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

Today's Daf Yomi

October 3, 2021 | 讻状讝 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 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 33

Today’s daf is sponsored by Sagi Carmel in honor of Ashley Offenheim on their marriage today.

Is it permissible to use wood for other purposes or can it only be used for kindling on Yom Tov? Rabbi Shimon allows and sages forbid. Leading an animal by a stick on a Yom Tov is a dispute between Rabbi Elazar Bar Rabbi Shimon and the rabbis. The rabbis forbid it besides that it is muktze, also because it appears as if he is leading the animal to sell in the market 鈥 therefore, even rabbi Shimon would forbid it. There is a dispute between Rav Sheshet and Rav Nachman as to whether it is possible to use a wooden branch for a skewer. Do they disagree about a wet or dry branch? What is the root of their debate? Rava did not allow one to take a branch from the storage shed of wood to use as a coal stoker or to use one that broke on Yom Tov. Why? Is it because he held like Rabbi Yehuda that broken pieces are muktze? Does it not appear from another case that he does not hold like Rabbi Yehuda in this matter? There is a dispute between R. Eliezer and the rabbis 鈥 can one collect sliver from the yard for cooking? Can one take a sliver to use for cleaning one鈥檚 teeth? It is forbidden to light a fire from stones, trees, etc. because it is creating something new. Rav Yehuda said that if a vessel (such as a toothpick for example) is made from animal food, it is permitted because it is not considered that one has created a vessel. Rav Kahana raises a difficulty against him from a braita and the Gemara solves by differentiating between hard and soft. The hard ones are forbidden to be cut to use a toothpick to clean one鈥檚 teeth on a Torah level and therefore they are forbidden by rabbinic law to cut them for smelling purposes. But Rav Acha raises a contradiction between this and a Mishnah in Masechet Shabbat that it is permissible to break a barrel and remove fruit from it, provided that he does not intend to make a vessel and there is no concern that if we permit it not to create a vessel, one may come to break it also to make a vessel. Also, Rav Yehuda cut branches and distributed them. The contradiction is resolved by connecting these two approaches to a tannaitic dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis. Rabbi Eliezer thinks that creating a toothpick is forbidden from the Torah and therefore the rabbis forbade cutting it for smelling. The rabbis thought it was only forbidden by rabbinic law to cut to make a toothpick and therefore the rabbis did not forbid cutting for smelling or other permitted purposes. However, how could Rabbi Eliezer disagree with the Mishnah in Shabbat? They answer that he establishes the Mishnah in a case of Mustaki – a rickety barrel. According to the Mishnah, it is permissible according to Rabbi Eliezer to gather trees from the yard. There is controversy in a braita as to whether it is permissible to put in piles. The basis for the controversy is: do we fear that it seems he is doing it for tomorrow or do his actions prove that he is not.

讜讻谉 讘讬注转讗 讜讻谉 拽讚专讛 讜讻谉 驻讜专讬讗 讜讻谉 讞讘讬转讗

And similarly, if one wishes to place eggs on the mouth of a hollow vessel or on a grill sitting above coals, he must first hold the vessel in his hands and put the eggs on it, and only afterward position them both on the coals. And similarly, with regard to a pot placed on barrels, one must hold the pot above the barrels before placing them underneath it. And similarly, in the case of a collapsible bed, whose legs and cover are separate pieces, one must first stretch the upper part, then add the legs. And similarly, in the case of barrels positioned one on top of the other, the upper one must be held in place first and then the others added below.

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 讘讚诇转 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讗诇讗 讗讬诪讗 讜讻谉 讛讚诇转 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讬谉 住讜诪讻讬谉 讗转 讛拽讚专讛 讘讘拽注转 讜讻谉 讛讚诇转 诇驻讬 砖诇讗 谞转谞讜 注爪讬诐 讗诇讗 诇讛住拽讛 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪转讬专

搂 It was taught in the mishna: And one may not prop a pot with a piece of wood, and similarly a door. The Gemara asks: With regard to a door, can this enter your mind? Is it possible to prop a pot by means of a door? Rather, say and correct the wording as follows: And similarly, one may not prop a door with a piece of wood. The Sages taught: One may not prop a pot with a piece of wood, and similarly a door, as wood is to be used only for kindling. With regard to any use other than kindling, wood is considered muktze. And Rabbi Shimon, who does not accept the prohibition of muktze, permits it.

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 诇讬诪讗 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讻讗讘讜讛 住讘讬专讗 诇讬讛 讚诇讬转 诇讬讛 诪讜拽爪讛 诇讗 讘讛讗 讗驻讬诇讜 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讜讚讛 诪砖讜诐 讚诪讞讝讬 讻诪讗谉 讚讗讝讬诇 诇讞谞讙讗

The baraita continues: And one may not lead an animal with a stick on a Festival, but Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, permits it. The Gemara asks: Shall we say that Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, holds in accordance with the opinion of his father, Rabbi Shimon, who is not of the opinion that there is a prohibition of muktze, and he therefore permits one to take any stick and lead an animal with it? The Gemara rejects this: No, there is no issue of muktze here at all, for in this case even Rabbi Shimon concedes to the first tanna that this activity is prohibited, not due to muktze but because one who does so looks like one who is going to the market [岣nga] in the manner of a weekday. On a Festival, one must therefore lead the animal in an unusual fashion.

