(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 143



(a) Beis Hillel in our Mishnah permit the removal of the entire table top and to shake the bones and shells outside, but not to remove them directly.

(b) Small bread-crumbs, and bean and lentil-pods are not Muktzah - because they are all fit for animals.

(c) One may use a sponge on Shabbos, to clean the table (on which water was spilt) - provided it has a handle; otherwise, squeezing out water whenever one handles it, is inevitable.

(d) The sponge is not Muktzah, even if it has no handle, though it cannot receive Tum'ah (since it is neither made of wood, nor cloth, nor sack nor metal).

(a) Rav Nachman inverts the opinions of Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel in our Mishnah. According to him, Beis Shamai permits only the table-top, and Beis Hillel, the bones and the shells.

(b) 'Ma'avirin me'Al ha'Shulchan Pirurin Pachos mi'Kezayis' - implies that one is not permitted to throw them away. (See also Tosfos, DH 'Pirurin', who changes the text of Rebbi Yochanan to 'Mutar le'Abdan be'Yad'.)

(c) According to Rebbi Yehudah, bean and pea-pods would be Muktzah on Shabbos, due to the fact that, before Shabbos, they were not yet fit for animals (since they were still attached to the food - which is fit for humans, and not for animals).

(d) Using a sponge without a handle (to sponge water) on Shabbos, is not just a 'Davar she'Eino Miskaven', it is a Pesik Reisha, and even Rebbi Shimon will agree that one may not use it on Shabbos.

(a) The stones of Persian dates were Muktzah on Shabbos - because when Shabbos entered, they were still attached to the fruit, which was designated for humans, and not for animals. Therefore the dates were Muktzah, too.

(b) The stones of Persian dates, on the other hand, which were poor quality dates, were not Muktzah - since one tended to feed them to one's animals.

(c) Shmuel would remove date-stones from the table together with bread. This was not necessary, because Shmuel holds like Rebbi Shimon, who permits the stones to be moved anyway. However, he was strict with himself, because he was such an important person, as we explained above (at the foot of the previous Daf).

(d) By 'Shmuel le'Ta'ameih' - the Gemara means that he follows his own reasoning elsewhere i.e. that one is permitted to use bread for other purposes.

(a) Rav Huna Brei de'Rav Yehoshua piled up the date-stones until they became disgusting (a G'raf shel Re'i), when it became permitted to take them out.

(b) Rav Ashi was surprised at what Rav Huna Brei de'Rav Yehoshua did - because of the principle 'Ein Osin G'raf shel Re'i Lechatchilah'.

(c) It is also possible to get rid of one's date-stones by spitting them right over the far end of the table or by spitting them behind the couch where one is sitting;

**** Hadran Alach, 'Notel'! ****



**** Perek Chavis ****


(a) If a barrel of wine broke on Shabbos, then one may save ...
  1. ... in one vessel - as much as one can (even for a hundred meals).
  2. ... in a few vessels - up to three meals.
(b) One may also invite others to come and save three meals each.

(c) One is not however, permitted to use a sponge to soak up the wine, because we are afraid that he may come to squeeze out the wine into a jar; neither is he permitted to use his hands to soak up the oil that is spilling from a broken barrel of oil, because of 'Uvdin de'Chol'.

(a) Squeezing fruit for its juice is forbidden on Shabbos, because it is a Toldah of Dash (threshing).

(b) Rebbi Yehudah agrees with the Tana Kama regarding juice that came from fruit that was designated for its juice (because of a decree that he may come to squeeze it). But by fruit that was designated for eating, he maintains that the juice that came out is permitted (because one is unlikely to come to squeeze it).

(c) Once the honey-combs have been rubbed, they do not need to be rubbed again, because the honey will all flow automatically. Rebbi Eliezer therefore holds that the honey which flows from the comb on Shabbos is permitted; whereas the Rabbanan decree honey-combs that were rubbed because of those that were not.

(d) If a basket of fruit spilled in the courtyard - one may pick up the fruit and either eat it or collect it in one's hands (see Tosfos DH ' Melaket), but not return it to the basket (because of 'Uvdin de'Chol').

(a) According to Shmuel (who says that Rebbi Yehudah agrees with the Rabbanan by olives and grapes, and the Rabbanan agree with Rebbi Yehudah by other fruit-juices) - they argue by the juice of berries and by pomegranate-wine, since there were some people who used to squeeze them for their juice (but not other fruits).

(b) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak says only that it is *logical* that Rebbi Yehudah's statement is confined to berries and pomegranates (despite the fact that Rebbi Yehudah specifically mentioned berries and pomegranates in the Beraisa) because it is possible to explain that, in reality, they argue by all fruits, and that the Beraisa mentions berries and pomegranates to show the extent of Rebbi Yehudah's opinion - that even by these fruits (which some people tend to squeeze), Rebbi Yehudah permits the juice that flowed from them on Shabbos - provided he took them in for food, and not for juice.

(c) Rebbi Yehudah considers Stam as if he had intended to squeeze them for their juice - and the juice is forbidden.

(a) The Tana Kama of the Beraisa renders the milk of a woman Tamei, whether it comes out le'Razton or not, whereas the milk of an animal is Tamei only if it comes out le'Ratzon.

(b) Rebbi Akiva learns that animal's milk (which is fit for grown-ups as well as children) should not be Tamei if it comes out she'Lo le'Ratzon, from a Kal va'Chomer from the milk of a woman (which is fit only for children):

(a) In spite of Rebbi Akiva's Kal va'Chomer, the Rabbanan decline to learn animal's milk from that of a woman - because the milk of a woman has the Chumra that the blood of her wound is Tamei, whilst the blood from the wound of an animal is *not*.

(b) Rebbi Akiva nevertheless learns the animal's milk from a woman's (ignoring the Chumra of a woman's blood over the animal's), because the Din of milk is more stringent than that of blood - as we find by the milk of an animal that was extracted as a cure (which is Tamei), as opposed to the blood of Hakazah (which is Tahor).

(c) In order to conform with Rebbi Yehudah (who said above that, in the case of Stam, the juice that comes out from berries on Shabbos is forbidden), we have to explain 'le'Ratzon' to mean Stam, and 'she'Lo Leratzon', when he specifies that he does not want the juice, which is a better indication than taking them into the house for food that he wants them them as food and not as liquid.

(d) No! It would not resolve anything, to explain 'she'Lo le'Ratzon' to mean Stam, and to establish the Beraisa like the Rabbanan of Rebbi Yehudah; because, Rebbi Yehudah is more lenient than the Rabbanan in this matter. Consequently, if the Rabbanan do not consider Stam to be liquid, Rebbi Yehudah will certainly not do so.

Next daf


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