(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 142


(a) Our Mishnah allows carrying a basket of fruit with a stone in it - in the courtyard.
Why is the basket not a Basis to the stone?

(b) Why should he not be obligated to empty the basket of all its contents, and return the fruit to the basket - to carry the fruit *without* the stone?

(c) Let him shake the fruit to the side, and the stone (it is clear that our Mishnah is speaking about a large stone, as is implied in the word 've'*ha*'Even') from the basket?

(a) How does Rav Chisda explain our Mishnah, which permits carrying a container of Terumah Tehorah together with Terumah Temei'ah?

(b) What did Rav Chisda say that forced us to explain the Mishnah in this way?

(c) How might we otherwise have established our Mishnah - even if the Tahor Terumah was on top?

(d) Rav Chisda establishes the Mishnah in this way, because of the Seifa (on Daf 142b) - 'Ma'os she'Al ha'Kar'. How does he infer from there that the Mishnah must be speaking about Tzorech Gufo?

(a) Rebbi Yehudah permits removing one Sa'ah from a basket of a hundred Sa'ah of Chulin into which one Sa'ah of Terumah fell. What is the problem with this?

(b) The Gemara initially contends that Rebbi Yehudah holds like Rebbi Eliezer, who holds 'Terumah be'Eina Machsa' What does Rebbi Eliezer say, what does this mean, and how does it explain Rebbi Yehudah?

(c) What do the Chachamim hold in that case?

(d) On what grounds does the Gemara refute this contention?

(a) The Gemara then explains that Rebbi Yehudah follows the opinion of Rebbi Shimon - with regard to a second Sa'ah that fell into the mixture before he had removed the required Sa'ah.
What does Rebbi Shimon say, and what is the connection with Rebbi Yehudah's Din?

(b) How does the Gemara reject that contention? How else could we explain Rebbi Shimon (and what do the Rabbanan hold)?

(c) We finally establish Rebbi Yehudah like Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar.
What does Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar hold - with regard to eating Medumah on Shabbos without actually removing the Sa'ah?

(d) In fact, Rebbi Yehudah disagrees with Rebi Shimon ben Elazar.
What does he hold in that case, and how do we nevertheless reconcile the two opinions?

Answers to questions



(a) What does one do with a barrel of wine that has a stone on it?

(b) What does one do if one is afraid that he will break the neighboring barrels in the process of removing the stone?

(c) If someone who is going to bed, finds money on his sheet, what does he do?

(d) If one finds mud on one's sheet, what is the difference whether it is a cloth sheet or leather one, with regard to how it may be removed?

(a) What difference does it make whether the stone was left on the barrel by mistake, or whether it was placed there on purpose?

(b) The Gemara establishes our Mishnah like Raban Shimon ben Gamliel.
What would be the Din according to the Rabbanan of Raban Shimon ben Gamliel?

(c) What does Rebbi Shimon ben Gamliel say - with regard to sorting out the bad beans from the good ones?

(d) Why is our case (where the wine takes up more volume than the stone) comparable to 'Pesoles Merubeh al ha'Ochel'?

(a) If one *deliberately* placed money on a sheet before Shabbos, is there any way that he may move the sheet on Shabbos?

(b) Is there any way that one may move the sheet directly, if one *forgot* the money there before Shabbos?

(a) Some Amora'im permitted moving a purse from the middle of the courtyard (to save it from being stolen) by placing a loaf of bread or a baby on it and carrying them into the house together. Rebbi Yochanan even permitted this in the street.
How is this possible? Carrying in the street is a Melachah d'Oraysa?

(b) Mar Zutra restricted this Heter to someone who forgot the Muktzah, but not if he left it there on purpose. What is Rav Ashi's opinion in this matter?

(a) The earlier Amora'im held like Mar Zutra (who permitted moving Muktzah, that one had left lying there inadvertently) .
In that case, how did ...
  1. ... Abaye account for moving sheaves by placing a ladle on them ...
  2. ... Rava account for moving a young dove by placing a knife on it ...
... even though they had both put them there deliberately?

(b) Rava explained that the young dove had been fit to be eaten raw. Otherwise, he would not have moved it by means of a knife. Why is that like the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah in Muktzah?

(c) In that case (since Rava follows the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah), how could he instruct his servant to roast him a duckling, and throw the intestines (which humans do not normally eat on Yom-Tov) to a cat - on Yom-Tov?

(d) What did Rava say regarding a poker, which proves that he holds like Rebbi Yehudah on Yom-Tov?

Answers to questions
Next daf

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