讞讝专讗 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗住专 讜专讘 砖砖转 砖专讬 讘专讟讬讘讗 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚讗住讜专 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘讬讘砖转讗 诪讗谉 讚讗住专 讗诪专 诇讱 诇讗 谞转谞讜 注爪讬诐 讗诇讗 诇讛住拽讛 讜诪讗谉 讚砖专讬 讗诪专 诇讱 诪讛 诇讬 诇爪诇讜转 讘讜 诪讛 诇讬 诇爪诇讜转 讘讙讞诇转讜

搂 In a case where one takes a bamboo branch to use as a skewer, Rav Na岣an prohibits it because it is muktze, since it was not made into a vessel the day before, and Rav Sheshet permits it. The Gemara elaborates: In the case of a wet branch, everyone agrees that it is prohibited; it is unfit for kindling and is therefore muktze. When they disagree, it is in the case of a dry branch. The one who prohibits handling it, Rav Na岣an, could have said to you: Wood is only for kindling, but it is considered muktze with regard to any other use. And the one who permits handling it, Rav Sheshet, could have said to you: Since all wood is to be used for roasting, what is it to me to roast with it when it is inserted into meat? What is it to me to roast with its coals? Just as it is permitted to burn the bamboo as coal, so it is permitted to use it as a skewer for cooking.

讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讘讬讘砖转讗 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚砖专讬 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘专讟讬讘转讗 诪讗谉 讚讗住专 讚诇讗 讞讝讬 诇讛住拽讛 讜诪讗谉 讚砖专讬 讗诪专 诇讱 讛讗 讞讝讬 诇讛讬住拽 讙讚讜诇 讜讛诇讻转讗 讬讘砖转讗 砖专讬 专讟讬讘转讗 讗住讜专

Some say a different version of the explanation of this dispute: In the case of a dry branch, everyone agrees that it is permitted; when they disagree, it is in the case of a wet one. The one who prohibits handling it does so because it is not fit for kindling. And the one who permits it could have said to you: Isn鈥檛 it at least fit for a large fire, which will dry out the branch and enable it to burn as well? The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that a dry one is permitted and a wet one is prohibited.

讚专砖 专讘讗 讗砖讛 诇讗 转讻谞住 诇讚讬专 讛注爪讬诐 诇讬讟讜诇 诪讛谉 讗讜讚 讜讗讜讚 砖谞砖讘专 讗住讜专 诇讛住讬拽讜 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 诇驻讬 砖诪住讬拽讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讗讬谉 诪住讬拽讬谉 讘砖讘专讬 讻诇讬诐

Rava taught: A woman may not enter a storehouse of wood in order to take from them a firebrand, a partly burnt piece of wood used for turning over the wood of the bonfire, because this piece of wood was not made into a vessel the day before and it is therefore muktze. And a firebrand that broke may not be kindled on a Festival, for one may kindle fire with vessels but one may not kindle fire with shards of vessels, and this firebrand was considered a vessel before it broke.

诇诪讬诪专讗 讚专讘讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 住讘讬专讗 诇讬讛 讚讗讬转 诇讬讛 诪讜拽爪讛 讜讛讗 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 讜砖讚讬 诪注讬讛 诇砖讜谞专讗 讛转诐 讻讬讜谉 讚诪住专讞讬 诪讗转诪讜诇 讚注转讬讛 注诇讜讬讛

The Gemara asks: Is that to say that in this case Rava holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who is of the opinion that there is a prohibition of muktze? But didn鈥檛 Rava say to his attendant: Roast a duck for me, and throw its innards to the cat? According to Rabbi Yehuda, it is prohibited to give the innards to animals, as they were not prepared for this purpose the day before. The Gemara answers: There, since the innards become rancid when they were left, from yesterday, the Festival eve, his mind was on them. At that point in time, he already intended to give them to the cats in his house.

诪转谞讬壮 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 谞讜讟诇 讗讚诐 拽讬住诐 诪砖诇驻谞讬讜 诇讞爪讜抓 讘讜 砖讬谞讬讜 讜诪讙讘讘 诪谉 讛讞爪专 讜诪讚诇讬拽 砖讻诇 诪讛 砖讘讞爪专 诪讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诪讙讘讘 诪砖诇驻谞讬讜 讜诪讚诇讬拽

MISHNA: Rabbi Eliezer says: On a Festival, a person may remove a sliver from a pile of straw or from similar material that is before him, in order to clean with it between his teeth. And he may collect straw from a courtyard and kindle it, for anything in a courtyard is considered prepared for all purposes. The Rabbis say: He may collect these materials only from things placed before him in his house, as they are certainly prepared for all uses, and kindle them. With regard to objects lying in his courtyard, however, as their collection takes great effort, he certainly did not have them in mind the day before, and they are therefore muktze.

