Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

October 2, 2021 | 讻状讜 讘转砖专讬 转砖驻状讘

Masechet Beitzah is dedicated by new friends of Hadran in appreciation of all who find new ways to be marbitzei Torah ba-Rabim ve Rabot.

A month of shiurim are sponsored for a refuah shleima for Noam Eliezer ben Yael Chaya v'Aytan Yehoshua.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Beitzah 32 – Shabbat October 2

This is the daf for Shabbat. For Friday’s daf, click here.

Shmuel rules on undoing ropes that are fastened to the ground or to an object. He differentiates between the two regarding how one can do it, however, he does not distinguish between Shabbat and Yom Tov. The Gemara raises a difficulty against him from the braita where a distinction between Shabbat and Yom Tov is made regarding this issue. They answer that Samuel must hold like the tana of a different braita. But even on this, there is a difficulty because some of his words correspond to the words of the tana and some do not. To solve this problem, it is assumed that one part of the braita has to do with an unrelated reason as he holds like Rabbi Nehemiah who has a very strict definition of muktze and only allows the use of a vessel for its usual use and not for any other use. There is also a difficulty on that which the Gemara resolves. Creating a tool on a Yom Tov is forbidden. The Mishnah gives some examples and the Gemara discusses the controversy over what stage is it considered that the utensil is built/finished both for laws of impurity and for Shabbat/Yom Tov. According to Rabbi Yehuda, it is possible to cut a wick in two by using fire. How does this solve the problem that he is creating an object? Six laws were said regarding wicks – three stringencies and three leniencies. What are they? Rabbi Natan Bar Abba brings on behalf of Rav a harsh criticism of the wealthy Jews of Babylonia who showed no mercy. The Gemara brings a number of statements on how difficult it is for a person who has to rely on others for one鈥檚 livelihood. It is said about the following people that they 鈥渉ave no life” 鈥 one who relies on others for one鈥檚 livelihood, one whose wife rules over him, and one whose body is enduring suffering and some say also one who only has one garment to wear. The Mishnah continues with a list of other things that should not be done on Yom Tov because it is considered creating a vessel as well as some other prohibitions. One cannot rake the ashes from an oven unless it affects the quality of the food. It is forbidden to build a stove out of two barrels. Why is it forbidden to do this but it is permitted to take stones in the outhouse and form from it a chair to use as a toilet 鈥 is it not a similar type of 鈥渂uilding鈥?

讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 讻讬 讛讗讬 转谞讗 讚转谞讬讗 讞讜转诪讜转 砖讘拽专拽注 诪转讬专 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪驻拽讬注 讜诇讗 讞讜转讱 讗讞讚 砖讘转 讜讗讞讚 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜砖讘讻诇讬 讘砖讘转 诪转讬专 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪驻拽讬注 讜诇讗 讞讜转讱 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 诪转讬专 讜诪驻拽讬注 讜讞讜转讱

The Gemara responds: It was he, Shmuel, who spoke in accordance with the opinion of that tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to fastenings that are to the ground, e.g., those on doors, one may untie them but not unravel or cut them, both on Shabbat and on a Festival. And with regard to those fastenings of a vessel, on Shabbat one may untie them, but one may not unravel or cut them; on a Festival one may untie, or unravel, or cut them.

转专爪转 诇讱 专讬砖讗 讗诇讗 住讬驻讗 拽砖讬讗

The Gemara challenges further: You have thereby answered the first clause of Shmuel鈥檚 statement, with regard to fastenings attached to the ground, e.g., those on doors, by finding a tanna who permits untying them, as does Shmuel. However, the latter clause is difficult because the baraita states that one may not unravel even ropes of vessels on Shabbat, whereas Shmuel permits unraveling in all cases.

讛讗 诪谞讬 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讛讬讗 讚讗诪专 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 讗讬谉 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讗诇讗 讚专讱 转砖诪讬砖谉

The Gemara answers: In accordance with whose opinion is this baraita? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, whose opinion is a minority view, as he said: All vessels may be handled only in the manner of their designated use. Therefore, the rope may not be cut, not because it is prohibited to unravel it but because one may not handle a knife for this purpose, as the designated use of the knife is cutting food rather than rope.

讗讬 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 诪讗讬 讗讬专讬讗 砖讘转 讗驻讬诇讜 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 谞诪讬 讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 砖谞讬讗 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讘讬谉 砖讘讜转 砖讘转 诇砖讘讜转 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜诪讬 砖谞讬讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara challenges: If it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, why discuss particularly Shabbat? The same halakha should apply even on a Festival, as there is no distinction between Shabbat and Festivals with regard to the halakhot of handling items. And if you say that there is a distinction according to Rabbi Ne岣mya between a rabbinic decree of Shabbat, when a vessel may be moved only for its designated purpose, and a rabbinic decree of a Festival, when it may not be moved for any purpose, there is a problem. Does he differentiate between them in this manner?

讜讛转谞讬 讞讚讗 诪住讬拽讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讗讬谉 诪住讬拽讬谉 讘砖讘专讬 讻诇讬诐 讜转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 诪住讬拽讬谉 讘讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讘讬谉 讘砖讘专讬 讻诇讬诐 讜转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 讗讬谉 诪住讬拽讬谉 诇讗 讘讻诇讬诐 讜诇讗 讘砖讘专讬 讻诇讬诐

But isn鈥檛 it taught in one baraita: On a Festival one may kindle fire with vessels, but one may not kindle fire with shards of vessels, as they are muktze? And it is taught in another baraita: One may kindle fire both with vessels and with shards of vessels. And it is taught in yet another baraita: One may kindle fire neither with vessels nor with shards of vessels.

讜诪砖谞讬 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讛讗 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛

And this contradiction between the baraitot is resolved in the following manner: It is not difficult; this first baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who accepts the law of muktze. One may therefore kindle fire with vessels, as they are not muktze, but not with shards of vessels, as they are muktze and may not be handled. This second baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who does not accept the law of muktze. According to him, one may use shards of vessels as well. This one that prohibits using even vessels that are intact is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, who allows vessels to be used only for their designated purpose. This indicates that Rabbi Ne岣mya prohibits handling even whole vessels on Festivals as well.

转专讬 转谞讗讬 讜讗诇讬讘讗 讚专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛

The Gemara replies: These are two tanna鈥檌m who both hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya. Two later tanna鈥檌m disagreed with each other in reporting the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya. Both agree that one may use vessels only for their designated purpose, but they disagree with regard to whether this halakha applies only on Shabbat or on Festivals as well.

