ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafBeitzah 33
(a) When (after prohibiting supporting a pot with a block if wood) the
Mishnah writes 'and the same *with* a door' - it means that one may also not
support a door with a block of wood. We amend 've'Chein *ba*'Deles' to read
(b) We reject the initial text (which means that one may not support a pot
with a door, either) - because given the weight of a door, it would probably
break the pot.
(c) Rebbi Shimon is the Tana who permits using a block of wood for these
(d) Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon permits leading an animal with a stick. That
does not mean that he and his father are of the same opinion here (i.e. that
the stick is not Muktzah and therefore permitted) - because even though
*Rebbi Elazar* definitely holds like *his father* - with regard to Muktzah),
*his father* does not necessarily hold like *him*. He (Rebbi Shimon) may
well agree with the Tana Kama, who forbids leading the animal with a stick,
not because of Muktzah (like we thought until now), but because it looks as
if he is taking his animal to market to sell.
(a) 'Chizra' is a sharp stick (from a specific type of tree) that is
potentially fit to be used as a spit-rod. Rav Nachman forbids it to be used
as such on Yom-Tov - because, due to the fact that he did not shape it
before Yom-Tov, it is Muktzah.
(b) Rav Sheshes holds like Rebbi Shimon, who does not hold of Muktzah.
1. In the first Lashon, even Rav Sheshes concedes that a wet Chizra may not
be used - because it is not fit to be used as fire-wood (and is therefore
Muktzah even according to Rebbi Shimon).
2. In the second Lashon (where Rav Nachman concedes that a dry Chizra is
permitted) Rav Sheshes permits even a wet one - because it can be used for a
(a) The Gemara rules that a dry Chizra is permitted, but a wet one is not.
(b) Rashi overrules the Gemara's decision - on the basis of the accepted
ruling (in other places) that the Halachah is like Rebbi Shimon regarding
Muktzah (see Tosfos DH 've'Hilchesa').
(c) Rashi rules that Madurta, Beraisa, Kedeirah, Pur'ya and Chavita - are
all permitted - because we also rule Rebbi Shimon regarding 'Davar she'Ein
Miskavein'. (Note: These are all cases of 'Pesik Reisha', which even Rebbi
Shimon normally concedes is forbidden).
(d) The Amora'im who rule strictly in all those cases, explains Rashi - are
all disciples of Rav, who rules like Rebbi Yehudah, with regard to both
Muktzah and 'Davar she'Ein Miskavein' (See Tosfos DH 'Darash').
(a) Rava forbids a woman to enter a wood-store to fetch a fire-brand -
because a fire-brand is designated for fire-wood and not for anything else.
(b) Rava also forbids a fire-brand that was designated as a poker on Yom-
Tov, if it broke.
(c) Rava holds like Rebbi Yehudah.
(a) Rava instructed his servant to roast him a goose and to throw the
intestines to his cat. The intestines ought to have been Muktzah, seeing as
Rava holds like Rebbi Yehudah - and according to Rebbi Yehudah, whatever is
prepared for a person, is not fit for an animal.
(b) We reconcile Rava however - by pointing out that intestines go off from
one day to the next, and consequently, they were prepared for animals
already from before Yom-Tov.
(a) Rebbi Eliezer permits taking a splinter of wood - even from the Chatzer,
and even to pick one's teeth.
(b) The reason that he uses the term 'from in front of him' with regard to
splinters for picking his teeth, and the courtyard, with regard to making a
fire, is because the Rabbanan dispute each of the two points that he makes
(as we shall now see).
(c) The Rabbanan forbid collecting wood to pick one's teeth, even it is from
the house; and they forbid collecting from the Chatzer, even it is to light
(d) The Mishnah forbids the production of fire on Yom-Tov - whether it is
from wood, stones, earth, tiles or water.
(a) Rav Yehudah maintains that there is no 'Tikun K'li' by animal food -
meaning that one is permitted to shape a tooth-pick out of things such as
straw and bamboo leaves on Shabbos, since they are animal food..
(b) One is ...
(c) It is however, Asur *mi'd'Oraysa* to break them in order to pick one's
- ... permitted to move Besamim-wood or wave it in front of a sick person.
- ... also permitted to roll it in one's hand in order to bring out the smell on Yom-Tov.
(d) Breaking them in order to bring out the smell, is Asur *mi'de'Rabbanan*.