讗讬谉 诪讜爪讬讗讬谉 讗转 讛讗讜专 诇讗 诪谉 讛注爪讬诐 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛讗讘谞讬诐 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛注驻专 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛专注驻讬诐 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛诪讬诐 讜讗讬谉 诪诇讘谞讬谉 讗转 讛专注驻讬诐 诇爪诇讜转 讘讛谉

The mishna states a different halakha: One may not produce fire, neither from wood, by rubbing one piece against another; nor from stones knocked against each other; nor from hot dirt; nor from tiles struck against each other; nor from water placed in round, glass vessels, which produces fire by focusing the rays of the sun. And similarly, one may not whiten tiles with a burning-hot heat in order to roast upon them afterward.

讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛

GEMARA: Rav Yehuda said:

讗讜讻诇讬 讘讛诪讛 讗讬谉 讘讛谉 诪砖讜诐 转拽讜谉 讻诇讬

Animal fodder, such as straw and reed branches, does not have any associated prohibition due to the preparing of a vessel. One may therefore trim it on Shabbat and use it as one wishes.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 专讘 讻讛谞讗 诇专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 注爪讬 讘砖诪讬诐 诇讛专讬讞 讘讛谉 讜诇讛谞讬祝 讘讛谉 诇讞讜诇讛 讜诪讜诇诇讜 讜诪专讬讞 讘讜 讜诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 诇讛专讬讞 讘讜 讜讗诐 拽讟诪讜 驻讟讜专 讗讘诇 讗住讜专 诇讞爪讜抓 讘讜 砖讬谞讬讜 诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 讜讗诐 拽讟诪讜 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转

Rav Kahana raised an objection to Rav Yehuda from the following baraita: One may handle wood of a spice tree on Shabbat in order to smell them and to wave them before a sick person to fan him. And he may crush it between his fingers to release its fragrance, and he may smell it. However, he may not cut it from the branch in order to produce a moist spot on the branch that will emit a strong fragrance, so as to smell it; and if he did cut it, he is exempt from punishment according to Torah law, but it is prohibited to do so. If he intends to clean his teeth with it, he may not cut it, and if he did cut it, he is liable to bring a sin-offering for transgressing a prohibited labor on Shabbat. This indicates that although some wood of a spice tree was used as animal fodder, it is nevertheless prohibited to cut it. This appears to contradict Rav Yehuda.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛砖转讗 驻讟讜专 讗讘诇 讗住讜专 拽讗 拽砖讬讗 诇讬 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转 诪讘注讬讗 讗诇讗 讻讬 转谞讬讗 讛讛讬讗 讘拽砖讬谉 拽砖讬谉 讘谞讬 诪诇讬诇讛 谞讬谞讛讜

Rav Yehuda said to Rav Kahana: Now, even the statement exempt but prohibited poses a difficulty to my opinion, and it is not reasonable. Is it required to say the opposite, i.e., liable to bring a sin-offering? This teaching cannot be understood at face value; rather, it must be understood as follows: When that baraita was taught, it was referring to hard pieces of wood such as beams, with regard to which there is a concern that one might perform a prohibited labor. The Gemara questions this: And can hard branches be crushed by hand?

讞住讜专讬 诪讞住专讗 讜讛讻讬 拽转谞讬 诪讜诇诇讜 讜诪专讬讞 讘讜 拽讜讟诪讜 讜诪专讬讞 讘讜 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 讘专讻讬谉 讗讘诇 讘拽砖讬谉 诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 讜讗诐 拽讟诪讜 驻讟讜专 讗讘诇 讗住讜专 诇讞爪讜抓 讘讜 砖讬谞讬讜 诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 讜讗诐 拽讟诪讜 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转

The Gemara replies: The baraita is incomplete and is teaching the following: With regard to wood of a spice tree, one may crush it and smell it and cut it and smell it. In what case is this statement said? With regard to soft pieces of wood, but with regard to hard ones, one may not cut them. And if he did cut it he is exempt, but it is prohibited to do so. If he intended to clean his teeth with it, he may not cut it, and if he did cut it, he is liable to bring a sin-offering.

转谞讬 讞讚讗 拽讜讟诪讜 讜诪专讬讞 讘讜 转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 诇讛专讬讞 讘讜 讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讘专讻讬谉 讛讗 讘拽砖讬谉

Similarly, it is taught in one baraita: One may cut it and smell it, and it is taught in another baraita: One may not cut it to smell it. Rabbi Zeira said that Rav 岣sda said: This is not difficult. In this case, when it is permitted, it is referring to soft wood. In that case, where the baraita prohibits it, it is referring to hard pieces of wood.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 讘拽砖讬谉 讗诪讗讬 诇讗 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 诪讛讗 讚转谞谉 砖讜讘专 讗讚诐 讗转 讛讞讘讬转 诇讗讻讜诇 诪诪谞讛 讙专讜讙专讜转 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 讬转讻讜讬谉 诇注砖讜转 讻诇讬 讜注讜讚 讛讗 专讘讗 讘专 专讘 讗讚讗 讜专讘讬谉 讘专 专讘 讗讚讗 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 讻讬 讛讜讬谞谉 讘讬 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讜讛 诪驻砖讞 讜讬讛讬讘 诇谉 讗诇讜转讗 讗诇讜转讗 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讞讝讬讗 诇拽转转讗 讚谞专讙讬 讜讞爪讬谞讬

With regard to the halakha itself, Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov strongly objects to this: With hard ones, why not? In what way is this case different from that which we learned in a mishna: A person may break a barrel in order to eat dried figs from it, provided that he does not thereby intend to make a vessel, and he may use the barrel afterward. Breaking off wood in order to smell it is certainly not more of a prohibited labor than breaking a barrel. And furthermore, it is Rava bar Rav Adda and Ravin bar Rav Adda, who both say: When we were at the house of Rav Yehuda, he would break and give us many sticks of wood of a spice tree, although they were hard enough to be fit for handles of axes and hatches.