诪转谞讬壮 讗讬谉 驻讜讞转讬谉 讗转 讛谞专 诪驻谞讬 砖讛讜讗 注讜砖讛 讻诇讬 讜讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 驻讞诪讬谉 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜讗讬谉 讞讜转讻讬谉 讗转 讛驻转讬诇讛 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讞讜转讻讛 讘讗讜专

MISHNA: On a Festival, one may not hollow out a piece of clay to form a lamp into which he will place oil and a wick because he thereby creates a vessel. And similarly, one may not produce charcoal at all on a Festival because this is not labor for sustenance. And similarly, one may not cut the wick, as this is considered mending a vessel. Rabbi Yehuda says: If one requires a wick of a particular length, he may cut it by burning it in a fire but not by cutting it with a knife.

讙诪壮 诪讗谉 转谞讗 讚驻讞讬转转 谞专 诪谞讗 讛讜讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讻诇讬 讞专住 诪讗讬诪转讬 诪拽讘诇 讟讜诪讗讛 诪砖谞讙诪专讛 诪诇讗讻转讜 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讗讜诪专 诪砖讬爪专驻讜 讘讻讘砖谉

GEMARA: Who is the tanna who taught that hollowing out a lamp is considered creating a vessel, even if it is not fired in a furnace? Rav Yosef said: It is Rabbi Meir, as it is taught in a baraita with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity: From when is an earthenware vessel susceptible to ritual impurity? It is from when its work is completed, i.e., when the clay has been made into the form of a vessel; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehoshua says: It is from when the vessel is fired in the furnace.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 诪诪讗讬 讚诇诪讗 注讚 讻讗谉 诇讗 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛转诐 讗诇讗 讚讞讝讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 讘讬讛 诪讬讚讬 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 诇诪讗讬 讞讝讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 讘讬讛 驻砖讬讟讬

Abaye said to him: From where do you conclude that this is the same opinion? Perhaps Rabbi Meir stated his opinion only there, with regard to vessels, since they are fit to contain something. Although they cannot hold liquids before being fired in a furnace, they can contain other items. But here, for what use is this lamp fit? The Gemara responds: It can be used to contain small coins.

讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘专讘讬 爪讚讜拽 讛讬讗 讚转谞谉 讗诇驻住讬谉 讞专谞讬讜转 讟讛讜专讜转 讘讗讛诇 讛诪转 讜讟诪讗讜转 讘诪砖讗 讛讝讘

Some say the following version of the discussion: Rav Yosef said: The mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, as we learned: 岣raniyyot pots [ilpasin] are unfinished earthenware pots made together with their covers. The covers are removed after they are fired in a furnace. They are pure with regard to contracting the impurity of a tent over a corpse, as they do not have a receptacle. Earthenware vessels can contract impurity imparted by a corpse only if they have a hollow space that can contain something. But 岣raniyyot pots are rendered impure by the carrying of a zav, even if the zav moved them without actually touching them, as this impurity applies to any earthenware vessels that serve some purpose.

专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘专讘讬 爪讚讜拽 讗讜诪专 讗祝 讟讛讜专讜转 讘诪砖讗 讛讝讘 诇驻讬 砖诇讗 谞讙诪专讛 诪诇讗讻转谉

Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: These vessels are even pure with regard to the impurity imparted by the carrying of a zav because their labor is not completed; therefore, they are not fully formed. This implies that when the pots are completed, they are considered full-fledged vessels, even before they have been fired in a furnace.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讚诇诪讗 注讚 讻讗谉 诇讗 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘专讘讬 爪讚讜拽 讛转诐 讗诇讗 讚讞讝讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 讘讬讛 诪讬讚讬 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 诇诪讗讬 讞讝讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 讘讬讛 驻砖讬讟讬

Abaye said to him: Perhaps it is not so, as it is possible to say that Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, stated his opinion only there, in the case of 岣raniyyot pots, since they are fit to contain something. But here, in the case of a lamp, for what is it fit? The Gemara replies: It is fit to contain small coins.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讬谉 驻讜讞转讬谉 讗转 讛谞专 讜讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 讗诇驻住讬谉 讞专谞讬讜转 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 诪转讬专 讘讗诇驻住讬谉 讞专谞讬讜转 诪讗讬 讞专谞讬讜转 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 注专谞讬讜转 诪讗讬 注专谞讬讜转 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 爪注讬 讞拽诇讬讬转讗

The Sages taught: One may not hollow out a lamp, and one may not create 岣raniyyot pots on a Festival. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel permits creating 岣raniyyot pots. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of 岣raniyyot? Rav Yehuda said: They are pots of a city [iraniyyot]. The Gemara again inquires: What is the meaning of iraniyyot? Abaye said: It means villagers鈥 bowls who will use even clay vessels that have not been fully formed or fired, as they are not particular with regard to half-finished utensils.

讜讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 驻讞诪讬谉 驻砖讬讟讗 诇诪讗讬 讞讝讬 转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 诇讗 谞爪专讻讛 讗诇讗 诇诪讜住专谉 诇讗讜诇讬讬专讬谉 诇讘讜 讘讬讜诐

It is taught in the mishna: And one may not produce charcoal on a Festival. The Gemara challenges: It is obvious that one may perform only labor for sustenance. For what is charcoal fit; what purpose does it have for the sake of sustenance? Rabbi 岣yya taught: It is necessary to teach this halakha only in the case of handing the charcoal over to bathhouse attendants [olyarin] who heat up the bathhouse for that day. One might have thought that since charcoal is used for the sake of washing on a Festival, producing it should be permitted.

讜讘讜 讘讬讜诐 诪讬 砖专讬 讻讚讗诪专 专讘讗 诇讛讝讬注 讜拽讜讚诐 讙讝专讛 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 诇讛讝讬注 讜拽讜讚诐 讙讝专讛

The Gemara questions this: And on that day is it permitted to heat up water for washing? The Sages decreed that one may not wash in a bathhouse on a Festival, even if the water was heated up the day before, and certainly it is prohibited if the water was heated on the Festival itself. The Gemara replies: As Rava said with regard to a different issue, this decree does not refer to actual washing but to entering a bathhouse merely in order to sweat, and it was stated before the enactment of the decree against sweating in a bathhouse. Here, too, one can explain that the statement of Rabbi 岣yya is referring to a case where one entered to sweat, and he entered at a time before the decree was enacted.

讜讗讬谉 讞讜转讻讬谉 讗转 讛驻转讬诇讛 诇砖谞讬诐 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讘住讻讬谉 讚诇讗

It was taught in the mishna: And one may not cut a wick into two, but Rabbi Yehuda permits cutting it by means of fire. The Gemara asks: What is different about cutting a wick with fire as opposed to with a knife, that one may not cut a wick with a knife?

