(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 58


(a) What is a 'Kavla de'Avda'?

(b) Shmuel disagrees with Rebbi Avahu. According to him, 'Kevul' in our Mishnah refers to the 'badge of a slave'.
Which kind of slaves badge does the Mishnah forbid, according to him, and which kind is therefore permitted?

(c) Then why does Shmuel forbid a slave to go out with a badge which is sewn to his clothes?

(d) And on what grounds did he permit Rebbi Chinena bar Shilas to go out with a badge sewn to his clothes, even though all other Rabbanan, who had to wear this badge as a sign of subservience to the Head of the Galus, were forbidden to do so?

(a) With which kind of badge then, does the Beraisa forbid a slave to go out - even if his master fixed it to his clothes?

(b) Why is the badge of a slave not subject to Tum'ah?

(c) How does the Gemara prove that this Beraisa must be talking about a metal badge, from the statement that follows* 'Zeh ve'Zeh (whether it is worn around the neck or attached to the clothes) Ein Mekablin Tum'ah'?

(d) Which three kinds of vessels are not subject to Tum'ah - even mi'de'Rabbanan?

3) A slave is forbidden to go out with a bell around his neck. He is however, permitted to go out with one attached to his clothes.
Why the difference?

4) May one allow one's animal to go out ...

  1. ... with a clay seal or ...
  2. ... with a bell ...
... hanging round its neck or attached to its apparel?

Answers to questions



(a) Why is a bell fixed to a door not subject to Tum'ah?

(b) Does a Tamei bell which one took from an animal and fixed to a door, lose its Tum'ah?

(c) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Bamidbar "Kol *Davar* Asher Yavo ba'Esh, Ta'aviru ba'Esh"?

(d) Then what does the Beraisa mean when it writes (about a bell on an animal) 'Zeh ve'Zeh Ein Mekablin Tum'ah'? What does 'Zeh ve'Zeh' mean?

(a) What purpose did a bell attached to ...
  1. ... a spice-mixer;
  2. ... a baby's cot;
  3. ... Sefer-Torah covers (for Sifrei-Torah used to teach the Cheder-children)
  4. ... serve?
(b) Under what conditions were these bells (and those attached to baby's cloths worn round the baby's neck) subject to Tum'ah?

(c) If the striker was removed after they became Tamei, did they become Tahor?

(d) How about bells worn by grown-ups?

(a) Abaye initially thinks that a baby's bell, whose striker has been removed, retains its Tum'ah, because even a novice can put it together.
What is the problem with that from the Beraisa 'ha'Zug ve'ha'Inbal, Chibur'?

(b) How does the Gemara attempt to explain that Beraisa?

(c) Rava however, refutes this explanation, due to the continuation of the Beraisa. 'Mispores shel Perakim ve'Izmal shel Rehitni, Chibur le'Tum'ah ve'Ein Chibur le'Haza'ah'.
What is the problem with this Beraisa, and how does the Gemara explain it?

(d) How does this Beraisa refute the contention in b?

(a) Why then, according to Rava, *does* the bell remain Tamei?

(b) Is the striker Tamei as well?

Answers to questions
Next daf

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