Previous daf

1)

(a) With regard to the Mishnah in 'Notel', which permits one to carry a basket with a stone in it, Rebbi Yochanan himself comments that it speaks when the basket is full of fruit, otherwise it will be a 'Basis le'Davar he'Asur'. From here we see, that far from the *stone* being Batel to the *basket*, it is the *basket* that becomes a Basis to the *stone*. By the same token, the dust-pan, rather than rendering the ashes Batel to it, should itself be Asur, because it becomes a Basis to the ashes?

(b) A grain of frankincense was hardly significant in the eyes of Rebbi, who was an extremely wealthy man.

(c) Nor would it help to say that it was fit to be used by other people (even though it was of no value to Rebbi), because we have already learnt, that clothes of three by three finger-breadths, which are fit exclusively for a poor man, remain Muktzah to someone who is wealthy.

(d) We cannot compare the pan with ashes to a baby's potty (which one is permitted to take out of the room because it is disgusting) for two reasons: firstly, because a pan with ashes is not repulsive (like a potty is), and secondly, because a pan of ashes is normally covered (at least, it used to be in those days), whilst a potty is not.

(a) Rava switches the role of the ashes. According to him, the ashes are *not* Muktzah (since in those days, they were used to cover dirt). And the Chidush is, that, although there were also pieces of wood (which are definitely Muktzah on Shabbos) on the pan, it is permitted to carry the pan because of the ashes (since it now becomes a 'Basis le'Davar ha'Asur u'le Davar ha'Mutar' - because the pieces of wood become Batel to the ashes).

(b) If the used, broken wicks that remain in a lamp render the lamp Muktzah, and do not become Batel to the lamp, then why should the pieces of wood be Batel to the ashes?

(c) Normally, the used, broken wicks are Batel to the lamp. However, we are speaking in the Galil, where linen garments (whose worn out strands they would use for wicks) were rare, so they would re-use old wicks to light their lamps.
That explains why these wicks did not become Batel to the lamps, like the wood to the ashes.

(a) A 'Mitah shel Terasim' is the portable bed of the coppersmiths, who would take it apart and transport it when they went to work. According to Rav and Shmuel, someone who puts it together is Chayav because of 'Makeh ba'Patish' - completing a task (not because of 'Binyan', since there is no 'Binyan' by vessels).

(b) A 'Kaneh shel Sayadin' is a long extendible pole, to which one attaches a cloth, with which one lime one's walls. The pole can be extended or shortened by adding or removing sections. One is never *Chayav* for extending the pole, since the pole is meant to be extended and shortened continually, so that there is no stage at which the job is completed.

(c) A 'Keren Agulah' and a 'Keren Peshutah' were both musical instruments. The former was more of a professional instrument, whose parts were assembled firmly, which is why one was Chayav - the latter less professional, its parts put together loosely, for which one is not Chayav.

(d) Those Amora'im who permit putting together a coppersmith's bed, follow the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who permits putting together the branches of the lamp loosely (according to some, only if that is the way that it is *normally* assembled).

4)

(a) 'Milbenos ha'Mitah' were hollow legs, into which one fitted the legs of a bed, to prevent them from rotting. 'Levachim shel Sachivas' were small boards that were made to fit onto a bow, and along which they would draw the arrows.

(b) The Tana Kama maintains that someone who assembled them was Patur Aval Asur.

(c) Someone who fitted them together firmly would be Chayav Chatas.

(d) What they asked Rava (or Rav Chama), was how the members of Rav Chama's family could assemble a Mitah Gelalnisa on Yom-Tov - even loosely (which is referred to as 'Binyan min ha'Tzad'. Because, they argued, even if it was not an Isur d'Oraysa, it was certainly an Isur de'Rabbanan.
He answered that he (Rav Chama) followed the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who permits assembling it, provided it was assembled loosely.

(a) Sparks that fall into a vessel will not render it Muktzah, since sparks, like specks of dust, are not tangible, and are therefore not Muktzah. Consequently, placing a receptacle underneath a lamp to receive the sparks is not 'Mevatel K'li me'Heichano'.

(b) 'Geram Kibuy' is causing a fire to become extinguished (e.g. placing something which contains water in front of an advancing fire, so that, when the fire reaches the water, it will automatically be extinguished). Rebbi Yossi (in "Kol Kisvei') holds that Geram Kibuy is forbidden. The Tana of our Mishnah cannot be Rebbi Yossi, because Rebbi Yossi only forbids Geram Kibuy on *Shabbos itself*, whereas our Mishnah forbids placing water in a lamp even on *Erev Shabbos*.

(c) The Tana Kama in our Mishnah forbids placing water in the lamp on Erev Shabbos, not because of Kibuy itself. Why is that?
Because unlike the Rebbi Yossi in 'Kol ha'Keilim', who speaks about placing vessels full of water in the line of the fire, we are speaking about placing actual water below the flame, to extinguish the flame when it reaches that point. *That* is not Geram Kibuy, but Kibuy itself.

(a) The waste of olives, manure, salt, lime, sand; straw, grape-skins, soft woolen strands and grass - which are wet - all increase the heat of whatever one wraps them with. Consequently, it is forbidden to wrap hot foods with them ...

(b) ... even on Erev Shabbos.

(c) It is permitted to wrap with straw, grape-skins, soft woolen strands and grass - when they are dry.

(d) Sand increases the heat whether it is wet or dry. Therefore both are forbidden.

(a) Sesame (or sunflower) seeds, like the waste of olives, increase the heat of whatever they are being wrapped in. Therefore, it is forbidden to wrap with them even on Erev Shabbos.

(b) They differ however, inasmuch as, whereas the heat from the waste of olives rises, that of the sesame (or sunflower) seeds does not.
Consequently, if one places a cooked pot in a box, it is forbidden to place that box on top of the waste of olives, but one *may* place it on top of sesame (or sunflower) seeds.