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

Today's Daf Yomi

March 26, 2020 | 讗壮 讘谞讬住谉 转砖状驻

Masechet Shabbat is sponsored in memory of Elliot Freilich, Eliyahu Daniel ben Bar Tzion David Halevi z"l by a group of women from Kehilath Jeshurun, Manhattan.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Shabbat 20

Today’s shiur is sponsored by Susie Handelman (Shayna Sara bat Miriam) in honor of all the brave and wonderful medical personnel taking care of coronavirus patients in Israel and around the world. May the learning be in their merit, give them divine asistance and protection. May HaKadosh Baruch Hu strengthen their hands in healing and help the scientists find a cure – and by Onnie Schiffmiller for a refuah shleima of Tzvi ben Frieda.聽

How much does an item need to be cooked in order to be able leave it on the fire before Shabbat? Like maachal ben drosai – what is that and where else does it appear in halacha? The gemara explain what part of the bread needs to be browned before Shabbat. Why is there a special dispensation for roasting the Pesach sacrifice and for the bonfire in the Beit Hamoked in the temple? How much does a regular bonfire need to be lit before Shabbat? The second chapter begins with a discussion of what cannot be used as wicks or oil for Shabbat candles since people need to use the light for seeing, it needs to be a good light. The gemara explains what each of聽 the items in the mishna are.

转讜讻谉 讝讛 转讜专讙诐 讙诐 诇: 注讘专讬转

讜讘讙讘讜诇讬谉 讻讚讬 砖转讗讞讜讝 讛讗讜专 讘专讜讘讜 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讘驻讞诪讬谉 讻诇 砖讛讜讗:

And, however, in the outlying areas, meaning in all of Eretz Yisrael outside the Temple, it is prohibited to light a bonfire on Shabbat eve, unless there is sufficient time for the fire to take hold in most of the bonfire, while it is still day. Rabbi Yehuda says: With a bonfire of coals, even in the outlying areas one is permitted to light the fire on Shabbat eve at nightfall, even if the fire only spread to any amount of the bonfire. The coals, once they are kindled, will not be extinguished again, and there is no concern lest he come to tend to them on Shabbat.

讙诪壮 讜讻诪讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗诪专 专讘 讻讚讬 砖讬爪讜诇讜 诪讘注讜讚 讬讜诐 讻诪讗讻诇 讘谉 讚专讜住讗讬 讗讬转诪专 谞诪讬 讗诪专 专讘 讗住讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讻诪讗讻诇 讘谉 讚专讜住讗讬 讗讬谉 讘讜 诪砖讜诐 讘讬砖讜诇讬 讙讜讬诐 转谞讬讗 讞谞谞讬讗 讗讜诪专 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讻诪讗讻诇 讘谉 讚专讜住讗讬 诪讜转专 诇讛砖讛讜转讜 注诇 讙讘讬 讻讬专讛 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讙专讜驻讛 讜拽讟讜诪讛:

GEMARA: We learned in the mishna that one may only roast meat and other food items if there remains sufficient time so that they could be roasted while it is still day. The Gemara asks: And how much do they need to be roasted in order to be considered sufficient, so that it will be permitted to complete their cooking afterward? Rabbi Elazar said that Rav said: So that they will be roasted while it is still day like the food of ben Drosai, which was partially roasted. Ben Drosai was a robber and pursued by all. He could not wait for his food to roast completely, so he sufficed with a partial roasting. It was also stated by another of the Sages, as Rav Asi said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Anything that is already cooked like the food of ben Drosai by a Jew, no longer has a problem of the cooking of gentiles. If a gentile completed cooking this food, it is, nevertheless, permitted to eat, even though, as a rule, it is prohibited to eat food cooked by gentiles. It was taught in a baraita, 岣nanya says: With regard to anything that is already cooked like the food of ben Drosai, it is permitted to keep it on the stove on Shabbat and even though this stove is not swept of coals and the burning coals are not covered with ashes. Since the food was already cooked to that extent, there is no concern that he will come to stoke the coals.

讗讬谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 讗转 讛驻转 讻讜壮: 讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 转讞转讜谉 讛讗讬讱 讚讙讘讬 转谞讜专 讗讜 讚讬诇诪讗 转讞转讜谉 讛讗讬讱 讚讙讘讬 讛讗讜专 转讗 砖诪注 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讻讚讬 砖讬拽专诪讜 驻谞讬讛 讛诪讚讜讘拽讬谉 讘转谞讜专:

We learned in the mishna that one may only place bread in the oven on Shabbat eve at nightfall if there remains sufficient time for its surface to form a crust while it is still day. According to Rabbi Eliezer, it is permitted to place bread in the oven on Shabbat eve while it is still day if there remains enough time for a crust to form on its bottom side. A dilemma was raised before them: With regard to the bottom mentioned in the mishna, is it that side close to the oven, or perhaps is it the bottom that is close to the fire? Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from what was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says explicitly: So that its surface that is stuck to the oven will form a crust.

诪砖诇砖诇讬谉 讗转 讛驻住讞: 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讘谞讬 讞讘讜专讛 讝专讬讝讬谉 讛谉 讛讗 诇讗讜 讛讻讬 诇讗 讜讛讗诪专 诪专 讙讚讬讗 讘讬谉 砖专讬拽 讘讬谉 诇讗 砖专讬拽 砖驻讬专 讚诪讬 讛转诐 诪讬谞转讞 讛讻讗 诇讗 诪讬谞转讞:

We learned in the mishna that one may lower the Paschal lamb into the oven on Shabbat eve at nightfall. The Gemara explains: What is the reason that this was permitted? Because the people of the group who registered to be counted together for the offering and eating of the Paschal lamb are vigilant in the performance of mitzvot and they will not transgress the halakhot of Shabbat. The Gemara asks: And if that was not so, there would not be permission to do so? Didn鈥檛 the Master say: The meat of a kid, whether it is in an oven that is sealed or whether it is in one that is not sealed, everyone agrees that he may well place it in the oven at nightfall because taking it out of the oven harms it, and there is no room for concern that he will do so? If so, there is no room for concern with regard to the meat of the Paschal lamb, which must be either a goat or a lamb (Exodus 12:5). The Gemara answers: In any case, it is necessary to emphasize the vigilance of the members of the group, as there, where it was permitted, it was specifically in a case that the goat was cut into pieces. However, here, with regard to the Paschal lamb, the goat is not cut into pieces. It is roasted whole, in accordance with the halakhot of the Paschal lamb. Consequently, it does not roast quickly, and there is room for concern lest he stoke the coals in order to accelerate the roasting. However, since the members of the group are vigilant, the Sages permitted it.

