Previous daf

1)

(a) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel ...

1. ... also permitted moving broken pieces of glass on Shabbos - because ostriches eat them ...
2. ... but not detached vine-branches - even though elephants eat them.

(b) The reason for the difference is because elephants were *not* common, whereas ostriches *were*.

(c) If one needed to actually own ostriches for the pieces of glass to be permitted, then how could Rebbi Nasan then ask Raban Shimon ben Gamliel why, according to him, vine-branches were not permitted, since they were fit for elephants? How many people owned elephants - for his Kashya to make any sense?

(a) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel, Rebbi Shimon, Rebbi Yishmael and Rebbi Akiva - all hold 'Kol Yisrael B'nei Melachim Hem'. Note: whenever the Gemara gives such a list of Tana'im, it is called 'Shitah' and is not Halachah.

(b) Rebbi Shimon says that all of Yisrael are permitted to use rose-oil, since all Jews are potentially worthy of becoming princes, and everybody agrees that princes are permitted to use it.

(c) According to the Chachamim, we sell the movables of a debtor to pay off his debt, and, if he is wearing a very expensive suit (above his means), we sell it, and use the proceeds to buy him a suit within his means, using the remainder to help pay his debt. Rebbi Yishmael and Rebbi Akiva however, maintain that every Jew is a potential prince; so, if he is wearing a very expensive suit, we leave him with it.

(d) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel is more strict than the Rabbanan; according to him, even a bundle of straw etc. that one designated is only permitted if it can be carried with one hand; but if it can only be carried with two hands, it is Muktzah - even if it *was* designated as animal-fodder, because of the excessive bother.

(a) Savory, hyssop and pennyroyal plants (like the bundles of straw etc., in the previous question) can be used either as fire-wood or as animal-fodder. They are only allowed to be moved if one specifically placed them in one's store of animal-fodder before Shabbos.

(b) One is permitted to cut them into small pieces on Shabbos - using one's hands, but not an implement.

(c) According to the Chachamim, one is only permitted to roll a few at a time with the tips of one's fingers, not with an implement, and not even in the palm of the hand.

(d) This Halachah also applies to mint, the rue-plant and all other kinds of spices.

(a) One may move raw, salted meat on Shabbos.

(b) Rav and Rav Huna hold like Rebbi Yehudah (concerning Muktzah) only as regards eating, but as far as moving is concerned, they hold like Rebbi Shimon.

(c) Unsalted meat is not fit to be eaten raw, but goose-meat, which is tender, *is*. That is why Rav Chisda forbade the former, but permitted the latter.

(d) The Beraisa forbids raw, unsalted fish on Shabbos, because it is not yet fit for human consumption. Nor does one designate it for one's dogs (since it is fit for humans); on the other hand, the Beraisa permits raw, unsalted meat, since it is fit for wild (carnivorous) animals. The author of this Beraisa is Rebbi Yehudah, who holds of Muktzah (according to Rebbi Shimon, the unsalted fish will also be permitted).

(a) Bones are not Muktzah on Shabbos, because dogs eat them.

(b) According to Raban Shimon ben Gamliel, water that was left uncovered is Muktzah. Why? Because even though cats can safely drink it, it is forbidden to leave it lying around (for the cats to drink) in case a human being finds it and drinks it.

6)

(a) The Chidush of the Mishnah, which permits overturning a basket on Shabbos for the chicks to hop on and off - is that a vessel may be moved to serve something that is itself Muktzah. According to Rav Yitzchak, who holds that one may not take a vessel to serve another vessel that is itself Muktzah, the Gemara already answered above (on 43a), that the Chidush of the Mishnah is that one may pick up a Muktzah vessel if one needs its location.

(b) One may return a rebellious hen to its coop, but not by carrying it - only by pushing it until it returns on its own volition.

(c) Chazal are more lenient with animals than with chickens in this regard, inasmuch as Diduy (holding them by the neck and body and moving them along) is permitted, whereas by a chicken that is forbidden. Why? Because it counters by sticking its claws into the ground and refusing to budge; in which case, one will actually be carrying it.