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讛讗 专讘谞谉 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 谞讜讟诇 讗讚诐 拽讬住诐 诪砖诇驻谞讬讜 诇讞爪讜抓 讘讜 砖讬谞讬讜 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讗 讬讟讜诇 讗诇讗 诪讗讘讜住 砖诇 讘讛诪讛 讜砖讜讬谉 砖诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 讜讗诐 拽讟诪讜 诇讞爪讜抓 讘讜 砖讬谞讬讜 讜诇驻转讜讞 讘讜 讛讚诇转 讘砖讜讙讙 讘砖讘转 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转 讘诪讝讬讚 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 住讜驻讙 讗转 讛讗专讘注讬诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; this case is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, whereas that case follows the Rabbis. As it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer says: On Shabbat or a Festival, a person may take a sliver of wood from before him to clean his teeth with it, and the Rabbis say: One may take a toothpick only from an animal鈥檚 trough; since it is fit for animal fodder, it is considered prepared for all purposes. And they agree that he may not pluck it. And if he did pluck it to clean his teeth with it or to use it as a key and open a door with it, if he did so unwittingly on Shabbat, he is liable to bring a sin-offering. If he did so intentionally on a Festival, he receives the forty lashes administered to one who desecrates the Festival by performing labor. These are the words of Rabbi Eliezer.

讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讞讚 讝讛 讜讗讞讚 讝讛 讗讬谞讜 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 砖讘讜转 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讚拽讗诪专 讛转诐 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转 讛讻讗 驻讟讜专 讗讘诇 讗住讜专 专讘谞谉 讚拽讗 讗诪专讬 讛转诐 驻讟讜专 讗讘诇 讗住讜专 讛讻讗 诪讜转专 诇讻转讞诇讛

And the Rabbis say: Both this and this, whether one did so on Shabbat or a Festival, even if he plucked it by hand to use it as a key, it is prohibited only due to a rabbinic decree. Therefore, Rabbi Eliezer, who states there that one who plucks a toothpick on Shabbat unwittingly in order to make a vessel such as a key is liable to bring a sin-offering, then here, in the case of one who cuts a sliver of wood in order to smell it, he is exempt, but it is prohibited. However, the Rabbis who state there, in the case of plucking a toothpick, that he is exempt but it is prohibited, then here, when one cuts a sliver of wood for purposes of smelling, it is permitted ab initio.

讜诇讬转 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讛讗 讚转谞谉 砖讜讘专 讗讚诐 讗转 讛讞讘讬转 诇讗讻讜诇 诪诪谞讛 讙专讜讙专讜转 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 讬转讻讜讬谉 诇注砖讜转 讻诇讬 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讻讬 转谞讬讗 讛讛讬讗 讘诪讜住转拽讬

The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Eliezer not accept this halakha that we learned in a mishna: A person may break a barrel in order to eat dried figs from it, provided that he does not thereby intend to make a vessel? This shows that if one does not intend to make a vessel, it is permitted ab initio; whereas Rabbi Eliezer maintains that he is exempt, but it is prohibited. The Gemara answers: Rav Ashi said: When that baraita was taught, its lenient ruling was with regard to a vessel patched with pitch [mustaki], meaning a vessel that had previously been broken and its pieces glued together with pitch. If one breaks it for his own needs, he does not smash a complete vessel, and he is therefore not considered to have fashioned a vessel.

讜诪讙讘讘 诪谉 讛讞爪专 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讙讘讘 诪谉 讛讞爪专 讜诪讚诇讬拽 砖讻诇 诪讛 砖讘讞爪专 诪讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 讬注砖讛 爪讘讜专讬谉 爪讘讜专讬谉 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪转讬专 讘诪讗讬 拽讗 诪驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 诪讞讝讬 讚拽讗 诪讻谞讬祝 诇诪讞专 讜诇讬讜诪讗 讗讞专讬谞讗 讜诪专 住讘专 拽讚专转讜 诪讜讻讞转 注诇讬讜

搂 It is taught in the mishna: And one may collect straw from the courtyard on a Festival. The Sages taught: One may collect materials from a courtyard and kindle a fire because everything in a courtyard is considered prepared, provided he does not arrange it in piles, and Rabbi Shimon permits it even in such a manner. The Gemara asks: With regard to what do they disagree; what is the basis of their dispute? One Sage, i.e., the Rabbis, who are stringent, holds: It looks as though he is collecting for tomorrow and another day, and it is therefore prohibited, so that one will not be suspected of preparing from a Festival to a weekday. And one Sage, Rabbi Shimon, holds: His pot proves his intention. When onlookers see that he is using the straw for cooking, they will not suspect him of preparing for after the Festival.