讜诪讗讞讬讝讬谉 讗转 讛讗讜专 讜讻讜壮: 诪谞讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇讗 转讘注专讜 讗砖 讘讻诇 诪讜砖讘讜转讬讻诐 讘讻诇 诪讜砖讘讜转讬讻诐 讗讬 讗转讛 诪讘注讬专 讗讘诇 讗转讛 诪讘注讬专 讘诪讚讜专转 讘讬转 讛诪讜拽讚 诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗讬 讛讻讬 讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖讘转 谞诪讬 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 拽专讗 讻讬 讗转讗 诇诪讬砖专讬 讗讘专讬诐 讜驻讚专讬诐 讛讜讗 讚讗转讗 讜讻讛谞讬诐 讝专讬讝讬谉 讛谉:

We learned the following in the mishna: And one may light the fire in the bonfire of the Chamber of the Hearth in the Temple on Shabbat eve adjacent to nightfall and allow the fire to spread afterward throughout the entire bonfire. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters that doing so is permitted, derived? Rav Huna said, as it is stated: 鈥淵ou shall kindle no fire in all of your habitations on the day of Shabbat鈥 (Exodus 35:3). The Gemara infers: 鈥淚n all of your habitations,鈥 the dwelling places of the Jewish people, you may not kindle fire, but you may kindle fire on Shabbat in the bonfire of the Chamber of the Hearth, which is in the Temple. Rav 岣sda objects: If so, if that is the source for the fact that kindling the fire is permitted on Shabbat eve at nightfall, it should also be permitted to kindle it even on Shabbat itself. Why kindle the fire while it is still day? Rather, Rav 岣sda said, it should be understood as follows: When the verse came, it came to permit burning the limbs and fats of the sacrifices on the altar, even on Shabbat. Lighting the bonfire of the Chamber of the Hearth was not permitted on Shabbat itself, since it is not part of the Temple service. It was kindled merely for the benefit of the priests. The fact that there was no concern about lighting the bonfire on Shabbat eve at nightfall is because the priests are vigilant with regard to mitzvot, and they will certainly not come to stoke the coals.

讜讘讙讘讜诇讬谉 讻讚讬 砖转讗讞讜讝 讻讜壮: 诪讗讬 专讜讘谉 讗诪专 专讘 专讜讘 讻诇 讗讞讚 讜讗讞讚 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讻讚讬 砖诇讗 讬讗诪专讜 讛讘讗 注爪讬诐 讜谞谞讬讞 转讞转讬讛谉 转谞讗 专讘 讞讬讬讗 诇住讬注讬讛 诇砖诪讜讗诇 讻讚讬 砖转讛讗 砖诇讛讘转 注讜诇讛 诪讗讬诇讬讛 讜诇讗 砖转讛讗 砖诇讛讘转 注讜诇讛 注诇 讬讚讬 讚讘专 讗讞专

We also learned in the mishna that in the outlying areas one may not light a bonfire on Shabbat eve at nightfall unless there is sufficient time for the fire to take hold in most of the bonfire. The Gemara asks about this: What is meant by the measure of most of it? Rav said: Most of each and every one of the branches. And Shmuel said: It is sufficient if the branches are sufficiently lit so that they will not say to each other: Bring thinner branches, which are easier to kindle, and we will place them beneath the existing branches to accelerate their burning. Rav 岣yya taught a baraita to support Shmuel, from a halakha that was stated with regard to the Temple candelabrum. The baraita said that it must be lit to the point that the flame will ascend on its own and not that the flame will ascend due to something else. In a place where kindling is required, it is sufficient to ensure that the fire burns on its own (Tosafot).

注抓 讬讞讬讚讬 专讘 讗诪专 专讜讘 注讘讬讜 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讘专讜讘 讛讬拽驻讜 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讛诇讻讱 讘注讬谞谉 专讜讘 注讘讬讜 讜讘注讬谞谉 专讜讘 讛讬拽驻讜 讻转谞讗讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讗诪专 讻讚讬 砖讬砖讞转 讛注抓 诪诪诇讗讻转 讛讗讜诪谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讗 讗讜诪专 讻讚讬 砖转讗讞讝 讛讗砖 诪砖谞讬 爪讚讚讬谉 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 专讗讬讛 诇讚讘专 讝讻专 诇讚讘专 讗转 砖谞讬 拽爪讜转讬讜 讗讻诇讛 讛讗砖 讜转讜讻讜 谞讞专 讛讬爪诇讞 诇诪诇讗讻讛:

To this point, the Gemara was discussing a bonfire. However, the Gemara asks: What is the halakha with regard to a single branch that one kindles on Shabbat eve? Rav said: Most of the thickness of the wood must ignite while it is still day, before Shabbat. Others say the same halakha in the name of Rav: Most of the circumference of the wood must ignite while it is still day, before Shabbat. Rav Pappa said: Since there is disagreement with regard to Rav鈥檚 halakha, and it is not clear exactly what he said, therefore, we require most of its thickness to ignite and we require most of its circumference to ignite; thereby, we avoid entering into a situation of uncertainty. The Gemara comments: This dispute is parallel to the dispute of the tanna鈥檌m, who disagreed with regard to a different matter. Rabbi 岣yya said: A fire is considered to be kindled when the wood will be ruined to the extent that it can no longer be used for the work of a craftsman. And Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: So that the fire will take hold from both sides of the wood. And he added: And even though there is no proof for the matter, i.e., what constitutes burning as far as Shabbat is concerned, nevertheless there is an allusion to the matter that wood in this condition is considered burnt, as it is stated: 鈥淏ehold, it is cast into the fire for fuel; the fire consumed both of its ends and the midst of it is burned. Is it fit for any work?鈥 (Ezekiel 15:4).

讜讛讗讞 诇驻谞讬讜 诪讘注专转 诪讗讬 讗讞 讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讜讜谞讗 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 注爪讬诐 砖谞讚诇拽讜 讘讗讞讜讜谞讗 讛讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 诇讛讜 诪讗谉 讘注讬 讗讞讜讜谞讗 讗砖转讻讞 注专讘转讗

Along the same lines, the Gemara cites a different verse that discusses burning fire, as it relates to King Jehoiakim: 鈥淎nd the hearth [a岣] was burning before him鈥 (Jeremiah 36:22). Amora鈥檌m disputed the question: What is the a岣 mentioned in the verse? Rav said that it means willow branch [a岣ana]. And Shmuel said: It is referring to wood that was lit with a岣ana, meaning with fraternity [a岣a], i.e., that each piece of wood is lit from another, even small ones from large ones. The meaning of the word a岣ana was forgotten; the Gemara relates that this man, who said to people in the marketplace: Who wants a岣ana? And he was found to be selling willow, and therefore, the meaning of the word was understood.

讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 拽谞讬诐 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 讗讙讚谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 讙专注讬谞讬谉 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 谞转谞谉 讘讞讜转诇讜转 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗讚专讘讛 讗讬驻讻讗 诪住转讘专讗 拽谞讬诐 诪讘讚专谉 讗讙讚谉 诇讗 诪讘讚专谉 讙专注讬谞讬谉 诪讘讚专谉 谞转谞谉 讘讞讜转诇讜转 诇讗 诪讘讚专谉 讗讬转诪专 谞诪讬

Rav Huna said: Reeds with which he lights a bonfire on Shabbat eve do not require that most of the reeds ignite prior to Shabbat, because they burn easily. However, if he tied them together into a bundle, the reeds assume the legal status of a wooden beam and most of the reeds need to catch fire before Shabbat. The same is true with regard to date seeds that he kindles. They do not require that most of them catch fire before Shabbat, because they burn easily. However, if he placed them in woven baskets [岣talot], most of the seeds need to ignite before Shabbat. Rav 岣sda strongly objects to this: On the contrary, the opposite makes sense, as reeds are scattered and difficult to burn. When they are bundled, they are not scattered, and therefore burn more easily. Similarly, seeds are scattered. And if he placed them in woven baskets, they are not scattered. It was also stated

讗诪专 专讘 讻讛谞讗 拽谞讬诐 砖讗讙讚谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 诇讗 讗讙讚谉 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 讙专注讬谞讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 谞转谞谉 讘讞讜转诇讜转 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘

on a similar note, Rav Kahana said: Reeds that one tied them into a bundle, require that most of them ignite. If one did not tie them into a bundle, they do not require that most of them ignite, in accordance with the statement of Rav Huna. However, seeds require that most of them ignite. And if he placed them in woven baskets, they do not require that most of them catch fire.

转谞讬 专讘 讬讜住祝 讗专讘注 诪讚讜专讜转 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 砖诇 讝驻转 讜砖诇 讙驻专讬转 讜砖诇 讙讘讬谞讛 讜砖诇 专讘讘 讘诪转谞讬转讗 转谞讗 讗祝 砖诇 拽砖 讜砖诇 讙讘讘讗

Rav Yosef taught a baraita: Four bonfires do not require that most of the flammable materials catch fire, as their materials burn easily once the fire takes hold of them. And they are: A bonfire of pitch, and of sulfur, and of dry cheese, and of fatty materials. And it was taught in a baraita: A bonfire of straw and one of rakings of wood gathered from the field also do not require that most of it catch fire.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 注爪讬诐 砖诇 讘讘诇 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讬讜住祝 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗讬诇讬诪讗 住讬诇转讬 讛砖转讗 驻转讬诇讛 讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讛诪讚诇讬拽 爪专讬讱 砖讬讚诇讬拽 讘专讜讘 讛讬讜爪讗 住讬诇转讬 诪讘注讬讗 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 砖讜讻讗 讚讗专讝讗 专诪讬 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 讝讗讝讗:

Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Babylonian wood does not require that most of it catch fire. Rav Yosef the Babylonian objects: What is that wood that they use in Babylonia that burns so well? If you say that it refers to wood slivers used for burning and light, now that with regard to a wick, Ulla said that one who lights it for a Shabbat lamp must light most of what emerges from the vessel; is it necessary to mention with regard to wood slivers that most of them must be lit? Rather, Rav Yosef said: Certainly the reference is to the branch of a cedar tree. And Rami bar Abba said: The reference here is to a hyssop [zaza].

讛讚专谉 注诇讱 讬爪讬讗讜转 讛砖讘转

 

诪转谞讬壮 讘诪讛 诪讚诇讬拽讬谉 讜讘诪讛 讗讬谉 诪讚诇讬拽讬谉 讗讬谉 诪讚诇讬拽讬谉 诇讗 讘诇讻砖 讜诇讗 讘讞讜住谉 讜诇讗 讘讻诇讱 讜诇讗 讘驻转讬诇转 讛讗讬讚谉 讜诇讗 讘驻转讬诇转 讛诪讚讘专 讜诇讗 讘讬专讜拽讛 砖注诇 驻谞讬 讛诪讬诐 讜诇讗 讘讝驻转 讜诇讗 讘砖注讜讛 讜诇讗 讘砖诪谉 拽讬拽 讜诇讗 讘砖诪谉 砖专讬驻讛 讜诇讗 讘讗诇讬讛 讜诇讗 讘讞诇讘 谞讞讜诐 讛诪讚讬 讗讜诪专 诪讚诇讬拽讬谉 讘讞诇讘 诪讘讜砖诇 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讞讚 诪讘讜砖诇 讜讗讞讚 砖讗讬谞讜 诪讘讜砖诇 讗讬谉 诪讚诇讬拽讬谉 讘讜:

This mishna cites a list of fuels and wicks that one may not use in kindling the Shabbat lights, either because their use might induce one to perform a prohibited labor on Shabbat or because they are not in keeping with the deference due Shabbat. The mishna begins by listing the materials that one may not use as wicks. That is followed by a list of the substances that one may not use as fuel.

MISHNA: With what may one light the Shabbat lamp, and with what may one not light it? With regard to types of prohibited wicks, one may light neither with cedar bast [lekhesh], nor with uncombed flax [岣sen], nor with raw silk [kalakh], nor with willow bast [petilat haidan], nor with desert weed [petilat hamidbar], nor with green moss that is on the surface of the water. With regard to types of prohibited oils, one may light neither with pitch [zefet], nor with wax [shaava], nor with castor oil [shemen kik], nor with burnt oil [shemen sereifa], nor with fat from a sheep鈥檚 tail [alya], nor with tallow [岣lev]. Na岣m the Mede says: One may light with boiled tallow. And the Rabbis say: Both tallow that was boiled and tallow that was not boiled, one may not light with them.

讙诪壮 诇讻砖 砖讜讻讗 讚讗专讝讗 砖讜讻讗 讚讗专讝讗 注抓 讘注诇诪讗 讛讜讗 讘注诪专谞讬转讗 讚讗讬转 讘讬讛:

GEMARA: Most of the terms used in the mishna were not understood in Babylonia. Therefore, the Gemara translated and clarified them. We learned in the mishna that one may not light with lekhesh. The Gemara explains that lekhesh is the branch of the cedar tree. The Gemara asks: Isn鈥檛 the cedar mere wood? How would one fashion a wick out of wood? The Gemara answers: The mishna is referring to the woolly substance that is beneath its bark.