讚拽诪转拽谉 诪谞讗 讘讗讜专 谞诪讬 拽讗 诪转拽谉 诪谞讗 转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讞讜转讻讛 讘讗讜专 讘驻讬 砖转讬 谞专讜转 讗诪专 专讘 谞转谉 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪讜讞讟讬谉 讗转 讛驻转讬诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 诪讗讬 诪讜讞讟讬谉 讗诪专 专讘 讞谞讬谞讗 讘专 砖诇诪讬讗 (诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘) 诇注讚讜讬讬 讞讜砖讻讗

Is it because he thereby mends a vessel? If so, when one cuts it in the fire, he is also preparing a vessel for use. Rabbi 岣yya taught in explanation: He cuts it by fire in the mouth of two candles. In other words, he does not simply cut a wick, but rather inserts a long wick into two lamps, which he subsequently lights in the middle. This indeed leads to the formation of two separate wicks, but only as a result of kindling two lamps. Rav Natan bar Abba said that Rav said: One may mo岣t a wick on a Festival. The term mo岣t was unknown, and the Gemara therefore asks: What is the meaning of the word mo岣t? Rav 岣nina bar Shelemya said in the name of Rav: To remove the dark; in other words, it is permitted to remove the burnt, charcoaled section to make the lamp shine more brightly.

转谞讬 讘专 拽驻专讗 砖砖讛 讚讘专讬诐 谞讗诪专讜 讘驻转讬诇讛 砖诇砖讛 诇讛讞诪讬专 讜砖诇砖讛 诇讛拽诇 诇讛讞诪讬专 讗讬谉 讙讜讚诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇讻转讞诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜讗讬谉 诪讛讘讛讘讬谉 讗讜转讛 讘讗讜专 讜讗讬谉 讞讜转讻讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇砖谞讬诐 诇讛拽诇 诪诪注讻讛 讘讬讚 讜砖讜专讛 讘砖诪谉 讜讞讜转讻讛 讘讗讜专 讘驻讬 砖转讬 谞专讜转

Bar Kappara taught: Six matters were stated with regard to the halakhot of a wick on a Festival, three of which are to be stringent and three of which are to be lenient. The three halakhot to be stringent are: One may not spin or twist it ab initio on a Festival, and one may not singe it in fire before lighting it so that it will burn well, and one may not cut it into two. The three halakhot to be lenient are: One may crush it by hand, as although it is prohibited to twist it into a wick, one may adjust its shape in an unusual manner; and one may soak it in oil so that it will later burn well; and one may cut it by fire in the mouth of two candles.

讜讗诪专 专讘 谞转谉 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘 注转讬专讬 讘讘诇 讬讜专讚讬 讙讬讛谞诐 讛诐 讻讬 讛讗 讚砖讘转讗讬 讘专 诪专讬谞讜住 讗拽诇注 诇讘讘诇 讘注讗 诪谞讬讬讛讜 注住拽讗 讜诇讗 讬讛讘讜 诇讬讛 诪讝讜谞讬 诪讬讝谉 谞诪讬 诇讗 讝讬谞讜讛讜

搂 After citing one teaching in the name of Rav Natan bar Abba, the Gemara quotes a few more statements attributed to the same scholar. Since he is not mentioned often, Rav Natan鈥檚 teachings are arranged together, so that they can be remembered more easily. Rav Natan bar Abba said that Rav said: The wealthy Jews of Babylonia will descend to Gehenna because they do not have compassion on others. This is illustrated by incidents such as this: Shabbetai bar Marinus happened to come to Babylonia. He requested their participation in a business venture, to lend him money and receive half the profits in return, and they did not give it to him. Furthermore, when he asked them to sustain him with food, they likewise refused to sustain him.

讗诪专 讛谞讬 诪注专讘 专讘 拽讗 讗转讜 讚讻转讬讘 讜谞转谉 诇讱 专讞诪讬诐 讜专讞诪讱 讻诇 讛诪专讞诐 注诇 讛讘专讬讜转 讘讬讚讜注 砖讛讜讗 诪讝专注讜 砖诇 讗讘专讛诐 讗讘讬谞讜 讜讻诇 诪讬 砖讗讬谞讜 诪专讞诐 注诇 讛讘专讬讜转 讘讬讚讜注 砖讗讬谞讜 诪讝专注讜 砖诇 讗讘专讛诐 讗讘讬谞讜

He said: These wealthy people are not descendants of our forefathers, but they came from the mixed multitude, as it is written: 鈥淎nd show you compassion, and have compassion upon you, and multiply you, as He has sworn to your fathers鈥 (Deuteronomy 13:18), from which it is derived: Anyone who has compassion for God鈥檚 creatures, it is known that he is of the descendants of Abraham, our father, and anyone who does not have compassion for God鈥檚 creatures, it is known that he is not of the descendants of Abraham, our father. Since these wealthy Babylonians do not have compassion on people, clearly they are not descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

讜讗诪专 专讘 谞转谉 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘 讻诇 讛诪爪驻讛 注诇 砖诇讞谉 讗讞专讬诐 注讜诇诐 讞砖讱 讘注讚讜 砖谞讗诪专 谞讜讚讚 讛讜讗 诇诇讞诐 讗讬讛 讬讚注 讻讬 谞讻讜谉 讘讬讚讜 讬讜诐 讞砖讱 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 讗祝 讞讬讬讜 讗讬谞谉 讞讬讬诐

This is another teaching that Rav Natan bar Abba said that Rav said: Whoever looks to the table of others for his sustenance, the world is dark for him. Everything looks bleak and hopeless to him, for it is stated: 鈥淗e wanders abroad for bread: Where is it? He knows the day of darkness is ready at his hand鈥 (Job 15:23). Rav 岣sda said: Even his life is no life, as he receives no satisfaction from it.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 砖诇砖讛 讞讬讬讛谉 讗讬谞诐 讞讬讬诐 讜讗诇讜 讛谉 讛诪爪驻讛 诇砖诇讞谉 讞讘讬专讜 讜诪讬 砖讗砖转讜 诪讜砖诇转 注诇讬讜 讜诪讬 砖讬住讜专讬谉 诪讜砖诇讬谉 讘讙讜驻讜 讜讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗祝 诪讬 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 讗诇讗 讞诇讜拽 讗讞讚 讜转谞讗 拽诪讗 讗驻砖专 讚诪注讬讬谉 讘诪谞讬讛

In support of this last claim, the Gemara cites a baraita in which the Sages taught: There are three whose lives are not lives, and they are as follows: One who looks to the table of others for his sustenance; and one whose wife rules over him; and one whose body is ruled by suffering. And some say: Even one who has only one robe. Since he cannot wash it properly, he suffers from lice and dirt. The Gemara comments: And the first tanna, who did not include such a person, maintains: It is possible for him to examine his clothes and remove the lice, which would alleviate his suffering.