讗讬谉 诪讜爪讬讗讬谉 讗转 讛讗讜专 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗 诪讜诇讬讚 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘

搂 It is taught in the mishna that one may not produce new fire on a Festival in any manner. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara explains: Because he creates something new on a Festival. This is similar to an act of creation, and it is therefore prohibited.

讜讗讬谉 诪诇讘谞讬谉 讗转 讛专注驻讬诐 诪讗讬 拽讗 注讘讬讚 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讛讻讗 讘专注驻讬诐 讞讚砖讬诐 注住拽讬谞谉 诪驻谞讬

搂 The mishna states that one may not whiten tiles by heating them, in order to roast food on them. The Gemara asks: What does one thereby do; since his intention is to prepare food, how does this differ from any other manner of roasting? Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Here we are dealing with new tiles, and it is prohibited because

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 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...
talking talmud_square

Beitzah 34: Labor-intensive Holidays

A series of halakhot of what is permitted and not permitted on yom tov. Beginning with some details of shechitah...
talking talmud_square

Beitzah 33: Toothpicks and Spice Wood

A couple of puzzling aspects to the daf today: a woman should not enter a storage place for wood to...
alon shvut women

Shabbat: Opening Packages

Beitzah, Daf 33 Shabbat - About Opening Packages by Susan Suna 聽The discussion on Beitza Daf 33b impacts聽 opening packages...

Beitzah 33

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Beitzah 33

讜讻谉 讘讬注转讗 讜讻谉 拽讚专讛 讜讻谉 驻讜专讬讗 讜讻谉 讞讘讬转讗

And similarly, if one wishes to place eggs on the mouth of a hollow vessel or on a grill sitting above coals, he must first hold the vessel in his hands and put the eggs on it, and only afterward position them both on the coals. And similarly, with regard to a pot placed on barrels, one must hold the pot above the barrels before placing them underneath it. And similarly, in the case of a collapsible bed, whose legs and cover are separate pieces, one must first stretch the upper part, then add the legs. And similarly, in the case of barrels positioned one on top of the other, the upper one must be held in place first and then the others added below.

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 讘讚诇转 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讗诇讗 讗讬诪讗 讜讻谉 讛讚诇转 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讬谉 住讜诪讻讬谉 讗转 讛拽讚专讛 讘讘拽注转 讜讻谉 讛讚诇转 诇驻讬 砖诇讗 谞转谞讜 注爪讬诐 讗诇讗 诇讛住拽讛 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪转讬专

搂 It was taught in the mishna: And one may not prop a pot with a piece of wood, and similarly a door. The Gemara asks: With regard to a door, can this enter your mind? Is it possible to prop a pot by means of a door? Rather, say and correct the wording as follows: And similarly, one may not prop a door with a piece of wood. The Sages taught: One may not prop a pot with a piece of wood, and similarly a door, as wood is to be used only for kindling. With regard to any use other than kindling, wood is considered muktze. And Rabbi Shimon, who does not accept the prohibition of muktze, permits it.

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 诇讬诪讗 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讻讗讘讜讛 住讘讬专讗 诇讬讛 讚诇讬转 诇讬讛 诪讜拽爪讛 诇讗 讘讛讗 讗驻讬诇讜 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讜讚讛 诪砖讜诐 讚诪讞讝讬 讻诪讗谉 讚讗讝讬诇 诇讞谞讙讗

The baraita continues: And one may not lead an animal with a stick on a Festival, but Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, permits it. The Gemara asks: Shall we say that Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, holds in accordance with the opinion of his father, Rabbi Shimon, who is not of the opinion that there is a prohibition of muktze, and he therefore permits one to take any stick and lead an animal with it? The Gemara rejects this: No, there is no issue of muktze here at all, for in this case even Rabbi Shimon concedes to the first tanna that this activity is prohibited, not due to muktze but because one who does so looks like one who is going to the market [岣nga] in the manner of a weekday. On a Festival, one must therefore lead the animal in an unusual fashion.

讞讝专讗 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗住专 讜专讘 砖砖转 砖专讬 讘专讟讬讘讗 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚讗住讜专 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘讬讘砖转讗 诪讗谉 讚讗住专 讗诪专 诇讱 诇讗 谞转谞讜 注爪讬诐 讗诇讗 诇讛住拽讛 讜诪讗谉 讚砖专讬 讗诪专 诇讱 诪讛 诇讬 诇爪诇讜转 讘讜 诪讛 诇讬 诇爪诇讜转 讘讙讞诇转讜

搂 In a case where one takes a bamboo branch to use as a skewer, Rav Na岣an prohibits it because it is muktze, since it was not made into a vessel the day before, and Rav Sheshet permits it. The Gemara elaborates: In the case of a wet branch, everyone agrees that it is prohibited; it is unfit for kindling and is therefore muktze. When they disagree, it is in the case of a dry branch. The one who prohibits handling it, Rav Na岣an, could have said to you: Wood is only for kindling, but it is considered muktze with regard to any other use. And the one who permits handling it, Rav Sheshet, could have said to you: Since all wood is to be used for roasting, what is it to me to roast with it when it is inserted into meat? What is it to me to roast with its coals? Just as it is permitted to burn the bamboo as coal, so it is permitted to use it as a skewer for cooking.

讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讘讬讘砖转讗 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚砖专讬 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘专讟讬讘转讗 诪讗谉 讚讗住专 讚诇讗 讞讝讬 诇讛住拽讛 讜诪讗谉 讚砖专讬 讗诪专 诇讱 讛讗 讞讝讬 诇讛讬住拽 讙讚讜诇 讜讛诇讻转讗 讬讘砖转讗 砖专讬 专讟讬讘转讗 讗住讜专

Some say a different version of the explanation of this dispute: In the case of a dry branch, everyone agrees that it is permitted; when they disagree, it is in the case of a wet one. The one who prohibits handling it does so because it is not fit for kindling. And the one who permits it could have said to you: Isn鈥檛 it at least fit for a large fire, which will dry out the branch and enable it to burn as well? The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that a dry one is permitted and a wet one is prohibited.

讚专砖 专讘讗 讗砖讛 诇讗 转讻谞住 诇讚讬专 讛注爪讬诐 诇讬讟讜诇 诪讛谉 讗讜讚 讜讗讜讚 砖谞砖讘专 讗住讜专 诇讛住讬拽讜 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 诇驻讬 砖诪住讬拽讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讗讬谉 诪住讬拽讬谉 讘砖讘专讬 讻诇讬诐

Rava taught: A woman may not enter a storehouse of wood in order to take from them a firebrand, a partly burnt piece of wood used for turning over the wood of the bonfire, because this piece of wood was not made into a vessel the day before and it is therefore muktze. And a firebrand that broke may not be kindled on a Festival, for one may kindle fire with vessels but one may not kindle fire with shards of vessels, and this firebrand was considered a vessel before it broke.

诇诪讬诪专讗 讚专讘讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 住讘讬专讗 诇讬讛 讚讗讬转 诇讬讛 诪讜拽爪讛 讜讛讗 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 讜砖讚讬 诪注讬讛 诇砖讜谞专讗 讛转诐 讻讬讜谉 讚诪住专讞讬 诪讗转诪讜诇 讚注转讬讛 注诇讜讬讛

The Gemara asks: Is that to say that in this case Rava holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who is of the opinion that there is a prohibition of muktze? But didn鈥檛 Rava say to his attendant: Roast a duck for me, and throw its innards to the cat? According to Rabbi Yehuda, it is prohibited to give the innards to animals, as they were not prepared for this purpose the day before. The Gemara answers: There, since the innards become rancid when they were left, from yesterday, the Festival eve, his mind was on them. At that point in time, he already intended to give them to the cats in his house.

诪转谞讬壮 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 谞讜讟诇 讗讚诐 拽讬住诐 诪砖诇驻谞讬讜 诇讞爪讜抓 讘讜 砖讬谞讬讜 讜诪讙讘讘 诪谉 讛讞爪专 讜诪讚诇讬拽 砖讻诇 诪讛 砖讘讞爪专 诪讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诪讙讘讘 诪砖诇驻谞讬讜 讜诪讚诇讬拽

MISHNA: Rabbi Eliezer says: On a Festival, a person may remove a sliver from a pile of straw or from similar material that is before him, in order to clean with it between his teeth. And he may collect straw from a courtyard and kindle it, for anything in a courtyard is considered prepared for all purposes. The Rabbis say: He may collect these materials only from things placed before him in his house, as they are certainly prepared for all uses, and kindle them. With regard to objects lying in his courtyard, however, as their collection takes great effort, he certainly did not have them in mind the day before, and they are therefore muktze.

讗讬谉 诪讜爪讬讗讬谉 讗转 讛讗讜专 诇讗 诪谉 讛注爪讬诐 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛讗讘谞讬诐 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛注驻专 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛专注驻讬诐 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛诪讬诐 讜讗讬谉 诪诇讘谞讬谉 讗转 讛专注驻讬诐 诇爪诇讜转 讘讛谉

The mishna states a different halakha: One may not produce fire, neither from wood, by rubbing one piece against another; nor from stones knocked against each other; nor from hot dirt; nor from tiles struck against each other; nor from water placed in round, glass vessels, which produces fire by focusing the rays of the sun. And similarly, one may not whiten tiles with a burning-hot heat in order to roast upon them afterward.

讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛

GEMARA: Rav Yehuda said:

讗讜讻诇讬 讘讛诪讛 讗讬谉 讘讛谉 诪砖讜诐 转拽讜谉 讻诇讬

Animal fodder, such as straw and reed branches, does not have any associated prohibition due to the preparing of a vessel. One may therefore trim it on Shabbat and use it as one wishes.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 专讘 讻讛谞讗 诇专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 注爪讬 讘砖诪讬诐 诇讛专讬讞 讘讛谉 讜诇讛谞讬祝 讘讛谉 诇讞讜诇讛 讜诪讜诇诇讜 讜诪专讬讞 讘讜 讜诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 诇讛专讬讞 讘讜 讜讗诐 拽讟诪讜 驻讟讜专 讗讘诇 讗住讜专 诇讞爪讜抓 讘讜 砖讬谞讬讜 诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 讜讗诐 拽讟诪讜 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转

Rav Kahana raised an objection to Rav Yehuda from the following baraita: One may handle wood of a spice tree on Shabbat in order to smell them and to wave them before a sick person to fan him. And he may crush it between his fingers to release its fragrance, and he may smell it. However, he may not cut it from the branch in order to produce a moist spot on the branch that will emit a strong fragrance, so as to smell it; and if he did cut it, he is exempt from punishment according to Torah law, but it is prohibited to do so. If he intends to clean his teeth with it, he may not cut it, and if he did cut it, he is liable to bring a sin-offering for transgressing a prohibited labor on Shabbat. This indicates that although some wood of a spice tree was used as animal fodder, it is nevertheless prohibited to cut it. This appears to contradict Rav Yehuda.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛砖转讗 驻讟讜专 讗讘诇 讗住讜专 拽讗 拽砖讬讗 诇讬 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转 诪讘注讬讗 讗诇讗 讻讬 转谞讬讗 讛讛讬讗 讘拽砖讬谉 拽砖讬谉 讘谞讬 诪诇讬诇讛 谞讬谞讛讜

Rav Yehuda said to Rav Kahana: Now, even the statement exempt but prohibited poses a difficulty to my opinion, and it is not reasonable. Is it required to say the opposite, i.e., liable to bring a sin-offering? This teaching cannot be understood at face value; rather, it must be understood as follows: When that baraita was taught, it was referring to hard pieces of wood such as beams, with regard to which there is a concern that one might perform a prohibited labor. The Gemara questions this: And can hard branches be crushed by hand?

讞住讜专讬 诪讞住专讗 讜讛讻讬 拽转谞讬 诪讜诇诇讜 讜诪专讬讞 讘讜 拽讜讟诪讜 讜诪专讬讞 讘讜 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 讘专讻讬谉 讗讘诇 讘拽砖讬谉 诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 讜讗诐 拽讟诪讜 驻讟讜专 讗讘诇 讗住讜专 诇讞爪讜抓 讘讜 砖讬谞讬讜 诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 讜讗诐 拽讟诪讜 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转

The Gemara replies: The baraita is incomplete and is teaching the following: With regard to wood of a spice tree, one may crush it and smell it and cut it and smell it. In what case is this statement said? With regard to soft pieces of wood, but with regard to hard ones, one may not cut them. And if he did cut it he is exempt, but it is prohibited to do so. If he intended to clean his teeth with it, he may not cut it, and if he did cut it, he is liable to bring a sin-offering.

转谞讬 讞讚讗 拽讜讟诪讜 讜诪专讬讞 讘讜 转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 诇讛专讬讞 讘讜 讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讘专讻讬谉 讛讗 讘拽砖讬谉

Similarly, it is taught in one baraita: One may cut it and smell it, and it is taught in another baraita: One may not cut it to smell it. Rabbi Zeira said that Rav 岣sda said: This is not difficult. In this case, when it is permitted, it is referring to soft wood. In that case, where the baraita prohibits it, it is referring to hard pieces of wood.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 讘拽砖讬谉 讗诪讗讬 诇讗 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 诪讛讗 讚转谞谉 砖讜讘专 讗讚诐 讗转 讛讞讘讬转 诇讗讻讜诇 诪诪谞讛 讙专讜讙专讜转 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 讬转讻讜讬谉 诇注砖讜转 讻诇讬 讜注讜讚 讛讗 专讘讗 讘专 专讘 讗讚讗 讜专讘讬谉 讘专 专讘 讗讚讗 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 讻讬 讛讜讬谞谉 讘讬 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讜讛 诪驻砖讞 讜讬讛讬讘 诇谉 讗诇讜转讗 讗诇讜转讗 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讞讝讬讗 诇拽转转讗 讚谞专讙讬 讜讞爪讬谞讬

With regard to the halakha itself, Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov strongly objects to this: With hard ones, why not? In what way is this case different from that which we learned in a mishna: A person may break a barrel in order to eat dried figs from it, provided that he does not thereby intend to make a vessel, and he may use the barrel afterward. Breaking off wood in order to smell it is certainly not more of a prohibited labor than breaking a barrel. And furthermore, it is Rava bar Rav Adda and Ravin bar Rav Adda, who both say: When we were at the house of Rav Yehuda, he would break and give us many sticks of wood of a spice tree, although they were hard enough to be fit for handles of axes and hatches.

