Previous daf

1)

(a) A man should say to his wife on Friday afternoon, shortly before dusk: 'Did you separate Ma'asros? Did you arrange an Eiruv( provided they are necessary), and - 'Kindle the Shabbos-lights!'

(b) He should not say this earlier, because then, his wife is likely to say that, since she has plenty of time, she will see to them later, and his reminder will have been have vain.

(c) During the week, Achilas Arai does not need to be Ma'asered; but Shabbos has a Din of 'Keva', so whatever one eats, needs to be Ma'asered.

(d) A man cannot see whether or not, his wife has Ma'asered the food for Shabbos, or whether she has made an Eiruv; therefore, he asks her whether she has done it or not. The Shabbos-lights, on the other hand, have obviously not yet been lit, otherwise he would have seen them burning, so he instructs her to kindle them.

(a) Clearly, Isurim de'Rabbanan are also forbidden during the period of dusk, because the Mishnah has listed Eiruvin (which is purely de'Rabbanan) among the things that are prohibited.

(b) Nevertheless, it is permitted to take Demai, because Demai is not even a full de'Rabbanan, as we learnt earlier (on Daf 23a).

(c) 'Eravtem' incorporates Eruvei Techumin and Eruvei Chatzeiros. (However, from the Gemara later - see 3c - it would appear, that the Reisha of the Mishnah is confined to Eruvei Techumin, which is how Rashi explains in Gitin. Refer also, to 3c)

(a) "ve'Yada'ta Ki Shalom Ohalecha" etc." teaches us that a man should tell his wife things that are relevant to Shalom Bayis: i.e. to Ma'aser, ro make an Eruv and to light Shabbos-lights, because, if one has not Ma'asered, the food will be forbidden, without an Eruv, one cannot carry in the courtyard, and without the Shabbos lights they will be unable to eat; all things that will interfere with Shalom Bayis.

(b) These things should be said gently, if they are to be effective - because women (just like men) do not like being shouted at.

(c) As we have already explained, most things are forbidden to be done after dusk. Another exception to the rule (besides that of taking Ma'aser from Demai), is Eruvei Chatzeros, which unlike Eruvei Techumin, does not have an Asmachta (a support from a Pasuk) in the Torah. It is *purely* mi'de'Rabbanan. Consequently, when the Mishnah permits making an Eruv during dusk, it refers to Eruvei Chatzeros. The Reisha, which forbids it, is speaking about Eruvei Techumin.a

(a) If the Eruv of the person who placed his Eruv before dusk was eaten *before* nightfall, and that of the one who placed his Eruv after dusk, *after* nightfall, both Eruvin are effective.

(b)&(c) The reason for this is because, dusk is a Safek, and, even though, strictly speaking, each moment of dusk is either day or night (it cannot possibly be both), nevertheless, we take each case individually, applying the principle 'Safek de'Rabbanan le'Kula'. Consequently, as far as the first person is concerned, we consider it as day, and with regard to the second, night. (According to Tosfos, d.h. 'Sheneihem', this case is speaking about Eruvei Chatzeros, which we learnt above, is more lenient. But by Eruvei Techumin, we would not be so lenient.)
(If the Eruv was placed during dusk and eaten during dusk, it is not effective, because we only consider dusk as belonging partly to the day and partly to the night - le'Chumra, but not le'Kula - see Rosh, end of Si'man 22.)

(a) It is forbidden to wrap food on Shabbos, even with something that does not actually increase the heat, because we are afraid that, when he comes to wrap the pot, he will discover that it has cooled down, and re-heat it before wrapping it, in order that it should still be hot when he comes to eat it on Shabbos morning.
(From this explanation of Rashi, it is clear that the principle of 'Ein Bishul Achar Bishul' does not apply to liquids that have gone cold - See Rosh, Perek Kirah, Si'man 10 and 11).

(b) This concern is not however, applicable during the dusk period, since most pots are boiling hot at that stage. Chazal therefore, did not forbid it then.

(c) It is forbidden to wrap with something that increases the heat, even on Friday afternoon. Why?
Because, since he clearly wants to heat the food, we are afraid that he may place the pot on the ashes, and then, at night-time, when he discovers that they are going out, he will stoke them.

(d) In spite of the fact that one is unlikely to stoke a pot that is fully cooked, Chazal decreed on pots that are fully cooked, because of pots that are not.
(This Sugya will be discussed further in the following Perakim.)

6)

(a) If dusk belongs to the day, then, on Motza'ei Shabbos, one must consider it all as part of the day, and it will be forbidden to perform any work before the end of dusk plus a few minutes (to allow for 'Tosfos Shabbos' - the obligation to add on to Shabbos). Whereas if we consider it to be part of the night, then we must consider dusk of Friday evening as Shabbos, which means that one must bring in Shabbos at least a few minutes *before* dusk (to allow for Tosfos Shabbos).

(b) If a man sees Zivus throughout one dusk period, we must assume that perhaps the entire dusk period belongs either to the day or to the night, in which case, he has seen only one day, and is no more than a Ba'al Keri (unless he sees again the following day); or whether the first half of the dusk belongs to the day and the second half to the night, in which case, he will be a Zav, though he does not bring a Korban.

(c) If he sees throughout two consecutive dusk periods, we are faced with three possibilities: either that the first dusk belongs to the first day, and the second dusk to the second night, in which case, he will not be a Zav at all - only a Ba'al Keri; or that both dusk periods belong either to their respective days or to their nights, in which case, he will be a Zav who saw twice, who is Tamei for seven days, but does not bring a Korban; or the first dusk period belonged half to the day and half to the night, and the second, to the night only, or if the second dusk period belongs to both day and night, and the first, to the day only (not to mention if, in the last two cases, *both* dusk periods belong to *both* the day and the night) - when he will be a full Zav, who brings a Korban at the termination of his Zivus.

(a) Rebbi Yehudah first says that from sunset as long as the Eastern horizon is still red, is considereddusk, from which we can infer that once it has become dark in the East, it is night. So how can he then refer to when it has gone dark in the East, as 'dusk'.

(b)

1. Rabbah (in the name of Shmuel) explains that what Rebbi Yehudah is saying is that from the time the sun sets and the Eastern horizon is red until it gets dark in the East, is all part of dusk. It is not two stages, and one can make no inferences from the first part of Rebbi Yehudah's words.
2. Rav Yosef (in the name of Shmuel) explains that Rebbi Yehudah is stating three stages: 1. From sunset as long as the Eastern horizon is red - is day (not dusk, as we learnt at first); when the East becomes dark, dusk begins; and night falls when it becomes dark from the Eastern horizon until the middle of the sky.

(c) From the time that the Eastern horizon reddens until it becomes dark (the difference between Rav Yosef and Rabbah), is only one twelfth of a Mil (about one and a half minutes) - the difference between three quarters of a Mil and two thirds of a Mil.

(d) Three parts of a Mil cannot mean three halves of a Mil, because then, why did he not say 'one and a half Mil'? Nor can he have meant three thirds of a Mil, because then he should have said 'one Mil'? Consequently, he can only have meant three quarters of a Mil.