(d) Rebbi Yehudah explains that the Tana Kama permits Diduy only if her son actually responds by moving his feet. She is not permitted to pull him along, as that constitutes carrying.

(a) The Beraisa permits only feeding it where it is, but no more, when that is possible. Rav permits placing cushions underneath the animal, when, for some reason or other, it is not possible to feed it in its place.

(b) True, placing the cushions there constitutes 'Mevatel K'li me'Hechano'. However, leaving the animal in the pool of water, is 'Tzar Ba'alei Chayim', and Tzar Ba'alei Chayim is d'Oraysa - Consequently, it over-rides 'Mevatel K'li me'Hechano', which is only de'Rabbanan.

(a) The Diduy of an animal is permitted only in the courtyard, but forbidden in the street, because, should the animal rise from the ground in the process of the Diduy, one will be Chayav for carrying (since, according to the Rabbanan of Rebbi Nasan, we do not apply 'ha'Chai Nosei es Atzmo' to animals). The Diduy of a child, however, is permitted even in the street, because the Rabbanan agree with Rebbi Nasan that, by a person, we say 'ha'Chai Nosei es Atzmo'. Consequently, even if the child refuses to walk, and is inadvertently pulled along, the mother will only have transgressed an Isur de'Rabbanan, but not a d'Oraysa.

(b) The Beraisa which permits even the *Diduy* of birds on Shabbos in a courtyard, is speaking about the majority of birds; whereas the Beraisa which permits only pushing them, but not Diduy - is speaking about chickens.

(c) When Shechting a hen, one should either pick it up from the ground, or push it down so that it bends its legs. Otherwise, it is like to press its claws into the ground, and move during the Shechitah, causing the Shochet to make Ikur Simanim (pulling out the Simanim instead of cutting them).

(a) One may assist a woman in childbirth on Yom-Tov in whichever way necessary; whereas by an animal only a limited assistance is permitted.

(b) In addition, assisting a woman in childbirth is permitted even on Shabbos, whereas by an animal, it is only permitted on Yom-Tov.

(c) According to Rebbi Yossi, even severing the umbilical cord is permitted.

(d) Besides holding the baby animal when it emerges (according to Rav Yehudah), one may also clear its nasal passage by blowing into it, and place its mothers teat into its mouth for it to drink.

(a) According to Rav Nachman, one is even permitted to press the animal's stomach behind the womb, to help the baby to emerge.

(b) Merachamin al Behemah Tehorah be'Yom-Tov means: 1. to place a grain of salt in the mother's womb, to remind it of its birth-pangs, so that it should take pity on its baby and look after it; 2. to sprinkle some water from the placenta on to the baby, because the smell too, will help evoke its mother's mercy.

(c) Raban Shion ben Gamliel restricts 'Merachmin' to a Behemah Tehorah - because a Behemah Temei'ah does not generally reject its young, but, once it does, then it will not take it back, and no human strategy will help.

(a) The Beraisa permits lighting a fire for a woman who has given birth - even if she is blind, in which case the light will not benefit her directly. Nevertheless, the Tana permits it, because the mother will feel better if she knows that other people can (literally) see to her needs, and the jeopardy to her life will be minimised.

(b) One brings the mother oil in one's hands, but not in a jar (in order to make as much Shinuy as possible - since this does not cause any delay). If more oil is needed, one may bring it in one's hair (from which one then squeezes it out). Should that not suffice, one brings her the oil in a bottle.

(c) Rabah and Rav Yosef hold that 'Ein Sechitah be'Se'ar' (mi'd'Oraysa - only mi'de'Rabbanan). Therefore, it is preferable to bring it in the hair than to carry it in the street.

(d) Rav Ashi answers that what the Beraisa means is, not that one carries the oil directly in one's hair, but that one carries the bottle of oil in one's hair 'k'le'Achar Yad'.