诪转谞讬壮 讗讬谉 砖讜讘专讬谉 讗转 讛讞专住 讜讗讬谉 讞讜转讻讬谉 讛谞讬讬专 诇爪诇讜转 讘讜 诪诇讬讞

MISHNA: One may not break earthenware on a Festival. And one may not cut paper in order to roast salted fish on it. Earthenware shards or pieces of paper that have been soaked in water were placed on the metal surface or in the oven in which the fish was roasted, so that it would not be burned by the heat.

讜讗讬谉 讙讜专驻讬谉 转谞讜专 讜讻讬专讬诐 讗讘诇 诪讻讘砖讬谉

And one may not sweep out anything that has fallen into an oven or stove that interferes with the baking, such as plaster. But one may press down and flatten any accumulated dust and ashes at the bottom of the oven, which might prevent it from lighting properly.

讜讗讬谉 诪拽讬驻讬谉 砖转讬 讞讘讬讜转 诇砖驻讜转 注诇讬讛谉 讗转 讛拽讚专讛 讜讗讬谉 住讜诪讻讬谉 讗转 讛拽讚专讛 讘讘拽注转 讜讻谉 讘讚诇转 讜讗讬谉 诪谞讛讬讙讬谉 讗转 讛讘讛诪讛 讘诪拽诇 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪转讬专

And one may not draw two barrels together in order to place a pot on them, so that its contents will be cooked by a fire lit between the barrels. And one may not prop a pot that does not stand straight with a piece of wood, in order to prevent it from falling. And similarly, with a door. And one may not lead an animal with a stick in the public domain on a Festival; and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, permits it.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗 诪转拽谉 诪谞讗

GEMARA: With regard to the issue of breaking earthenware and cutting paper, the Gemara explains: What is the reason for this prohibition? Because one is thereby preparing a vessel for use.

讜讗讬谉 讙讜专驻讬谉 转谞讜专 讜讻讬专讬诐 转谞讬 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讬讜住祝 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 谞讞诪谉 讜讗诐 讗讬 讗驻砖专 诇讗驻讜转 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 讙讜专驻讜 诪讜转专 讚讘讬转讛讜 讚专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 谞驻诇 诇讛 讗专讬讞讗 讘转谞讜专讗 讘讬讜诪讗 讟讘讗 讗诪专 诇讛 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讞讝讬 讚讗谞讗 专驻转讗 诪注诇讬讬转讗 讘注讬谞讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诇砖诪注讬讛 讟讜讬 诇讬 讘专 讗讜讜讝讗 讜讗讝讚讛专 诪讞专讜讻讗

It was taught in the mishna: And one may not sweep out an oven or stove. Rabbi 岣yya bar Yosef taught before Rav Na岣an: And if it is not possible to bake unless one sweeps it out, it is permitted. The Gemara relates an incident with regard to the wife of Rabbi 岣yya: A part of a brick fell into her oven on a Festival, preventing her from baking. Rav 岣yya said to her: See, you should know that I want good-quality bread. He thereby stated that it would be impossible unless she removed the brick, making it permissible for her to do so. Similarly, Rava said to his attendant: Roast for me a duck in an oven, and be careful not to singe it. He thereby implied that the attendant may remove all impediments from the oven in order to fulfill this requirement because otherwise it would not be possible to cook without singeing.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬谞讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 诇谉 专讘 讗讞讗 诪讛讜爪诇 讚诪专 砖专拽讬谉 诇讬讛 转谞讜专讗 讘讬讜诪讗 讟讘讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗谞谉 讗专拽转讗 讚驻专转 住诪讻讬谞谉 讜讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讜讗 讚爪讬讬专讬讛 诪讗转诪讜诇 讗诪专 专讘讬谞讗 讜拽讟诪讗 砖专讬

In a related case, Ravina said to Rav Ashi: Rav A岣 from Hutzal said to us that the master, Rav Ashi, allows his attendants to plaster the mouth of the oven for him on a Festival. This was done in order to ensure that the roasted or cooked dish would be fully prepared. Why does this not constitute the prohibited labor of kneading on a Festival? He said to him: We rely on the bank of the Euphrates River. We avoid the labor of kneading by taking sufficiently kneaded mud from the riverbank. The Gemara comments: And this applies only when one wrapped or made some mark on the mud the day before, so that it not be muktze. Ravina said: And as for kneading with ashes for this purpose, it is permitted, since the labor of kneading does not apply to ashes.

讜讗讬谉 诪拽讬驻讬谉 砖转讬 讞讘讬讜转 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗讘谞讬诐 砖诇 讘讬转 讛讻住讗 诪讜转专 诇爪讚讚谉 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讗讬转讬讘讬讛 专讘讛 诇专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗讬谉 诪拽讬驻讬谉 砖转讬 讞讘讬讜转 诇砖驻讜转 注诇讬讛谉 讗转 讛拽讚专讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖讗谞讬 讛转诐 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗 注讘讬讚 讗讛诇讗

搂 It was taught in the mishna: One may not draw two barrels together in order to place a pot on them. Rav Na岣an said: With regard to large stones of a lavatory, upon which one sits to attend to his needs, it is permitted to put them together in the proper manner, so that they may be used on a Festival. Rabba raised an objection to Rav Na岣an: Wasn鈥檛 it taught that one may not draw two barrels together in order to place a pot on them? This seems to indicate that any arrangement resembling building is prohibited. He said to him: There, with regard to barrels, it is different, because one makes a tent. It is not the drawing of the barrels close together that is prohibited. Rather, the placement of the pot over them forms a kind of covering, which is similar to building a tent.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讛 讝讜讟讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 讘谞讛 讗爪讟讘讗 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讚诇讗 注讘讬讚 讗讛诇讗 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讚砖专讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛转诐 讘谞讬谉 拽讘注 讗住专讛 转讜专讛 讘谞讬谉 注专讗讬 诇讗 讗住专讛 转讜专讛 讜讙讝专讜 专讘谞谉 注诇 讘谞讬谉 注专讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讘谞讬谉 拽讘注 讜讛讻讗 诪砖讜诐 讻讘讜讚讜 诇讗 讙讝专讜 讘讬讛 专讘谞谉

Rabba the Younger, so called to distinguish him from the more famous amora known as Rabba, said to Rav Ashi: However, if that is so, then if, on a Festival, one built a solid bench [itztaba], without a gap below the seat, a situation in which one does not make a tent, so too, will you say that it is permitted? He said to him: The two cases are not comparable: There, with regard to a proper construction, such as a bench, the Torah prohibited erecting a permanent construction, but the Torah did not prohibit erecting a temporary construction. The Sages, however, decreed against creating a temporary construction on a Festival due to a permanent construction. However, here, with regard to a lavatory, due to the dignity of the user, the Sages did not decree with regard to it.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗讬 诪讚讜专转讗 诪诇诪注诇讛 诇诪讟讛 砖专讬 诪诇诪讟讛 诇诪注诇讛 讗住讜专

Rav Yehuda said: With Regard to this bonfire, in which the wood is arranged in the form of a house, if one arranges it from above to below it is permitted, as this is not the regular manner of building. However, if one prepares it in the usual fashion, from below to above, it is prohibited, for this is considered building.

