ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafShabbos 49
(a) The Gemara thinks that straw etc., that became wet artificially might
not be considered 'Mosif Hevel', since they are not as hot as those that
are wet naturally.
(b) 'Muchin', which usually refers to sheep's wool (or one of its
derivatives), is naturally *dry*, so how can the Mishnah include it among
the list of things that are only Mosif Hevel when they are *wet* - unless
*wet* in our Mishnah also means *artificially* wet?
(c) There is one part of the sheep where the wool is naturally wet: namely,
the wool between the thighs, and that is the 'Muchin' to which the Tana of
our Mishnah could be referring. Consequently, we have no proof that the
Tana does not require the materials in question to be naturally wet.
(d) The wool between the thighs is so wet that it cannot be shorn, only
plucked - which is what the word 'Marta' means.
(a) Clothes, fruit (wheat and legumes) pigeons' feathers, saw-dust and
flax-shavings are all *not* 'Mosif Hevel', which means that one is
permitted to use them to wrap a pot of hot food on Erev Shabbos.
(b) Rebbi Yehudah forbids the flax-shavings when they are fine, because he
considers them to be 'Mosif Hevel'.
(c) Although the Gemara is not at first sure, whether Rebbi Yehudah refers
to the shavings of wood (saw-dust) or of flax. It concludes from a Beraisa
that the latter is in fact, the case.
(a) Abaye explains Rebbi Yanai (that Tefilin require a clean body) to mean
that one may not emit a smell whilst wearing Tefilin. (Someone who is
unable to do this should not wear Tefilin).
According to Rava, we assume everyone to be able to keep a clean body as
long as they are awake; what Rebbi Yanai means is that he should not fall
asleep whilst wearing Tefilin, in case he makes a smell or has an emission.
(b) The basis of their Machlokes, as we just explained, is whether a person
who will remain awake needs to assume that he will not be able to refrain
from emitting a smell. According to Abaye, one needs to assess oneself
before putting on one's Tefilin - that he will be able to keep his body
clean; whilst according to Rava, this is automatically presumed to be the
(c) Elisha Ba'al Kenafayim was so called because of the episode with the
Roman officer, who, at the time when the decree prohibiting the wearing of
Tefilin was in force, discovered Elisha wearing them. He fled the scene.
The officer gave chase and, as he caught up with him, Elisha t removed them
and held them in his hand. When the officer asked him what he was holding,
he replied 'pigeons' wings (hence his title - 'Kanfei Yonah'). He opened
his hands, and the officer (probably could not believe his eyes when he)
beheld - pigeons' wings!
(d) Elisha referred to his Tefilin (just as he would have done to any
object of Mitzvah), because Mitzvos, like Tefilin, protect Yisrael from
their enemies and from other punishments.
(a) Although one may wrap a hot pot with both animals' skins and shearings
of wool on Erev Shabbos, the difference between them is, that whereas the
former are not Muktzah, the latter *are*.
(b) One arranges to move the pot by seeing to it that the lid protrudes
from the shearings, in which case one may lift up the lid, allowing the
shearings to fall off. Then he may take the pot.
(c) Rebbi Elazar ben Azarya forbids one to remove the pot (in case the
shearings in which the pot was lying cave in, and he inadvertently moves
them in order to re-place the pot). Consequently, he is permitted only to
tip the pot on its side, but not to take it out.
(a) The concession to handle animals' skins may well not apply to skins
designated for commercial use.
(b) Rebbi Yishmael b'Rebbi Yossi gave testimony that his father, Rebbi
Yossi, who was a tanner, had skins brought from his store-house on Shabbos
to sit on them.
(c) Beams that were designated for commercial use have a stricter Din than
skins, because one tends to be more particular about them (due to the fact
that they become easily spoilt - see Rabeinu Chananel). Consequently, they
will remain Muktzah until one prepares them more substantially for one's
(d) For the beams to become permitted, one needs to have in mind to use
them for guests - 'to put bread on them for the guests'.
(a) Tanned skins are subject to Tum'ah, untanned skins are not.
(b) The Mishnah is only concerned with the category of private skins.
Consequently, it is confined to cases that fit into that category;
Halachically however, he could indeed have differentiated between skins
meant for one's private use and commercial ones.
(c) The Gemara finally comment on commercial skins is that it is a
Machlokes Tana'im. Rebbi Yossi does not differentiate, as we learnt above;
whereas the Tana Kama holds that commercial skins are indeed Muktzah.
(a) The connection between the Melachos of the Mishkan and the Melachos of
Shabbos derives from the proximity of the Parshah of Shabbos to that of the
construction of the Mishkan - in Parshas Veyakhel, and is based on the fact
that they constructed the Mishkan using the 39 Melachos of Shabbos -
(b) The second reason for the thirty-nine Melachos is because of the
thirty-nine times that the word 'Melachah' (or a derivative of it ) appears
in the Torah.
(c) If "va'Yavo ha'Bayso La'asos Melachto" refers to the sin to which Yosef
was about to succumb, then Melachah cannot be taken literally to mean
'work', in which case it will not be counted in the thirty-nine times
"Melachah" that hint to the Melachos of the Mishkan.
(d) Similarly, if "ve'ha'Melachah Haysa Dayam" comes to teach us that
Yisrael had donated more raw materials than were needed for the
construction of the Mishkan, then the word "ve'ha'Melachah" does not have
the connotation of work.
(a) If the Pasuk "ve'ha'Melachah" etc., is to have the connotation of
'work', then it is referring to the work that was performed to the raw
materials after they were donated - before they actually began with the
construction, such as beating out the golden plates to make the golden
threads and spinning the various threads for the curtains.
(b) It was the image of his father, Ya'akov, asking his whether he would be
happy to have his name from the stones of the Efod - whilst the names of
his eleven brothers would, which held him back from sinning with the wife
(a) Sowing and reaping were needed to obtain the dark-blue, purple and
crimson dyes for the curtains (though this must have achieved already in
Egypt prior to the Exodus). And transporting the planks from one domain to
the other, were performed with the planks (when they took down the Mishkan
- and reconstructed it at its new site) which were handed from the men at
the old site to the men in the wagons, and from the men in the wagons to
the men at the new site (as well as handing them from one wagon to another
- which will explain the case in the next answer).
(b) One is indeed not Chayav for transporting an object from one Reshus
ha'Yachid to another; the Beraisa is speaking about carrying from one
Reshus ha'Yachid to another *via the Reshus ha'Rabim*.
(Incidentally, Hotza'ah and Hachnasah are not two separate Avos Melachos,
as would appear from the Beraisa - See Tosfos, d.h. 've'Atem'.)