讜诇讗 讘讞讜住谉: 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 谞注讜专转 砖诇 驻砖转谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讜讛讻转讬讘 讜讛讬讛 讛讞住讜谉 诇谞注讜专转 诪讻诇诇 讚讞讜住谉 诇讗讜 谞注讜专转 讛讜讗 讗诇讗 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讻讬转谞讗 讚讚讬讬拽 讜诇讗 谞驻讬抓:

The mishna taught further that one may not light with 岣sen. Rav Yosef said: 岣sen is tow, thin chaff that falls off the stalk of combed flax. Abaye said to him: Isn鈥檛 it written: 鈥淎nd the 岣son shall be as tow鈥 (Isaiah 1:31)? By inference, 岣sen is not tow. Rather, Abaye said: 岣sen is flax whose stalk was crushed but not yet combed. The threads in the stalk are still covered by a shell and therefore do not burn well.

讜诇讗 讘讻诇讱: 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 砖讗诇转讬谞讛讜 诇讻诇 谞讞讜转讬 讬诪讗 讜讗诪专讬 (诇讛) 讻讜诇讻讗 砖诪讬讛 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专 讝注讬专讗 讗诪专 讙讜砖拽专讗

And we also learned in the mishna that one may not light with kalakh. Shmuel said: I asked all seafarers, and they said to me that the present-day name of kalakh mentioned in the mishna is kulka. Rav Yitz岣k bar Ze鈥檌ra said: Kalakh is the cocoon of the silkworm [gushkera].

专讘讬谉 讜讗讘讬讬 讛讜讜 讬转讘讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘谞讗 谞讞诪讬讛 讗讞讜讛 讚专讬砖 讙诇讜转讗 讞讝讬讬讛 讚讛讜讛 诇讘讬砖 诪讟讻住讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬谉 诇讗讘讬讬 讛讬讬谞讜 讻诇讱 讚转谞谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗谞谉 砖讬专讗 驻专谞讚讗 拽专讬谞谉 诇讬讛

The Gemara relates that Ravin and Abaye were sitting before Rabbana Ne岣mya, brother of the Exilarch. Ravin saw that Rabbana Ne岣mya was wearing metaksa, a type of silk. Ravin said to Abaye: This is the kalakh that we learned in our mishna. Abaye said to him: We call it shira peranda.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讛砖讬专讗讬诐 讜讛讻诇讱 讜讛住讬专讬拽讬谉 讞讬讬讘讬谉 讘爪讬爪讬转 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘讬谉 转讬讜讘转讗 讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 砖讬专讗 诇讞讜讚 讜砖讬专讗 驻专谞讚讗 诇讞讜讚:

The Gemara raises an objection from that which we learned: The shiraim, the kalakh, and the sirikin, different types of silk, all require ritual fringes. Apparently, shiraim and kalakh are different types of silk. This is a conclusive refutation of the statement of Ravin who identified kalakh with shira peranda. The Gemara responds: Indeed, it is a conclusive refutation. If you wish, say instead that shira is a distinct entity, and shira peranda is a distinct entity. Shira peranda is kalakh.

讜诇讗 讘驻转讬诇转 讛讗讬讚谉: 讗讞讜讬谞讗 专讘讬谉 讜讗讘讬讬 讛讜讜 拽讗讝诇讜 讘驻拽转讗 讚讟诪专讜专讬转讗 讞讝讬谞讛讜 诇讛谞讛讜 讗专讘转讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬谉 诇讗讘讬讬 讛讬讬谞讜 讗讬讚谉 讚转谞谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讛讬讗 注抓 讘注诇诪讗 讛讜讗 拽诇祝 讜讗讞讜讬 诇讬讛 注诪专谞讬转讗 讚讘讬谞讬 讘讬谞讬 讜诇讗 讘驻转讬诇转 讛诪讚讘专 砖讘专讗:

And we learned in the mishna that one may not light with petilat haidan. The Gemara explains that petilat haidan is willow, which does not burn well. The Gemara relates that Ravin and Abaye were walking in the valley of Tamrurita. They saw these willow trees. Ravin said to Abaye: This is the idan that we learned in the mishna. Abaye said to him: But this is mere wood. How would one fashion a wick from it? Ravin peeled the bark and showed him the wool-like substance between the bark and the tree. We also learned in the mishna: Nor with desert silk [petilat hamidbar]. That is the mullein plant, which does not burn well.

讜诇讗 讘讬专讜拽讛 砖注诇 讻讜壮: 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讗讜讻诪转讗 讚讞专讬爪讬 讗讬驻专讜讻讬 诪驻专讻谉 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讗讜讻诪转讗 讚讗专讘讗

And we learned in the mishna that one may not use the green moss that is on the surface of the water to fashion a wick for lighting the Shabbat lamp. The Gemara asks: What is this green moss? If you say that it is the moss found on standing water, isn鈥檛 that moss brittle and therefore unfit material from which to fashion a wick? Rather, Rav Pappa said: It is referring to the moss that accumulates on ships, which is more pliable and when dried can be fashioned into a wick.

转谞讗 讛讜住讬驻讜 注诇讬讛谉 砖诇 爪诪专 讜砖诇 砖注专 讜转谞讗 讚讬讚谉 爪诪专 诪讻讜讜抓 讻讜讜讬抓 砖注专 讗讬讞专讜讻讬 诪讬讞专讱:

It was taught in a baraita: The Sages added to the list of prohibited wicks in the mishna those made of wool and hair as well. The Gemara remarks: And our tanna did not consider it necessary to enumerate these because it is virtually impossible to fashion wicks from these materials, as, when they burn, wool shrinks and hair is scorched. Consequently, they are unsuitable for use as wicks.

讜诇讗 讘讝驻转: 讝驻转 讝讬驻转讗 砖注讜讛 拽讬专讜转讗 转谞讗 注讚 讻讗谉 驻住讜诇 驻转讬诇讜转 诪讻讗谉 讜讗讬诇讱 驻住讜诇 砖诪谞讬诐 驻砖讬讟讗 砖注讜讛 讗讬爪讟专讬讻讗 诇讬讛 诪讛讜 讚转讬诪讗 诇驻转讬诇讜转 谞诪讬 诇讗 讞讝讬讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

And we learned in the mishna that one may not use zefet or shaava as fuel in lighting the Shabbat lamp. The Gemara explains that zefet is pitch, and shaava is wax. It was taught in a baraita: Until this point, the word zefet, the mishna is dealing with disqualification of materials unfit for use as wicks, and from this point on it is dealing with disqualification of substances unfit for use as oils. The Gemara asks: Obviously, a wick cannot be made from pitch and similar materials. The Gemara answers: It was necessary for the mishna to mention wax, lest you say that it is also unfit for use as a coating for wicks, in the manner that wicks are usually made. Therefore, it teaches us that even though wax is unfit for use as oil, it is fit for use as coating for wicks.