Masechet Beitzah is dedicated by new friends of Hadran in appreciation of all who find new ways to be marbitzei Torah ba-Rabim ve Rabot.

A month of shiurim are sponsored by Rabbi Lisa Malik in honor of her daughter, Rivkah Wyner, who recently made aliyah, and in memory of Rivkah's namesake, Lisa's grandmother, Regina Post z"l, a Holocaust survivor from Lubaczow, Poland who lived in Brooklyn, NY.

And for a refuah shleima for Noam Eliezer ben Yael Chaya v'Aytan Yehoshua.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Beitzah: 31-35 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

This week we will learn what is considered designated for use on the Festival and what is not ie. Muktza...

Beitzah 32 – Shabbat October 2

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Beitzah 32 – Shabbat October 2

讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 讻讬 讛讗讬 转谞讗 讚转谞讬讗 讞讜转诪讜转 砖讘拽专拽注 诪转讬专 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪驻拽讬注 讜诇讗 讞讜转讱 讗讞讚 砖讘转 讜讗讞讚 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜砖讘讻诇讬 讘砖讘转 诪转讬专 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪驻拽讬注 讜诇讗 讞讜转讱 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 诪转讬专 讜诪驻拽讬注 讜讞讜转讱

The Gemara responds: It was he, Shmuel, who spoke in accordance with the opinion of that tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to fastenings that are to the ground, e.g., those on doors, one may untie them but not unravel or cut them, both on Shabbat and on a Festival. And with regard to those fastenings of a vessel, on Shabbat one may untie them, but one may not unravel or cut them; on a Festival one may untie, or unravel, or cut them.

转专爪转 诇讱 专讬砖讗 讗诇讗 住讬驻讗 拽砖讬讗

The Gemara challenges further: You have thereby answered the first clause of Shmuel鈥檚 statement, with regard to fastenings attached to the ground, e.g., those on doors, by finding a tanna who permits untying them, as does Shmuel. However, the latter clause is difficult because the baraita states that one may not unravel even ropes of vessels on Shabbat, whereas Shmuel permits unraveling in all cases.

讛讗 诪谞讬 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讛讬讗 讚讗诪专 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 讗讬谉 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讗诇讗 讚专讱 转砖诪讬砖谉

The Gemara answers: In accordance with whose opinion is this baraita? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, whose opinion is a minority view, as he said: All vessels may be handled only in the manner of their designated use. Therefore, the rope may not be cut, not because it is prohibited to unravel it but because one may not handle a knife for this purpose, as the designated use of the knife is cutting food rather than rope.

讗讬 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 诪讗讬 讗讬专讬讗 砖讘转 讗驻讬诇讜 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 谞诪讬 讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 砖谞讬讗 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讘讬谉 砖讘讜转 砖讘转 诇砖讘讜转 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜诪讬 砖谞讬讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara challenges: If it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, why discuss particularly Shabbat? The same halakha should apply even on a Festival, as there is no distinction between Shabbat and Festivals with regard to the halakhot of handling items. And if you say that there is a distinction according to Rabbi Ne岣mya between a rabbinic decree of Shabbat, when a vessel may be moved only for its designated purpose, and a rabbinic decree of a Festival, when it may not be moved for any purpose, there is a problem. Does he differentiate between them in this manner?

讜讛转谞讬 讞讚讗 诪住讬拽讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讗讬谉 诪住讬拽讬谉 讘砖讘专讬 讻诇讬诐 讜转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 诪住讬拽讬谉 讘讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讘讬谉 讘砖讘专讬 讻诇讬诐 讜转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 讗讬谉 诪住讬拽讬谉 诇讗 讘讻诇讬诐 讜诇讗 讘砖讘专讬 讻诇讬诐

But isn鈥檛 it taught in one baraita: On a Festival one may kindle fire with vessels, but one may not kindle fire with shards of vessels, as they are muktze? And it is taught in another baraita: One may kindle fire both with vessels and with shards of vessels. And it is taught in yet another baraita: One may kindle fire neither with vessels nor with shards of vessels.

讜诪砖谞讬 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讛讗 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛

And this contradiction between the baraitot is resolved in the following manner: It is not difficult; this first baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who accepts the law of muktze. One may therefore kindle fire with vessels, as they are not muktze, but not with shards of vessels, as they are muktze and may not be handled. This second baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who does not accept the law of muktze. According to him, one may use shards of vessels as well. This one that prohibits using even vessels that are intact is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, who allows vessels to be used only for their designated purpose. This indicates that Rabbi Ne岣mya prohibits handling even whole vessels on Festivals as well.

转专讬 转谞讗讬 讜讗诇讬讘讗 讚专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛

The Gemara replies: These are two tanna鈥檌m who both hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya. Two later tanna鈥檌m disagreed with each other in reporting the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya. Both agree that one may use vessels only for their designated purpose, but they disagree with regard to whether this halakha applies only on Shabbat or on Festivals as well.

诪转谞讬壮 讗讬谉 驻讜讞转讬谉 讗转 讛谞专 诪驻谞讬 砖讛讜讗 注讜砖讛 讻诇讬 讜讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 驻讞诪讬谉 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜讗讬谉 讞讜转讻讬谉 讗转 讛驻转讬诇讛 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讞讜转讻讛 讘讗讜专

MISHNA: On a Festival, one may not hollow out a piece of clay to form a lamp into which he will place oil and a wick because he thereby creates a vessel. And similarly, one may not produce charcoal at all on a Festival because this is not labor for sustenance. And similarly, one may not cut the wick, as this is considered mending a vessel. Rabbi Yehuda says: If one requires a wick of a particular length, he may cut it by burning it in a fire but not by cutting it with a knife.

