(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Shabbos 42



(a) Extinguishing a hot faggot constitutes an Isur d'Oraysa, and is therefore prohibited, even to prevent people from getting hurt, whereas extinguishing a hot metal bar is only an Isur de'Rabbanan, which Chazal waived in face of public safety. (See Rabeinu Chananel, who holds that both are d'Oraysa, and who presents an alternative way of explaining the difference.)

(b) The Gemara presumes that, since Shmuel follows the opinion of Rebbi Shimon with regard to 'Davar she'Ein Miskaven', he will also hold like him in 'Melachah she'Einah Tzerichah le'Gufah', Consequently, the faggot of wood is no more an Isur d'Oraysa than is the metal bar, so why does Shmuel rule to the strict side regarding it?

(c) In fact, replies the Gemara, Shmuel follows the opinion of Rebbi Shimon only with regard to 'Davar she'Ein Miskaven'; as far as 'Melachah she'Einah Tzerichah' is concerned, he rules like Rebbi Yehudah, and the wooden faggot therefore does indeed constitute an Isur d'Oraysa.

(a) One may move - out of harm's way - dangerous thorns ...
1. ... that one finds in a Reshus ha'Rabim, at intervals of less than four Amos at a time.
2. ... that one finds in a Karmelis, in the normal manner.
(b) The reason for the difference is because carrying in the Reshus ha'Rabim is Asur d'Oraysa, and carries with it a Chiyuv Kares, whereas carrying in a Karmelis is only an Isur de'Rabbanan. In both cases, one will now be performing an Isur de'Rabbanan, which the Rabbanan waived in face of the potential harm.
(a) Beis Shamai permit pouring hot water into cold, but not vice-versa, because they hold 'Tata'ah Gavar' - i.e. whatever lies in the vessel, affects what is being poured into it (and not vice-versa). Consequently, if the water in the vessel is cold, the hot water being poured into it will not boil the cold water, but rather will be cooled down by it.

(b) Beis Hillel forbid pouring cold water into hot water in a bath-tub which is a K'li Rishon (or even if it a K'li Sheni, because, for bathing, one wants the water very hot - which is Asur because, the water in a bath-tub is so hot that people will think that it is a K'li Rishon - Tosfos, d.h. 'Aval'). Nobody however, will think that the water in a cup - which is for drinking - is a K'li Rishon, because no-one really wants the water to be so hot, as then, it will be too hot to drink; and in addition, it is a K'li Sheni. Consequently, Beis Hillel permit pouring even cold water into hot when it is in a K'li Sheni, and is also for drinking.

(a) Abaye asks on Rav Yosef from the Beraisa of Rebbi Chiya, which writes that a dish does *not* have the Din of a bath-tub, so how can Rav Yosef say that it does?

(b) If we rule like Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya, who forbids the pouring even of hot water into cold in a bath-tub, and we also rule that pouring hot water into a dish (for washing purposes) has the same Din as pouring it into a bath-tub, as Rav Yosef contends, then how can one wash at all with hot water, on Shabbos? Does this mean that Chazal canceled all facilities for washing with hot water on Shabbos?

(c) The Gemara answers by establishing Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya on the Reisha - where Beis Hillel permitted the pouring of even of cold water into hot - into a cup for drinking. And it is with *that* contention which Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya disagrees. According to him, cold water into hot water is forbidden, even in a cup. (He does not discuss pouring hot water into cold, as we thought at first).

(d) No! Even though Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya quotes Beis Shamai, it is not because he holds like them, but because, in his opinion, Beis Hillel agree with that. There is, in fact, no Machlokes.

(a) Initially, we thought that Rebbi Chiya's Beraisa meant to say that one may place a flask of hot water into cold water, or vice-versa.

(b) In that case, we have no proof that one may pour hot water into cold, or vice-versa, because the Beraisa's concession is confined to a case where the wall of the vessel divides between the hot water and the cold.

(c) We therefore amend the Beraisa to read that one is permitted to *pour* (rather than to *place*) a flask of water etc.




(a) It is forbidden to place spices into a hot K'li Rishon, even after it has been removed from the stove, because a K'li Rishon continues to cook (even after it has been removed from the stove), as long as it is still hot.

(b) On the other hand, a K'li Sheni does not cook. Therefore, one may add spices to a dish or a plate, even if they contain hot food.

(c) Vinegar and juice that drips from pickled fish, are exceptionally sharp, and will therefore cause spices to cook when they are hot. The Genara will clarify later whether Rebbi Yehudah is speaking about a K'li Rishon or a K'li Sheni).

(a) We are uncertain whether Rebbi Yehudah permits cooking even in a K'li Rishon once it has been removed from the flame, or whether he comes to qualify the concession of cooking in a K'li Sheni (which the Tana Kama permits categorically), to prohibit cooking even in a K'li Sheni, dishes which contain vinegar or fish-juice.

(b) The Gemara concludes from the wording of a Beraisa, like the first suggestion, that Rebbi Yehudah is lenient - even in a K'li Rishon.

(a) According to one of the versions of Rebbi Chiya's Beraisa, salt is not like spices, because it cooks even in a K'li Sheni; and according to the other version, it is not like spices, because it does not cook even in a K'li Rishon.

(b) Rav Nachman meant to say that salt takes a long, long time to cook, like the meat of an ox. Practically, this means that one may place both ox meat and salt into a K'li Rishon, which has been removed from the stove, because neither will cook in a pot that is not actually on the stove.

(a) The Tana of our Mishnah permits one to place a receptacle underneath a dripping lamp *before* Shabbos, but not *on* Shabbos.

(b) No! It does follow that the oil should then be permitted. On the contrary, our Mishnah writes 've'Ein Ne'osin Mimenu, Lefi she'Eino Min ha'Muchan'.

(c) Rabbah explains that Rav Chisda like this: The Tana of our Mishnah forbids one to place a vessel under a chicken to save the egg from rolling, because it is not usual for a chicken to lay eggs on a slope (likewise our Mishnah, it is not common for an oil lamp to drip).
They *did* however, permit one to take a vessel to save (even) an egg (despite the fact that the egg itself is Muktzah), which the chicken is about to lay in a trash-heap - from being trodden on, because it is common for the chicken to lay its eggs there. Chazal permitted one to take a vessel to save even something that is Muktzah, as long as it is from a loss which is common.

10) The Mishnah/Beraisa which permits one to place ...
1. ... a receptacle underneath a barrel of Tevel wine, that is escaping from a broken barrel, is speaking about a new barrel, and it is common for new barrels to break;
2. ... a receptacle underneath a lamp to catch the sparks - because it is common for sparks to fall from a burning lamp;
3. ... a dish over a lamp to prevent the beam from burning speaks about a house with a low ceiling - where fires are common;
4. ... a bench to support a broken beam speaks in the case of a new house - where it is common for beams to break.
Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,