讗诪专 专诪讬 讘专 讗讘讬谉 注讟专谞讗 驻住讜诇转讗 讚讝讬驻转讗 砖注讜讛 驻住讜诇转讗 讚讚讜讘砖讗

Rami bar Avin said: Tar [itran] is the by-product of pitch. When wood is burned to extract pitch, a clearer liquid oozes out after the pitch, and that is tar. Similarly, wax is the by-product of honey.

Masechet Shabbat is sponsored in memory of Elliot Freilich, Eliyahu Daniel ben Bar Tzion David Halevi z"l by a group of women from Kehilath Jeshurun, Manhattan.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

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

Women's Daf Yomi of Alon Shvut

Alon Shvut Women’s Daf Yomi- Shabbat 20

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByGkOQg24Ww With Rabbanit Dr. Tamara Spitz
talking talmud_square

Shabbat 20: Does My Toast Have Crunch?

What does it mean for something to be cooked? How much must be cooked before Shabbat starts? The measurement of...
Ilana Kurshan

Daf Yomi in the Time of Corona- Vayakhel-Pekudei

I began learning Masechet Shabbat against the backdrop of the Corona Crisis, as I gradually realized that people all over...

Shabbat 20

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Shabbat 20

讜讘讙讘讜诇讬谉 讻讚讬 砖转讗讞讜讝 讛讗讜专 讘专讜讘讜 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讘驻讞诪讬谉 讻诇 砖讛讜讗:

And, however, in the outlying areas, meaning in all of Eretz Yisrael outside the Temple, it is prohibited to light a bonfire on Shabbat eve, unless there is sufficient time for the fire to take hold in most of the bonfire, while it is still day. Rabbi Yehuda says: With a bonfire of coals, even in the outlying areas one is permitted to light the fire on Shabbat eve at nightfall, even if the fire only spread to any amount of the bonfire. The coals, once they are kindled, will not be extinguished again, and there is no concern lest he come to tend to them on Shabbat.

讙诪壮 讜讻诪讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗诪专 专讘 讻讚讬 砖讬爪讜诇讜 诪讘注讜讚 讬讜诐 讻诪讗讻诇 讘谉 讚专讜住讗讬 讗讬转诪专 谞诪讬 讗诪专 专讘 讗住讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讻诪讗讻诇 讘谉 讚专讜住讗讬 讗讬谉 讘讜 诪砖讜诐 讘讬砖讜诇讬 讙讜讬诐 转谞讬讗 讞谞谞讬讗 讗讜诪专 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讻诪讗讻诇 讘谉 讚专讜住讗讬 诪讜转专 诇讛砖讛讜转讜 注诇 讙讘讬 讻讬专讛 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讙专讜驻讛 讜拽讟讜诪讛:

GEMARA: We learned in the mishna that one may only roast meat and other food items if there remains sufficient time so that they could be roasted while it is still day. The Gemara asks: And how much do they need to be roasted in order to be considered sufficient, so that it will be permitted to complete their cooking afterward? Rabbi Elazar said that Rav said: So that they will be roasted while it is still day like the food of ben Drosai, which was partially roasted. Ben Drosai was a robber and pursued by all. He could not wait for his food to roast completely, so he sufficed with a partial roasting. It was also stated by another of the Sages, as Rav Asi said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Anything that is already cooked like the food of ben Drosai by a Jew, no longer has a problem of the cooking of gentiles. If a gentile completed cooking this food, it is, nevertheless, permitted to eat, even though, as a rule, it is prohibited to eat food cooked by gentiles. It was taught in a baraita, 岣nanya says: With regard to anything that is already cooked like the food of ben Drosai, it is permitted to keep it on the stove on Shabbat and even though this stove is not swept of coals and the burning coals are not covered with ashes. Since the food was already cooked to that extent, there is no concern that he will come to stoke the coals.

讗讬谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 讗转 讛驻转 讻讜壮: 讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 转讞转讜谉 讛讗讬讱 讚讙讘讬 转谞讜专 讗讜 讚讬诇诪讗 转讞转讜谉 讛讗讬讱 讚讙讘讬 讛讗讜专 转讗 砖诪注 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讻讚讬 砖讬拽专诪讜 驻谞讬讛 讛诪讚讜讘拽讬谉 讘转谞讜专:

We learned in the mishna that one may only place bread in the oven on Shabbat eve at nightfall if there remains sufficient time for its surface to form a crust while it is still day. According to Rabbi Eliezer, it is permitted to place bread in the oven on Shabbat eve while it is still day if there remains enough time for a crust to form on its bottom side. A dilemma was raised before them: With regard to the bottom mentioned in the mishna, is it that side close to the oven, or perhaps is it the bottom that is close to the fire? Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from what was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says explicitly: So that its surface that is stuck to the oven will form a crust.

诪砖诇砖诇讬谉 讗转 讛驻住讞: 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讘谞讬 讞讘讜专讛 讝专讬讝讬谉 讛谉 讛讗 诇讗讜 讛讻讬 诇讗 讜讛讗诪专 诪专 讙讚讬讗 讘讬谉 砖专讬拽 讘讬谉 诇讗 砖专讬拽 砖驻讬专 讚诪讬 讛转诐 诪讬谞转讞 讛讻讗 诇讗 诪讬谞转讞:

We learned in the mishna that one may lower the Paschal lamb into the oven on Shabbat eve at nightfall. The Gemara explains: What is the reason that this was permitted? Because the people of the group who registered to be counted together for the offering and eating of the Paschal lamb are vigilant in the performance of mitzvot and they will not transgress the halakhot of Shabbat. The Gemara asks: And if that was not so, there would not be permission to do so? Didn鈥檛 the Master say: The meat of a kid, whether it is in an oven that is sealed or whether it is in one that is not sealed, everyone agrees that he may well place it in the oven at nightfall because taking it out of the oven harms it, and there is no room for concern that he will do so? If so, there is no room for concern with regard to the meat of the Paschal lamb, which must be either a goat or a lamb (Exodus 12:5). The Gemara answers: In any case, it is necessary to emphasize the vigilance of the members of the group, as there, where it was permitted, it was specifically in a case that the goat was cut into pieces. However, here, with regard to the Paschal lamb, the goat is not cut into pieces. It is roasted whole, in accordance with the halakhot of the Paschal lamb. Consequently, it does not roast quickly, and there is room for concern lest he stoke the coals in order to accelerate the roasting. However, since the members of the group are vigilant, the Sages permitted it.