讙诪壮 诪讗谉 转谞讗 讚驻讞讬转转 谞专 诪谞讗 讛讜讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讻诇讬 讞专住 诪讗讬诪转讬 诪拽讘诇 讟讜诪讗讛 诪砖谞讙诪专讛 诪诇讗讻转讜 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讗讜诪专 诪砖讬爪专驻讜 讘讻讘砖谉

GEMARA: Who is the tanna who taught that hollowing out a lamp is considered creating a vessel, even if it is not fired in a furnace? Rav Yosef said: It is Rabbi Meir, as it is taught in a baraita with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity: From when is an earthenware vessel susceptible to ritual impurity? It is from when its work is completed, i.e., when the clay has been made into the form of a vessel; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehoshua says: It is from when the vessel is fired in the furnace.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 诪诪讗讬 讚诇诪讗 注讚 讻讗谉 诇讗 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讛转诐 讗诇讗 讚讞讝讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 讘讬讛 诪讬讚讬 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 诇诪讗讬 讞讝讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 讘讬讛 驻砖讬讟讬

Abaye said to him: From where do you conclude that this is the same opinion? Perhaps Rabbi Meir stated his opinion only there, with regard to vessels, since they are fit to contain something. Although they cannot hold liquids before being fired in a furnace, they can contain other items. But here, for what use is this lamp fit? The Gemara responds: It can be used to contain small coins.

讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘专讘讬 爪讚讜拽 讛讬讗 讚转谞谉 讗诇驻住讬谉 讞专谞讬讜转 讟讛讜专讜转 讘讗讛诇 讛诪转 讜讟诪讗讜转 讘诪砖讗 讛讝讘

Some say the following version of the discussion: Rav Yosef said: The mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, as we learned: 岣raniyyot pots [ilpasin] are unfinished earthenware pots made together with their covers. The covers are removed after they are fired in a furnace. They are pure with regard to contracting the impurity of a tent over a corpse, as they do not have a receptacle. Earthenware vessels can contract impurity imparted by a corpse only if they have a hollow space that can contain something. But 岣raniyyot pots are rendered impure by the carrying of a zav, even if the zav moved them without actually touching them, as this impurity applies to any earthenware vessels that serve some purpose.

专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘专讘讬 爪讚讜拽 讗讜诪专 讗祝 讟讛讜专讜转 讘诪砖讗 讛讝讘 诇驻讬 砖诇讗 谞讙诪专讛 诪诇讗讻转谉

Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: These vessels are even pure with regard to the impurity imparted by the carrying of a zav because their labor is not completed; therefore, they are not fully formed. This implies that when the pots are completed, they are considered full-fledged vessels, even before they have been fired in a furnace.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讚诇诪讗 注讚 讻讗谉 诇讗 拽讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘专讘讬 爪讚讜拽 讛转诐 讗诇讗 讚讞讝讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 讘讬讛 诪讬讚讬 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 诇诪讗讬 讞讝讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 讘讬讛 驻砖讬讟讬

Abaye said to him: Perhaps it is not so, as it is possible to say that Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, stated his opinion only there, in the case of 岣raniyyot pots, since they are fit to contain something. But here, in the case of a lamp, for what is it fit? The Gemara replies: It is fit to contain small coins.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讬谉 驻讜讞转讬谉 讗转 讛谞专 讜讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 讗诇驻住讬谉 讞专谞讬讜转 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 诪转讬专 讘讗诇驻住讬谉 讞专谞讬讜转 诪讗讬 讞专谞讬讜转 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 注专谞讬讜转 诪讗讬 注专谞讬讜转 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 爪注讬 讞拽诇讬讬转讗

The Sages taught: One may not hollow out a lamp, and one may not create 岣raniyyot pots on a Festival. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel permits creating 岣raniyyot pots. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of 岣raniyyot? Rav Yehuda said: They are pots of a city [iraniyyot]. The Gemara again inquires: What is the meaning of iraniyyot? Abaye said: It means villagers鈥 bowls who will use even clay vessels that have not been fully formed or fired, as they are not particular with regard to half-finished utensils.

讜讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 驻讞诪讬谉 驻砖讬讟讗 诇诪讗讬 讞讝讬 转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 诇讗 谞爪专讻讛 讗诇讗 诇诪讜住专谉 诇讗讜诇讬讬专讬谉 诇讘讜 讘讬讜诐

It is taught in the mishna: And one may not produce charcoal on a Festival. The Gemara challenges: It is obvious that one may perform only labor for sustenance. For what is charcoal fit; what purpose does it have for the sake of sustenance? Rabbi 岣yya taught: It is necessary to teach this halakha only in the case of handing the charcoal over to bathhouse attendants [olyarin] who heat up the bathhouse for that day. One might have thought that since charcoal is used for the sake of washing on a Festival, producing it should be permitted.

讜讘讜 讘讬讜诐 诪讬 砖专讬 讻讚讗诪专 专讘讗 诇讛讝讬注 讜拽讜讚诐 讙讝专讛 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 诇讛讝讬注 讜拽讜讚诐 讙讝专讛

The Gemara questions this: And on that day is it permitted to heat up water for washing? The Sages decreed that one may not wash in a bathhouse on a Festival, even if the water was heated up the day before, and certainly it is prohibited if the water was heated on the Festival itself. The Gemara replies: As Rava said with regard to a different issue, this decree does not refer to actual washing but to entering a bathhouse merely in order to sweat, and it was stated before the enactment of the decree against sweating in a bathhouse. Here, too, one can explain that the statement of Rabbi 岣yya is referring to a case where one entered to sweat, and he entered at a time before the decree was enacted.

讜讗讬谉 讞讜转讻讬谉 讗转 讛驻转讬诇讛 诇砖谞讬诐 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讘住讻讬谉 讚诇讗

It was taught in the mishna: And one may not cut a wick into two, but Rabbi Yehuda permits cutting it by means of fire. The Gemara asks: What is different about cutting a wick with fire as opposed to with a knife, that one may not cut a wick with a knife?

讚拽诪转拽谉 诪谞讗 讘讗讜专 谞诪讬 拽讗 诪转拽谉 诪谞讗 转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讞讜转讻讛 讘讗讜专 讘驻讬 砖转讬 谞专讜转 讗诪专 专讘 谞转谉 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪讜讞讟讬谉 讗转 讛驻转讬诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 诪讗讬 诪讜讞讟讬谉 讗诪专 专讘 讞谞讬谞讗 讘专 砖诇诪讬讗 (诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘) 诇注讚讜讬讬 讞讜砖讻讗

Is it because he thereby mends a vessel? If so, when one cuts it in the fire, he is also preparing a vessel for use. Rabbi 岣yya taught in explanation: He cuts it by fire in the mouth of two candles. In other words, he does not simply cut a wick, but rather inserts a long wick into two lamps, which he subsequently lights in the middle. This indeed leads to the formation of two separate wicks, but only as a result of kindling two lamps. Rav Natan bar Abba said that Rav said: One may mo岣t a wick on a Festival. The term mo岣t was unknown, and the Gemara therefore asks: What is the meaning of the word mo岣t? Rav 岣nina bar Shelemya said in the name of Rav: To remove the dark; in other words, it is permitted to remove the burnt, charcoaled section to make the lamp shine more brightly.

