ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafShabbos 25
(a) The Torah writes 'ba'Esh Tisrofu' (Sh'mos) by Kodshim which became
Pasul, and Terumah Temei'ah is no different, since we learn the obligation
to burn it from Pasul Kodshim.
(b) We learn from ...
1. ... "Terumosai" (plural) that the Torah is referring to two types of
Terumah. Tehorah and Temei'ah - and the Torah writes "Lecha", to tell the
Kohen that they are* his* to benefit from;
(c) "be'Tamei" incorporate's whether the Ma'aser was Tamei or the person,
both are forbidden.
2. ... "ve'Lo Bi'arti *Mimenu* be'Tamei" implies that one may not burn
'Ma'aser Sheni' which is Tamei, but but that there is something else that
is Tamei which one does burn - Terumah Temei'ah.
(a) The six stringencies of Kodshim over Terumah are: 1.&2. One is Chayav
for eating them when they are Pigul or Nosar; 3. They are a Korban; 4.
Someone who benefits from them (under certain circumstances) be'Shogeg is
Chayav to bring a Korban Me'ilah; 5. Someone who eats them when he is
Tamei be'Meizid is Chayav Kares; 6. An Onen is forbidden to eat them - all
of which do not apply to Terumah.
'Misah bi'Yedei Shamayim' means that one will die prematurely, Kares
incorporates 'Ariri' - meaning that he will also die childless. (Most
Rishonim however, do not agree with Rashi's interpretation. - See also
Tif'eres Yisrael at the end of the ninth chapter of Sanhedrin, who lists
two more differences between Kares and Misah.)
(b) Terumah, on the other hand, has four stringencies, which Kodshim do
not: 1. A Yisrael (incorporating a Levi) or a Kohen Tamei who eats it, is
Chayav Misah bi'Yedei Shamayim; 2. A Yisrael who eats it be'Shogeg must
pay an extra twenty-five per cent fine to the Kohen; 3. It can never be
redeemed; 4. Under no circumstances, may a Yisrael eat it.
(c) One reason that infer a Heter to derive benefit from Terumah Temei'ah
and not Kodshim, is because Terumah Temei'ah has only *four* stringencies,
to Kodshim's *six*; the other, is because Kares is more stringent than
Misah (as we shall see shortly).
(d) "Titen *Lo*" - 've'Lo le'Oro', implying that Terumah Tehorah should not
be burned. Now why on earth would we have thought that it may? - unless the
Torah wishes to teach us here that it is only Terumah Tehorah that is *not*
burned, but that Terumah Temei'ah *is*.
(a) The Ner Shabbos is mandatory - because the Shabbos meal is not Chashuv
when eaten in the dark. Consequently, if he leaves the room to go and eat
in the dark, he will not be fulfilling the Mitzvah of Oneg Shabbos
(It should be pointed out that, before the advent of electricity, the lamp
that one lit for Shabbos, was the lamp which provided one with light. And
that is also why the Gemara discussed earlier an extra light by the Din of
Ner Chanukah. With the advent of electricity, all these Halachos took on
slightly different connotations.)
(b) Rava maintains that washing on Friday afternoon is not Reshus, but a
Mitzvah - Shabbos lights is a Chovah, a stronger obligation still.
(c) The basic obligation of washing on Erev Shabbos li'Chevod Shabbos is
one's face and neck, arms and legs.
(a) The Talmidim hid their linen wraps from Rebbi Yehudah, because they did
not have Tzitzis. This is because, in their opinion, a linen wrap is Patur
(b) Beis Shamai maintain that a Sadin is Patur from Tzitzis because of the
Isur of Kil'ayim. They do not hold of the Derashah of Semuchin (Tzitzis
next to Kil'ayim), from which Beis Hillel learn that one must attach
Tziztis to a linen garment, in spite of the thread of Techeles, which, when
attached to the garment, produces Kil'ayim.
(c) It does not necessarily follow that Rebbi Yehudah's disciples were
following the opinion of Beis Shamai. They may well have agreed with their
Rebbi, who ruled like Beis Hillel. Still they did not attach Tzitzis to
their linen garments because they decreed on day garments (the negative
prohibition of not attatching Tzitzis ro a garment), because of night
garments (which are Patur from Tzitzis), which, if one *did* attach Tzitzis
and wear them, would render one Chayav for wearing Kil'ayim (even when worn
during the day).
(d) Rebbi Yehudah did not agree with this decree.
(a) "va'Tiznach mi'Shalom Nafshi" refers to Ner Shabbos, of which Yisrael
were somehow deprived in the latter part of the second Beis Hamikdash.
Yet others interpret wealth as a wife who excels in good deeds; and others
someone who has a bathroom near his house (a rarity in the times of the
(b) "Nashisi Tovah" might also refer to a nice bed and nice spreads, or to
a made bed and a pretty wife for Talmidei Chachamim.
(It is interesting to note that Rebbi Tarfon, who issued the second
explanation, was a man who owned vast estates, and Rebbi Akiva, whose wife
was the exceptional Rachel, the third.)
(a) Balsam cannot be used for Ner Shabbos, both because one may be tempted
to take some out on Shabbos to smell , and because it jumps, and is likely
to set the house alight.
(b) Someone who takes oil from a burning lamp on Shabbos is Chayav because
of extinguishing (which might be no more than an Isur de'Rabbanan, as we
shall see later, on Daf 30a).
(c) The woman who hated her daughter-in-law advised her to adorn herself
with balsam oil. Then she told her to light the lamp. She obeyed, and burnt