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讛讗 专讘谞谉 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 谞讜讟诇 讗讚诐 拽讬住诐 诪砖诇驻谞讬讜 诇讞爪讜抓 讘讜 砖讬谞讬讜 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讗 讬讟讜诇 讗诇讗 诪讗讘讜住 砖诇 讘讛诪讛 讜砖讜讬谉 砖诇讗 讬拽讟诪谞讜 讜讗诐 拽讟诪讜 诇讞爪讜抓 讘讜 砖讬谞讬讜 讜诇驻转讜讞 讘讜 讛讚诇转 讘砖讜讙讙 讘砖讘转 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转 讘诪讝讬讚 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 住讜驻讙 讗转 讛讗专讘注讬诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; this case is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, whereas that case follows the Rabbis. As it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer says: On Shabbat or a Festival, a person may take a sliver of wood from before him to clean his teeth with it, and the Rabbis say: One may take a toothpick only from an animal鈥檚 trough; since it is fit for animal fodder, it is considered prepared for all purposes. And they agree that he may not pluck it. And if he did pluck it to clean his teeth with it or to use it as a key and open a door with it, if he did so unwittingly on Shabbat, he is liable to bring a sin-offering. If he did so intentionally on a Festival, he receives the forty lashes administered to one who desecrates the Festival by performing labor. These are the words of Rabbi Eliezer.

讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讞讚 讝讛 讜讗讞讚 讝讛 讗讬谞讜 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 砖讘讜转 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讚拽讗诪专 讛转诐 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转 讛讻讗 驻讟讜专 讗讘诇 讗住讜专 专讘谞谉 讚拽讗 讗诪专讬 讛转诐 驻讟讜专 讗讘诇 讗住讜专 讛讻讗 诪讜转专 诇讻转讞诇讛

And the Rabbis say: Both this and this, whether one did so on Shabbat or a Festival, even if he plucked it by hand to use it as a key, it is prohibited only due to a rabbinic decree. Therefore, Rabbi Eliezer, who states there that one who plucks a toothpick on Shabbat unwittingly in order to make a vessel such as a key is liable to bring a sin-offering, then here, in the case of one who cuts a sliver of wood in order to smell it, he is exempt, but it is prohibited. However, the Rabbis who state there, in the case of plucking a toothpick, that he is exempt but it is prohibited, then here, when one cuts a sliver of wood for purposes of smelling, it is permitted ab initio.

讜诇讬转 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讛讗 讚转谞谉 砖讜讘专 讗讚诐 讗转 讛讞讘讬转 诇讗讻讜诇 诪诪谞讛 讙专讜讙专讜转 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 讬转讻讜讬谉 诇注砖讜转 讻诇讬 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讻讬 转谞讬讗 讛讛讬讗 讘诪讜住转拽讬

The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Eliezer not accept this halakha that we learned in a mishna: A person may break a barrel in order to eat dried figs from it, provided that he does not thereby intend to make a vessel? This shows that if one does not intend to make a vessel, it is permitted ab initio; whereas Rabbi Eliezer maintains that he is exempt, but it is prohibited. The Gemara answers: Rav Ashi said: When that baraita was taught, its lenient ruling was with regard to a vessel patched with pitch [mustaki], meaning a vessel that had previously been broken and its pieces glued together with pitch. If one breaks it for his own needs, he does not smash a complete vessel, and he is therefore not considered to have fashioned a vessel.

讜诪讙讘讘 诪谉 讛讞爪专 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讙讘讘 诪谉 讛讞爪专 讜诪讚诇讬拽 砖讻诇 诪讛 砖讘讞爪专 诪讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 讬注砖讛 爪讘讜专讬谉 爪讘讜专讬谉 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪转讬专 讘诪讗讬 拽讗 诪驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 诪讞讝讬 讚拽讗 诪讻谞讬祝 诇诪讞专 讜诇讬讜诪讗 讗讞专讬谞讗 讜诪专 住讘专 拽讚专转讜 诪讜讻讞转 注诇讬讜

搂 It is taught in the mishna: And one may collect straw from the courtyard on a Festival. The Sages taught: One may collect materials from a courtyard and kindle a fire because everything in a courtyard is considered prepared, provided he does not arrange it in piles, and Rabbi Shimon permits it even in such a manner. The Gemara asks: With regard to what do they disagree; what is the basis of their dispute? One Sage, i.e., the Rabbis, who are stringent, holds: It looks as though he is collecting for tomorrow and another day, and it is therefore prohibited, so that one will not be suspected of preparing from a Festival to a weekday. And one Sage, Rabbi Shimon, holds: His pot proves his intention. When onlookers see that he is using the straw for cooking, they will not suspect him of preparing for after the Festival.

讗讬谉 诪讜爪讬讗讬谉 讗转 讛讗讜专 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗 诪讜诇讬讚 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘

搂 It is taught in the mishna that one may not produce new fire on a Festival in any manner. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara explains: Because he creates something new on a Festival. This is similar to an act of creation, and it is therefore prohibited.

讜讗讬谉 诪诇讘谞讬谉 讗转 讛专注驻讬诐 诪讗讬 拽讗 注讘讬讚 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讛讻讗 讘专注驻讬诐 讞讚砖讬诐 注住拽讬谞谉 诪驻谞讬

搂 The mishna states that one may not whiten tiles by heating them, in order to roast food on them. The Gemara asks: What does one thereby do; since his intention is to prepare food, how does this differ from any other manner of roasting? Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Here we are dealing with new tiles, and it is prohibited because

Scroll To Top