转谞讬 讘专 拽驻专讗 砖砖讛 讚讘专讬诐 谞讗诪专讜 讘驻转讬诇讛 砖诇砖讛 诇讛讞诪讬专 讜砖诇砖讛 诇讛拽诇 诇讛讞诪讬专 讗讬谉 讙讜讚诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇讻转讞诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜讗讬谉 诪讛讘讛讘讬谉 讗讜转讛 讘讗讜专 讜讗讬谉 讞讜转讻讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇砖谞讬诐 诇讛拽诇 诪诪注讻讛 讘讬讚 讜砖讜专讛 讘砖诪谉 讜讞讜转讻讛 讘讗讜专 讘驻讬 砖转讬 谞专讜转

Bar Kappara taught: Six matters were stated with regard to the halakhot of a wick on a Festival, three of which are to be stringent and three of which are to be lenient. The three halakhot to be stringent are: One may not spin or twist it ab initio on a Festival, and one may not singe it in fire before lighting it so that it will burn well, and one may not cut it into two. The three halakhot to be lenient are: One may crush it by hand, as although it is prohibited to twist it into a wick, one may adjust its shape in an unusual manner; and one may soak it in oil so that it will later burn well; and one may cut it by fire in the mouth of two candles.

讜讗诪专 专讘 谞转谉 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘 注转讬专讬 讘讘诇 讬讜专讚讬 讙讬讛谞诐 讛诐 讻讬 讛讗 讚砖讘转讗讬 讘专 诪专讬谞讜住 讗拽诇注 诇讘讘诇 讘注讗 诪谞讬讬讛讜 注住拽讗 讜诇讗 讬讛讘讜 诇讬讛 诪讝讜谞讬 诪讬讝谉 谞诪讬 诇讗 讝讬谞讜讛讜

搂 After citing one teaching in the name of Rav Natan bar Abba, the Gemara quotes a few more statements attributed to the same scholar. Since he is not mentioned often, Rav Natan鈥檚 teachings are arranged together, so that they can be remembered more easily. Rav Natan bar Abba said that Rav said: The wealthy Jews of Babylonia will descend to Gehenna because they do not have compassion on others. This is illustrated by incidents such as this: Shabbetai bar Marinus happened to come to Babylonia. He requested their participation in a business venture, to lend him money and receive half the profits in return, and they did not give it to him. Furthermore, when he asked them to sustain him with food, they likewise refused to sustain him.

讗诪专 讛谞讬 诪注专讘 专讘 拽讗 讗转讜 讚讻转讬讘 讜谞转谉 诇讱 专讞诪讬诐 讜专讞诪讱 讻诇 讛诪专讞诐 注诇 讛讘专讬讜转 讘讬讚讜注 砖讛讜讗 诪讝专注讜 砖诇 讗讘专讛诐 讗讘讬谞讜 讜讻诇 诪讬 砖讗讬谞讜 诪专讞诐 注诇 讛讘专讬讜转 讘讬讚讜注 砖讗讬谞讜 诪讝专注讜 砖诇 讗讘专讛诐 讗讘讬谞讜

He said: These wealthy people are not descendants of our forefathers, but they came from the mixed multitude, as it is written: 鈥淎nd show you compassion, and have compassion upon you, and multiply you, as He has sworn to your fathers鈥 (Deuteronomy 13:18), from which it is derived: Anyone who has compassion for God鈥檚 creatures, it is known that he is of the descendants of Abraham, our father, and anyone who does not have compassion for God鈥檚 creatures, it is known that he is not of the descendants of Abraham, our father. Since these wealthy Babylonians do not have compassion on people, clearly they are not descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

讜讗诪专 专讘 谞转谉 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘 讻诇 讛诪爪驻讛 注诇 砖诇讞谉 讗讞专讬诐 注讜诇诐 讞砖讱 讘注讚讜 砖谞讗诪专 谞讜讚讚 讛讜讗 诇诇讞诐 讗讬讛 讬讚注 讻讬 谞讻讜谉 讘讬讚讜 讬讜诐 讞砖讱 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 讗祝 讞讬讬讜 讗讬谞谉 讞讬讬诐

This is another teaching that Rav Natan bar Abba said that Rav said: Whoever looks to the table of others for his sustenance, the world is dark for him. Everything looks bleak and hopeless to him, for it is stated: 鈥淗e wanders abroad for bread: Where is it? He knows the day of darkness is ready at his hand鈥 (Job 15:23). Rav 岣sda said: Even his life is no life, as he receives no satisfaction from it.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 砖诇砖讛 讞讬讬讛谉 讗讬谞诐 讞讬讬诐 讜讗诇讜 讛谉 讛诪爪驻讛 诇砖诇讞谉 讞讘讬专讜 讜诪讬 砖讗砖转讜 诪讜砖诇转 注诇讬讜 讜诪讬 砖讬住讜专讬谉 诪讜砖诇讬谉 讘讙讜驻讜 讜讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗祝 诪讬 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 讗诇讗 讞诇讜拽 讗讞讚 讜转谞讗 拽诪讗 讗驻砖专 讚诪注讬讬谉 讘诪谞讬讛

In support of this last claim, the Gemara cites a baraita in which the Sages taught: There are three whose lives are not lives, and they are as follows: One who looks to the table of others for his sustenance; and one whose wife rules over him; and one whose body is ruled by suffering. And some say: Even one who has only one robe. Since he cannot wash it properly, he suffers from lice and dirt. The Gemara comments: And the first tanna, who did not include such a person, maintains: It is possible for him to examine his clothes and remove the lice, which would alleviate his suffering.

诪转谞讬壮 讗讬谉 砖讜讘专讬谉 讗转 讛讞专住 讜讗讬谉 讞讜转讻讬谉 讛谞讬讬专 诇爪诇讜转 讘讜 诪诇讬讞

MISHNA: One may not break earthenware on a Festival. And one may not cut paper in order to roast salted fish on it. Earthenware shards or pieces of paper that have been soaked in water were placed on the metal surface or in the oven in which the fish was roasted, so that it would not be burned by the heat.

