ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafShabbos 127
(a) The amount of produce that constitutes a pile with regard to Muktzah is
a Lesech (half a Kur- or fifteen Sa'ah).
(b) The Gemara asks that, if, as Rav Chisda explains, four or five Sa'ah is
specific, does this mean that one may only carry the permitted amount in
four five boxes, but not more - because it is preferable to minimize the
distance that one walks; or maybe the Mishnah is only giving the maximum
quantity that may be cleared, but that it is better to clear it out in as
many boxes as possible, in order to minimize the amount that one carries -
even if it means having to walk further.
(c) No! The two Beraisos both agree that it is preferable to minimize the
distance that one walks on Shabbos, and the 'ten' and 'fifteen' mentioned
in the two Beraisos are referring, not to the number of *boxes*, but to the
number of *jars*: the Beraisa which permits four or five boxes, is speaking
about clearing one large jar in each box. Whereas the Beraisa which permits
ten or fifteen jars - is speaking about clearing medium-size jars (ten - in
five boxes) or small ones (fifteen).
(a) The episode with Rebbi (when Rebbi -or Rebbi Chiya -, after discovering
that there was no room for the Talmidim, went into the field, and cleared
all the sheaves for them - proves that, when there are a lot of guests, one
may clear even more than four or five boxes.
(b) There is however, no proof from there that one person is permitted to
clear the space for all the guests - because, despite the Lashon 've'Imar
Rebbi es Kol ha'Sadeh', it is highly unlikely that Rebbi carried out the
entire operation on his own. So 've'Imar Rebbi' must mean that he gave
orders for the field to be cleared, leaving no indication who did the
(a) The Gemara proves from the Lashon 'because of the guests' (first, and
only then) 'because of 'Bitul Beis ha'Medrash' - that the Mitzvah of
receiving guests is equal to that of going early to study Torah in the Beis
(b) From the fact that Avraham asked the Shechinah to wait for him whilst
he went to attend to his guests - we can learn that the Mitzvah of
receiving guests is even greater than receiving the Shechinah.
(c) Hachnasas Orchim, Bikur Cholim and Iyun Tefilah - are included in the
general term of Gemilus Chasadim, Hashkamas Beis-ha'Medrash and Gidul Banim
le'Talmud Torah, in Talmud-Torah; and Dan es Chavero le'Chaf Zechus, in
Hava'as Shalom Bein Adam la'Chavero.
(a) When the man from Gelil ha'Elyon came to his employer on Erev Yom
Kipur, and asked him for three years' remuneration - he replied that he
had no money.
(b) When he said he had ...
(c) When he heard his employee's answer, the employer responded with
'Ke'shem she'Dantani li'Zechus, ha'Makom Yadin Oscha li'Zechus'!
- ... no land, he thought (correctly) that it was probably in the possession of tenant farmers.
- ... no fruit, that it was not yet Ma'asered.
- ... no movables, that he had probably sanctified all of his possessions.
(a) When, after they arrived at the inn, the Chasid arranged the girl's bed
at the foot of his own - the Chasid's Talmidim thought (correctly), that he
did this because there was one Talmid among his Talmidim whom he did not
know intimately enough to trust, so he personally undertook to safeguard
(b) And when, on the following morning, he went to Tovel in the Mikvah -
they thought that probably, due to the travails of the long journey, he had
(c) When Rebbi Yehoshua first removed his Tefilin, and then closed the door
behind him (when he went to speak with the aristocratic woman), his
Talmidim thought (correctly) that he probably did not want to take his
Tefilin into a Makom Tum'ah, and that he closed the door behind him because
he had secret matters - of national significance - to discuss with her.
(d) And when he subsequently Toveled, they assumed that, as the woman was
speaking with him, some of her spittle fell on him (and Chazal decreed that
gentiles are Metamei like Zavin).
(a) Had the Mishnah not taught us that Terumah Tehorah is not Muktzah, we
would have thought that it is, because it is not fit for a Yisrael to eat.
The reason that it is not Muktzah, is because it is fit for a Kohen.
(b) 'be'Shibolin' means when the corn (the five kinds of grain) are still
called 'Shibolin' i.e. before it becomes Chayav Ma'asros (the stage of
Miru'ach, flattening the pile after the winnowing). 'Idgan' means after
that stage, when the corn adopts the name 'Dagan'. If the Levi appears at
the barn, and asks for and receives his Ma'aser Rishon when the corn is
still Shibolin, then although he has pre-empted the Kohen, who really ought
to have received his Terumah Gedolah - i.e. two per-cent of the tenth -
first, the Levi is not obligated to give the Kohen that amount. However, if
the Levi claims his Ma'aser Rishon after it has become Dagan, he *is*
obligated to give the Kohen that two percent of what he received.
(a) If someone redeems the Ma'aser Sheni or Hekdesh that he had himself been
Makdish, without adding the required fifth - the redemption is nevertheless
(b) No! This does not mean that he is now exempt from paying the extra
fifth. It remains a debt that has to be paid in due course.
(c) A wet Turmus-bean is not normally eaten, due to its extreme bitterness;
therefore it is Muktzah. A dry Turmus-bean is edible, so it is not.