(a) The Beraisa forbids breaking them in order to bring out the smell -
because one might come to break them in order to make a tooth-pick.
(b) Rav Yehudah reconciles his opinion (which permits Tikun K'li by animal
food) with this Beraisa, which renders him Chayav Chatas - by establishing
the Beraisa by hard wood, which is not fit for animal food.
(c) The Reisha nevertheless permits rolling them in one's hand - because
(after adding a few words, we conclude that) the Reisha is speaking about
soft wood, which one is even permitted to break for a tooth-pick, and the
Seifa, about hard wood.
(a) We just explained that one may not break hard Besamim-wood to smell, in
case one comes to do it to make a tooth-pick. The reason that one is Chayav
for breaking the wood for a tooth-pick, and not for breaking it to smell is
- because a tooth-pick is a K'li, and one is Chayav for making a K'li,
whereas a piece of wood for smelling is not a K'li.
(b) Rebbi Zeira quoting Rav Chisda reconciles two other Beraisos in the same
way. We explain the Mishnah in Shabbos, which permits breaking open a barrel
haphazardly to obtain the dried figs inside it, ignoring the possibility
that one may come to make a neat opening, for which he will be Chayav Chatas
- by establishing it (initially) according to the Rabbanan; whereas the
author of the Beraisa which forbids breaking Besamim-wood to smell, is Rebbi
(c) Rav Yehudah used to break off large sticks from pieces of hard wood,
despite the fact that the pieces were fit to fashion handles for various
tools (which adds to the Kashya - which we just answered - on Rav Yehudah
and Rebbi Zeira quoting Rav Chisda, who forbid breaking splinters from hard
wood in case one comes to break off tooth-picks.
(a) We answered the above Kashyos by introducing a Machlokes between Rebbi
Eliezer and the Rabbanan. Rebbi Eliezer holds with regard to someone who
breaks a splinter off a large piece of wood to form a tooth-pick ...
Rebbi Eliezer decrees whenever what he is doing could lead to a Chiyuv
Chatas. This does not however mean, that he will disagree with the Mishnah
which permits breaking a barrel haphazardly to obtain the dried figs inside
it (in spite of the fact that one may come to make a neat opening) - because
that Mishnah, according to him, speaks by a broken barrel, whose pieces are
stuck together with resin. Consequently, it is highly unlikely that one will
intentionally cut a neat opening into it, and Chazal did not therefore
decree in that case. (See also Tosfos, DH 'Ki Tanya'). Note: From the Sugya,
it appears that the Rabbanan would also have decreed, forbidding to break a
piece of wood to smell, had breaking off a splinter of wood been an Isur
d'Oraysa. In that case, it is unclear why it is only according to *Rebbi
Eliezer*, that the Gemara establishes the Mishnah in Shabbos by a broken
barrel, and not according to the Rabbanan, too.
(b) According to the Rabbanan - in both cases, he only contravenes an Isur
de'Rabbanan (seeing as he did nothing but break off a piece of wood, without
- ... on Shabbos be'Shogeg - that he is Chayav Chatas.
- ... on Yom-Tov be'Meizid - that he gets Malkos.
(c) Rebbi Eliezer, who renders someone Chayav for breaking off a tooth-pick
from a piece of wood, issues a decree forbidding breaking it to smell;
whereas, the Rabbanan, who do not render him Chayav for breaking off a
tooth-pick, will not decree. According to them, breaking the wood to bring
out the smell is permitted.
(a) Rebbi Shimon permits collecting wood from the courtyard, even if one
piles it into heaps in the process. The Rabbanan forbid it - because it
looks as if one is gathering the wood for after Yom-Tov.
(b) Rebbi Eliezer nevertheless permits it - because, he argues, the pot on
the stove is clear evidence that he is collecting the wood for Yom-Tov, and
not for afterwards.
(c) Our Mishnah forbids heating tiles (for cooking purposes) on Yom-Tov.
Rabah bar bar Chanah gives the reason for this 'Mipnei she'Tzarich
le'Badkan' - meaning that they need to be examined for strength, to see
whether they can take so much heat. This cannot be done on Yom-Tov, because
it may transpire that the tiles are not strong enough, and they crack from
the heat, in which case, they will have been heated for nothing (and Chazal
are always wary of excessive bother on Shabbos).
(d) Others say 'Mipnei she'Tzarich le'Chasman' - which means that the tiles
need to be strengthened, in order to become fit for use, and that
constitutes 'Tikun K'li'.