讜讗讬谉 讙讜专驻讬谉 转谞讜专 讜讻讬专讬诐 讗讘诇 诪讻讘砖讬谉

And one may not sweep out anything that has fallen into an oven or stove that interferes with the baking, such as plaster. But one may press down and flatten any accumulated dust and ashes at the bottom of the oven, which might prevent it from lighting properly.

讜讗讬谉 诪拽讬驻讬谉 砖转讬 讞讘讬讜转 诇砖驻讜转 注诇讬讛谉 讗转 讛拽讚专讛 讜讗讬谉 住讜诪讻讬谉 讗转 讛拽讚专讛 讘讘拽注转 讜讻谉 讘讚诇转 讜讗讬谉 诪谞讛讬讙讬谉 讗转 讛讘讛诪讛 讘诪拽诇 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪转讬专

And one may not draw two barrels together in order to place a pot on them, so that its contents will be cooked by a fire lit between the barrels. And one may not prop a pot that does not stand straight with a piece of wood, in order to prevent it from falling. And similarly, with a door. And one may not lead an animal with a stick in the public domain on a Festival; and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, permits it.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗 诪转拽谉 诪谞讗

GEMARA: With regard to the issue of breaking earthenware and cutting paper, the Gemara explains: What is the reason for this prohibition? Because one is thereby preparing a vessel for use.

讜讗讬谉 讙讜专驻讬谉 转谞讜专 讜讻讬专讬诐 转谞讬 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讬讜住祝 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 谞讞诪谉 讜讗诐 讗讬 讗驻砖专 诇讗驻讜转 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 讙讜专驻讜 诪讜转专 讚讘讬转讛讜 讚专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 谞驻诇 诇讛 讗专讬讞讗 讘转谞讜专讗 讘讬讜诪讗 讟讘讗 讗诪专 诇讛 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讞讝讬 讚讗谞讗 专驻转讗 诪注诇讬讬转讗 讘注讬谞讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诇砖诪注讬讛 讟讜讬 诇讬 讘专 讗讜讜讝讗 讜讗讝讚讛专 诪讞专讜讻讗

It was taught in the mishna: And one may not sweep out an oven or stove. Rabbi 岣yya bar Yosef taught before Rav Na岣an: And if it is not possible to bake unless one sweeps it out, it is permitted. The Gemara relates an incident with regard to the wife of Rabbi 岣yya: A part of a brick fell into her oven on a Festival, preventing her from baking. Rav 岣yya said to her: See, you should know that I want good-quality bread. He thereby stated that it would be impossible unless she removed the brick, making it permissible for her to do so. Similarly, Rava said to his attendant: Roast for me a duck in an oven, and be careful not to singe it. He thereby implied that the attendant may remove all impediments from the oven in order to fulfill this requirement because otherwise it would not be possible to cook without singeing.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬谞讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 诇谉 专讘 讗讞讗 诪讛讜爪诇 讚诪专 砖专拽讬谉 诇讬讛 转谞讜专讗 讘讬讜诪讗 讟讘讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗谞谉 讗专拽转讗 讚驻专转 住诪讻讬谞谉 讜讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讜讗 讚爪讬讬专讬讛 诪讗转诪讜诇 讗诪专 专讘讬谞讗 讜拽讟诪讗 砖专讬

In a related case, Ravina said to Rav Ashi: Rav A岣 from Hutzal said to us that the master, Rav Ashi, allows his attendants to plaster the mouth of the oven for him on a Festival. This was done in order to ensure that the roasted or cooked dish would be fully prepared. Why does this not constitute the prohibited labor of kneading on a Festival? He said to him: We rely on the bank of the Euphrates River. We avoid the labor of kneading by taking sufficiently kneaded mud from the riverbank. The Gemara comments: And this applies only when one wrapped or made some mark on the mud the day before, so that it not be muktze. Ravina said: And as for kneading with ashes for this purpose, it is permitted, since the labor of kneading does not apply to ashes.

讜讗讬谉 诪拽讬驻讬谉 砖转讬 讞讘讬讜转 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗讘谞讬诐 砖诇 讘讬转 讛讻住讗 诪讜转专 诇爪讚讚谉 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讗讬转讬讘讬讛 专讘讛 诇专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗讬谉 诪拽讬驻讬谉 砖转讬 讞讘讬讜转 诇砖驻讜转 注诇讬讛谉 讗转 讛拽讚专讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖讗谞讬 讛转诐 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗 注讘讬讚 讗讛诇讗

搂 It was taught in the mishna: One may not draw two barrels together in order to place a pot on them. Rav Na岣an said: With regard to large stones of a lavatory, upon which one sits to attend to his needs, it is permitted to put them together in the proper manner, so that they may be used on a Festival. Rabba raised an objection to Rav Na岣an: Wasn鈥檛 it taught that one may not draw two barrels together in order to place a pot on them? This seems to indicate that any arrangement resembling building is prohibited. He said to him: There, with regard to barrels, it is different, because one makes a tent. It is not the drawing of the barrels close together that is prohibited. Rather, the placement of the pot over them forms a kind of covering, which is similar to building a tent.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讛 讝讜讟讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 讘谞讛 讗爪讟讘讗 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讚诇讗 注讘讬讚 讗讛诇讗 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讚砖专讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛转诐 讘谞讬谉 拽讘注 讗住专讛 转讜专讛 讘谞讬谉 注专讗讬 诇讗 讗住专讛 转讜专讛 讜讙讝专讜 专讘谞谉 注诇 讘谞讬谉 注专讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讘谞讬谉 拽讘注 讜讛讻讗 诪砖讜诐 讻讘讜讚讜 诇讗 讙讝专讜 讘讬讛 专讘谞谉

Rabba the Younger, so called to distinguish him from the more famous amora known as Rabba, said to Rav Ashi: However, if that is so, then if, on a Festival, one built a solid bench [itztaba], without a gap below the seat, a situation in which one does not make a tent, so too, will you say that it is permitted? He said to him: The two cases are not comparable: There, with regard to a proper construction, such as a bench, the Torah prohibited erecting a permanent construction, but the Torah did not prohibit erecting a temporary construction. The Sages, however, decreed against creating a temporary construction on a Festival due to a permanent construction. However, here, with regard to a lavatory, due to the dignity of the user, the Sages did not decree with regard to it.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗讬 诪讚讜专转讗 诪诇诪注诇讛 诇诪讟讛 砖专讬 诪诇诪讟讛 诇诪注诇讛 讗住讜专

Rav Yehuda said: With Regard to this bonfire, in which the wood is arranged in the form of a house, if one arranges it from above to below it is permitted, as this is not the regular manner of building. However, if one prepares it in the usual fashion, from below to above, it is prohibited, for this is considered building.

Scroll To Top