讜诪讗讞讬讝讬谉 讗转 讛讗讜专 讜讻讜壮: 诪谞讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇讗 转讘注专讜 讗砖 讘讻诇 诪讜砖讘讜转讬讻诐 讘讻诇 诪讜砖讘讜转讬讻诐 讗讬 讗转讛 诪讘注讬专 讗讘诇 讗转讛 诪讘注讬专 讘诪讚讜专转 讘讬转 讛诪讜拽讚 诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗讬 讛讻讬 讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖讘转 谞诪讬 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 拽专讗 讻讬 讗转讗 诇诪讬砖专讬 讗讘专讬诐 讜驻讚专讬诐 讛讜讗 讚讗转讗 讜讻讛谞讬诐 讝专讬讝讬谉 讛谉:

We learned the following in the mishna: And one may light the fire in the bonfire of the Chamber of the Hearth in the Temple on Shabbat eve adjacent to nightfall and allow the fire to spread afterward throughout the entire bonfire. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters that doing so is permitted, derived? Rav Huna said, as it is stated: 鈥淵ou shall kindle no fire in all of your habitations on the day of Shabbat鈥 (Exodus 35:3). The Gemara infers: 鈥淚n all of your habitations,鈥 the dwelling places of the Jewish people, you may not kindle fire, but you may kindle fire on Shabbat in the bonfire of the Chamber of the Hearth, which is in the Temple. Rav 岣sda objects: If so, if that is the source for the fact that kindling the fire is permitted on Shabbat eve at nightfall, it should also be permitted to kindle it even on Shabbat itself. Why kindle the fire while it is still day? Rather, Rav 岣sda said, it should be understood as follows: When the verse came, it came to permit burning the limbs and fats of the sacrifices on the altar, even on Shabbat. Lighting the bonfire of the Chamber of the Hearth was not permitted on Shabbat itself, since it is not part of the Temple service. It was kindled merely for the benefit of the priests. The fact that there was no concern about lighting the bonfire on Shabbat eve at nightfall is because the priests are vigilant with regard to mitzvot, and they will certainly not come to stoke the coals.

讜讘讙讘讜诇讬谉 讻讚讬 砖转讗讞讜讝 讻讜壮: 诪讗讬 专讜讘谉 讗诪专 专讘 专讜讘 讻诇 讗讞讚 讜讗讞讚 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讻讚讬 砖诇讗 讬讗诪专讜 讛讘讗 注爪讬诐 讜谞谞讬讞 转讞转讬讛谉 转谞讗 专讘 讞讬讬讗 诇住讬注讬讛 诇砖诪讜讗诇 讻讚讬 砖转讛讗 砖诇讛讘转 注讜诇讛 诪讗讬诇讬讛 讜诇讗 砖转讛讗 砖诇讛讘转 注讜诇讛 注诇 讬讚讬 讚讘专 讗讞专

We also learned in the mishna that in the outlying areas one may not light a bonfire on Shabbat eve at nightfall unless there is sufficient time for the fire to take hold in most of the bonfire. The Gemara asks about this: What is meant by the measure of most of it? Rav said: Most of each and every one of the branches. And Shmuel said: It is sufficient if the branches are sufficiently lit so that they will not say to each other: Bring thinner branches, which are easier to kindle, and we will place them beneath the existing branches to accelerate their burning. Rav 岣yya taught a baraita to support Shmuel, from a halakha that was stated with regard to the Temple candelabrum. The baraita said that it must be lit to the point that the flame will ascend on its own and not that the flame will ascend due to something else. In a place where kindling is required, it is sufficient to ensure that the fire burns on its own (Tosafot).

注抓 讬讞讬讚讬 专讘 讗诪专 专讜讘 注讘讬讜 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讘专讜讘 讛讬拽驻讜 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讛诇讻讱 讘注讬谞谉 专讜讘 注讘讬讜 讜讘注讬谞谉 专讜讘 讛讬拽驻讜 讻转谞讗讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讗诪专 讻讚讬 砖讬砖讞转 讛注抓 诪诪诇讗讻转 讛讗讜诪谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讗 讗讜诪专 讻讚讬 砖转讗讞讝 讛讗砖 诪砖谞讬 爪讚讚讬谉 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 专讗讬讛 诇讚讘专 讝讻专 诇讚讘专 讗转 砖谞讬 拽爪讜转讬讜 讗讻诇讛 讛讗砖 讜转讜讻讜 谞讞专 讛讬爪诇讞 诇诪诇讗讻讛:

To this point, the Gemara was discussing a bonfire. However, the Gemara asks: What is the halakha with regard to a single branch that one kindles on Shabbat eve? Rav said: Most of the thickness of the wood must ignite while it is still day, before Shabbat. Others say the same halakha in the name of Rav: Most of the circumference of the wood must ignite while it is still day, before Shabbat. Rav Pappa said: Since there is disagreement with regard to Rav鈥檚 halakha, and it is not clear exactly what he said, therefore, we require most of its thickness to ignite and we require most of its circumference to ignite; thereby, we avoid entering into a situation of uncertainty. The Gemara comments: This dispute is parallel to the dispute of the tanna鈥檌m, who disagreed with regard to a different matter. Rabbi 岣yya said: A fire is considered to be kindled when the wood will be ruined to the extent that it can no longer be used for the work of a craftsman. And Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: So that the fire will take hold from both sides of the wood. And he added: And even though there is no proof for the matter, i.e., what constitutes burning as far as Shabbat is concerned, nevertheless there is an allusion to the matter that wood in this condition is considered burnt, as it is stated: 鈥淏ehold, it is cast into the fire for fuel; the fire consumed both of its ends and the midst of it is burned. Is it fit for any work?鈥 (Ezekiel 15:4).

讜讛讗讞 诇驻谞讬讜 诪讘注专转 诪讗讬 讗讞 讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讜讜谞讗 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 注爪讬诐 砖谞讚诇拽讜 讘讗讞讜讜谞讗 讛讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 诇讛讜 诪讗谉 讘注讬 讗讞讜讜谞讗 讗砖转讻讞 注专讘转讗

Along the same lines, the Gemara cites a different verse that discusses burning fire, as it relates to King Jehoiakim: 鈥淎nd the hearth [a岣] was burning before him鈥 (Jeremiah 36:22). Amora鈥檌m disputed the question: What is the a岣 mentioned in the verse? Rav said that it means willow branch [a岣ana]. And Shmuel said: It is referring to wood that was lit with a岣ana, meaning with fraternity [a岣a], i.e., that each piece of wood is lit from another, even small ones from large ones. The meaning of the word a岣ana was forgotten; the Gemara relates that this man, who said to people in the marketplace: Who wants a岣ana? And he was found to be selling willow, and therefore, the meaning of the word was understood.

讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 拽谞讬诐 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 讗讙讚谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 讙专注讬谞讬谉 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 谞转谞谉 讘讞讜转诇讜转 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗讚专讘讛 讗讬驻讻讗 诪住转讘专讗 拽谞讬诐 诪讘讚专谉 讗讙讚谉 诇讗 诪讘讚专谉 讙专注讬谞讬谉 诪讘讚专谉 谞转谞谉 讘讞讜转诇讜转 诇讗 诪讘讚专谉 讗讬转诪专 谞诪讬

Rav Huna said: Reeds with which he lights a bonfire on Shabbat eve do not require that most of the reeds ignite prior to Shabbat, because they burn easily. However, if he tied them together into a bundle, the reeds assume the legal status of a wooden beam and most of the reeds need to catch fire before Shabbat. The same is true with regard to date seeds that he kindles. They do not require that most of them catch fire before Shabbat, because they burn easily. However, if he placed them in woven baskets [岣talot], most of the seeds need to ignite before Shabbat. Rav 岣sda strongly objects to this: On the contrary, the opposite makes sense, as reeds are scattered and difficult to burn. When they are bundled, they are not scattered, and therefore burn more easily. Similarly, seeds are scattered. And if he placed them in woven baskets, they are not scattered. It was also stated

讗诪专 专讘 讻讛谞讗 拽谞讬诐 砖讗讙讚谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 诇讗 讗讙讚谉 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 讙专注讬谞讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 谞转谞谉 讘讞讜转诇讜转 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘

on a similar note, Rav Kahana said: Reeds that one tied them into a bundle, require that most of them ignite. If one did not tie them into a bundle, they do not require that most of them ignite, in accordance with the statement of Rav Huna. However, seeds require that most of them ignite. And if he placed them in woven baskets, they do not require that most of them catch fire.

转谞讬 专讘 讬讜住祝 讗专讘注 诪讚讜专讜转 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 砖诇 讝驻转 讜砖诇 讙驻专讬转 讜砖诇 讙讘讬谞讛 讜砖诇 专讘讘 讘诪转谞讬转讗 转谞讗 讗祝 砖诇 拽砖 讜砖诇 讙讘讘讗

Rav Yosef taught a baraita: Four bonfires do not require that most of the flammable materials catch fire, as their materials burn easily once the fire takes hold of them. And they are: A bonfire of pitch, and of sulfur, and of dry cheese, and of fatty materials. And it was taught in a baraita: A bonfire of straw and one of rakings of wood gathered from the field also do not require that most of it catch fire.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 注爪讬诐 砖诇 讘讘诇 讗讬谉 爪专讬讻讬谉 专讜讘 诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讬讜住祝 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗讬诇讬诪讗 住讬诇转讬 讛砖转讗 驻转讬诇讛 讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讛诪讚诇讬拽 爪专讬讱 砖讬讚诇讬拽 讘专讜讘 讛讬讜爪讗 住讬诇转讬 诪讘注讬讗 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 砖讜讻讗 讚讗专讝讗 专诪讬 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 讝讗讝讗:

Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Babylonian wood does not require that most of it catch fire. Rav Yosef the Babylonian objects: What is that wood that they use in Babylonia that burns so well? If you say that it refers to wood slivers used for burning and light, now that with regard to a wick, Ulla said that one who lights it for a Shabbat lamp must light most of what emerges from the vessel; is it necessary to mention with regard to wood slivers that most of them must be lit? Rather, Rav Yosef said: Certainly the reference is to the branch of a cedar tree. And Rami bar Abba said: The reference here is to a hyssop [zaza].

讛讚专谉 注诇讱 讬爪讬讗讜转 讛砖讘转

 

诪转谞讬壮 讘诪讛 诪讚诇讬拽讬谉 讜讘诪讛 讗讬谉 诪讚诇讬拽讬谉 讗讬谉 诪讚诇讬拽讬谉 诇讗 讘诇讻砖 讜诇讗 讘讞讜住谉 讜诇讗 讘讻诇讱 讜诇讗 讘驻转讬诇转 讛讗讬讚谉 讜诇讗 讘驻转讬诇转 讛诪讚讘专 讜诇讗 讘讬专讜拽讛 砖注诇 驻谞讬 讛诪讬诐 讜诇讗 讘讝驻转 讜诇讗 讘砖注讜讛 讜诇讗 讘砖诪谉 拽讬拽 讜诇讗 讘砖诪谉 砖专讬驻讛 讜诇讗 讘讗诇讬讛 讜诇讗 讘讞诇讘 谞讞讜诐 讛诪讚讬 讗讜诪专 诪讚诇讬拽讬谉 讘讞诇讘 诪讘讜砖诇 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讞讚 诪讘讜砖诇 讜讗讞讚 砖讗讬谞讜 诪讘讜砖诇 讗讬谉 诪讚诇讬拽讬谉 讘讜:

This mishna cites a list of fuels and wicks that one may not use in kindling the Shabbat lights, either because their use might induce one to perform a prohibited labor on Shabbat or because they are not in keeping with the deference due Shabbat. The mishna begins by listing the materials that one may not use as wicks. That is followed by a list of the substances that one may not use as fuel.

MISHNA: With what may one light the Shabbat lamp, and with what may one not light it? With regard to types of prohibited wicks, one may light neither with cedar bast [lekhesh], nor with uncombed flax [岣sen], nor with raw silk [kalakh], nor with willow bast [petilat haidan], nor with desert weed [petilat hamidbar], nor with green moss that is on the surface of the water. With regard to types of prohibited oils, one may light neither with pitch [zefet], nor with wax [shaava], nor with castor oil [shemen kik], nor with burnt oil [shemen sereifa], nor with fat from a sheep鈥檚 tail [alya], nor with tallow [岣lev]. Na岣m the Mede says: One may light with boiled tallow. And the Rabbis say: Both tallow that was boiled and tallow that was not boiled, one may not light with them.

讙诪壮 诇讻砖 砖讜讻讗 讚讗专讝讗 砖讜讻讗 讚讗专讝讗 注抓 讘注诇诪讗 讛讜讗 讘注诪专谞讬转讗 讚讗讬转 讘讬讛:

GEMARA: Most of the terms used in the mishna were not understood in Babylonia. Therefore, the Gemara translated and clarified them. We learned in the mishna that one may not light with lekhesh. The Gemara explains that lekhesh is the branch of the cedar tree. The Gemara asks: Isn鈥檛 the cedar mere wood? How would one fashion a wick out of wood? The Gemara answers: The mishna is referring to the woolly substance that is beneath its bark.

讜诇讗 讘讞讜住谉: 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 谞注讜专转 砖诇 驻砖转谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讜讛讻转讬讘 讜讛讬讛 讛讞住讜谉 诇谞注讜专转 诪讻诇诇 讚讞讜住谉 诇讗讜 谞注讜专转 讛讜讗 讗诇讗 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讻讬转谞讗 讚讚讬讬拽 讜诇讗 谞驻讬抓:

The mishna taught further that one may not light with 岣sen. Rav Yosef said: 岣sen is tow, thin chaff that falls off the stalk of combed flax. Abaye said to him: Isn鈥檛 it written: 鈥淎nd the 岣son shall be as tow鈥 (Isaiah 1:31)? By inference, 岣sen is not tow. Rather, Abaye said: 岣sen is flax whose stalk was crushed but not yet combed. The threads in the stalk are still covered by a shell and therefore do not burn well.

