wasteful? The whole Gemara is incomprehensible. And so you look at the Maharasha, and what he says makes your hair stand on end. To the extent that you have to wonder if he really wrote this, and if he did, whether he wrote it during the month of Adar:
ואמר רב פפא האי מאן דאפשר למשתי שיכרא כו' ולאו מלתא היא כו'. ורב פפא לטובת עצמו אמרה שהוא היה עושה שכר כדאמרי' פ' ע"פ דאמר רב פפא אי לאו דעבדי שיכרא לא איעתרו וק"ל:
(That Gemara in Pesachim actually says that the quote might have been from either Rav Pappa or Rav Chisda, or perhaps both, and they are the baal memras in our Gemara:
אמר רב פפא אי לא דרמאי שכרא לא איעתרי א"ד אמר רב חסדא אי לא דרמאי שכרא לא איעתרי)
The Sfas Emes takes Rav Chisda at face value, that only health benefit justifies higher expenditure.
Worse than all of this, there are certain poskim that write that Rav Chisda's rule is true lehalacha, that the Gemara accepts the essence of Rav Chisda/Pappa, and only disagrees in cases where there is some nutritional benefit from the more expensive item. I am dust on the soles of their shoes, and I beg their forgiveness, and they know so much more than me, and are certainly more holy than I am, but that's ridiculous.
The Meiri says that Rav Chisda is talking to poor people, and telling them that they need to be vigilant about their spending. It is a warning to the poor, or to bnei Torah that learn in poverty, to be extremely deliberate in their expenditures, and not even think about spending more because "it tastes better." Either the Meiri is learning that the term bal tashchis is not meant literally here, or that bal tashchis is situational - in an arid land, wasting water is bal tashchis, but it is not when Lake Michigan is flooding the Chicago shoreline. This probably is useful in understanding the problem the nosei keilim have with the Rama in 296
ונוהגין לשפוך מכוס של יין על הארץ קודם שסיים בורא פרי הגפן כדי שלא יהיה הכוס פגום וטעם השפיכה דאמרינן כל בית שלא נשפך בו יין כמים אין בו סימן ברכה ועושין כן לסימן טוב בתחלת השבוע גם שופכין מן הכוס לאחר הבדלה ומכבין בו הנר ורוחצים בו עיניו משום חיבוב המצוה:
But the Meiri's interpretation requires that we limit Rav Chisda/Pappa's words to poor people, and also wonder about the use of the term bal tashchis.
So I have two good explanations. One from RYF Perlow on the Smag, which is pretty good, but leaves Rav Chisda difficult, and one from my father in law shlitah, which is good all around
הגר"י פערלא בביאור לספר המצוות של רס"ג (ל"ת רמט)
"ולכן נראה דודאי מאי דקאמר ולאו מילתא היא, על עיקר מילתא הוא דקאמר דלאו מילתא היא, כלומר דלא שייך הכא איסורא דבל תשחית כלל. ומאי דמסיק בל תשחית דגופא עדיף, לדבריהם הוא דקאמר, דלדבריהם דשייך בזה בל תשחית א"כ גם בגוף שייך בזה בל תשחית ובל תשחית דגופא עדיף. אבל לקושטא דמילתא לא שייך בזה בל תשחית כלל לא בלחם ויין ולא בגוף".
My father in law shlita, Rav Reuven Feinstein: (and it turns out that the Smak, brought at the end of this discussion, would agree with the tochen, but not the way to see it in the Gemara.)
Rav Chisda personally did not enjoy one more than the other, and the same for Rav Pappa. For them, the increased cost of wheat/wine was absurd - like diamonds, people only thought them precious because they are knowingly participating in a self effected fraud. A rational person would say there was no difference - in a blind test, you wouldn't be able to tell which was which, like vodka without labels on the bottle. Additionally, they did not think there was any nutritional difference between them. If so, the extra money was simply wasted. The Gemara responds that first of all, there is a real difference in taste, and that, of course, justifies the extra expenditure. And furthermore, even for people that cannot discern the difference, wine and wheat have health benefits over beer and barley.
But Grey Goose would still be bal tashchis.
Ok, to be perfectly honest, I don't really believe that. Perception affects experience, and presentation and anticipation physically influence taste, among other experiences. As the Gemara succinctly ( יומא ע'ד ב) says, המאכילך מן במדבר למען ענותך רבי אמי ורבי אסי חד אמר אינו דומה מי שיש לו פת בסלו למי שאין לו פת בסלו וחד אמר אינו דומה מי שרואה ואוכל למי שאינו רואה ואוכל טואמר רב יוסף מכאן רמז לסומין שאוכלין ואין שבעין And, with apologies to the Ramchal, החיצוניות מעוררת את הפנימיות.
If you like likkutim, Eitz Hasadeh, a book about Bal Tashchis from one Yitzchak Shtesman, See here in the sefer.
If I may attempt to alleviate your dismay at the words of the Maharsha, I would suggest that he does not ch"v mean to insinuate that R' Pappa was "paskening" something he didnt believe in order to gain monetarily. Of course R' Pappa believed it to be true. Maybe the Maharsha is addressing why R' Pappa felt the need to repeat what R' Chisda essentially said already, with a different example- and the answer being that he wanted to give people a reason to buy beer (from him). Nothing wrong with that! And that would also explain why the Maharsha felt there was a need to comment on R' Pappa and not on R' Chisda- as we know, the Maharsha is not one to throw a "geshmake he'ara" out there without some sort of kashya that needs to be addressed.
ReplyDeleteGood. That's a nice approach. I have to put it in. Rav Pappa was just saying that Reb Chisda's idea applies just as well to beer, so all the baalei mussar should stop drinking wine, and drink more beer. I think that irrespective of Reb Chisda, this is a good idea.
Delete