讜诇讗 讘讻诇讱: 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 砖讗诇转讬谞讛讜 诇讻诇 谞讞讜转讬 讬诪讗 讜讗诪专讬 (诇讛) 讻讜诇讻讗 砖诪讬讛 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专 讝注讬专讗 讗诪专 讙讜砖拽专讗

And we also learned in the mishna that one may not light with kalakh. Shmuel said: I asked all seafarers, and they said to me that the present-day name of kalakh mentioned in the mishna is kulka. Rav Yitz岣k bar Ze鈥檌ra said: Kalakh is the cocoon of the silkworm [gushkera].

专讘讬谉 讜讗讘讬讬 讛讜讜 讬转讘讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘谞讗 谞讞诪讬讛 讗讞讜讛 讚专讬砖 讙诇讜转讗 讞讝讬讬讛 讚讛讜讛 诇讘讬砖 诪讟讻住讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬谉 诇讗讘讬讬 讛讬讬谞讜 讻诇讱 讚转谞谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗谞谉 砖讬专讗 驻专谞讚讗 拽专讬谞谉 诇讬讛

The Gemara relates that Ravin and Abaye were sitting before Rabbana Ne岣mya, brother of the Exilarch. Ravin saw that Rabbana Ne岣mya was wearing metaksa, a type of silk. Ravin said to Abaye: This is the kalakh that we learned in our mishna. Abaye said to him: We call it shira peranda.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讛砖讬专讗讬诐 讜讛讻诇讱 讜讛住讬专讬拽讬谉 讞讬讬讘讬谉 讘爪讬爪讬转 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘讬谉 转讬讜讘转讗 讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 砖讬专讗 诇讞讜讚 讜砖讬专讗 驻专谞讚讗 诇讞讜讚:

The Gemara raises an objection from that which we learned: The shiraim, the kalakh, and the sirikin, different types of silk, all require ritual fringes. Apparently, shiraim and kalakh are different types of silk. This is a conclusive refutation of the statement of Ravin who identified kalakh with shira peranda. The Gemara responds: Indeed, it is a conclusive refutation. If you wish, say instead that shira is a distinct entity, and shira peranda is a distinct entity. Shira peranda is kalakh.

讜诇讗 讘驻转讬诇转 讛讗讬讚谉: 讗讞讜讬谞讗 专讘讬谉 讜讗讘讬讬 讛讜讜 拽讗讝诇讜 讘驻拽转讗 讚讟诪专讜专讬转讗 讞讝讬谞讛讜 诇讛谞讛讜 讗专讘转讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬谉 诇讗讘讬讬 讛讬讬谞讜 讗讬讚谉 讚转谞谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讛讬讗 注抓 讘注诇诪讗 讛讜讗 拽诇祝 讜讗讞讜讬 诇讬讛 注诪专谞讬转讗 讚讘讬谞讬 讘讬谞讬 讜诇讗 讘驻转讬诇转 讛诪讚讘专 砖讘专讗:

And we learned in the mishna that one may not light with petilat haidan. The Gemara explains that petilat haidan is willow, which does not burn well. The Gemara relates that Ravin and Abaye were walking in the valley of Tamrurita. They saw these willow trees. Ravin said to Abaye: This is the idan that we learned in the mishna. Abaye said to him: But this is mere wood. How would one fashion a wick from it? Ravin peeled the bark and showed him the wool-like substance between the bark and the tree. We also learned in the mishna: Nor with desert silk [petilat hamidbar]. That is the mullein plant, which does not burn well.

讜诇讗 讘讬专讜拽讛 砖注诇 讻讜壮: 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讗讜讻诪转讗 讚讞专讬爪讬 讗讬驻专讜讻讬 诪驻专讻谉 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讗讜讻诪转讗 讚讗专讘讗

And we learned in the mishna that one may not use the green moss that is on the surface of the water to fashion a wick for lighting the Shabbat lamp. The Gemara asks: What is this green moss? If you say that it is the moss found on standing water, isn鈥檛 that moss brittle and therefore unfit material from which to fashion a wick? Rather, Rav Pappa said: It is referring to the moss that accumulates on ships, which is more pliable and when dried can be fashioned into a wick.

转谞讗 讛讜住讬驻讜 注诇讬讛谉 砖诇 爪诪专 讜砖诇 砖注专 讜转谞讗 讚讬讚谉 爪诪专 诪讻讜讜抓 讻讜讜讬抓 砖注专 讗讬讞专讜讻讬 诪讬讞专讱:

It was taught in a baraita: The Sages added to the list of prohibited wicks in the mishna those made of wool and hair as well. The Gemara remarks: And our tanna did not consider it necessary to enumerate these because it is virtually impossible to fashion wicks from these materials, as, when they burn, wool shrinks and hair is scorched. Consequently, they are unsuitable for use as wicks.

讜诇讗 讘讝驻转: 讝驻转 讝讬驻转讗 砖注讜讛 拽讬专讜转讗 转谞讗 注讚 讻讗谉 驻住讜诇 驻转讬诇讜转 诪讻讗谉 讜讗讬诇讱 驻住讜诇 砖诪谞讬诐 驻砖讬讟讗 砖注讜讛 讗讬爪讟专讬讻讗 诇讬讛 诪讛讜 讚转讬诪讗 诇驻转讬诇讜转 谞诪讬 诇讗 讞讝讬讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

And we learned in the mishna that one may not use zefet or shaava as fuel in lighting the Shabbat lamp. The Gemara explains that zefet is pitch, and shaava is wax. It was taught in a baraita: Until this point, the word zefet, the mishna is dealing with disqualification of materials unfit for use as wicks, and from this point on it is dealing with disqualification of substances unfit for use as oils. The Gemara asks: Obviously, a wick cannot be made from pitch and similar materials. The Gemara answers: It was necessary for the mishna to mention wax, lest you say that it is also unfit for use as a coating for wicks, in the manner that wicks are usually made. Therefore, it teaches us that even though wax is unfit for use as oil, it is fit for use as coating for wicks.

讗诪专 专诪讬 讘专 讗讘讬谉 注讟专谞讗 驻住讜诇转讗 讚讝讬驻转讗 砖注讜讛 驻住讜诇转讗 讚讚讜讘砖讗

Rami bar Avin said: Tar [itran] is the by-product of pitch. When wood is burned to extract pitch, a clearer liquid oozes out after the pitch, and that is tar. Similarly, wax is the by-product of honey.

Scroll To Top