POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous dafBeitzah 23
1) MOLID (CONTINUATION OF SMOKING FRUIT)
(a) (Rabah and R. Yosef) It is prohibited to place a cup of
perfume on a silk garment on YomTov.
(b) Question: Why is this so?
(c) Answer: Because it creates (Molid) a fragrance in the
(d) Question: Why should this be any different from
creating an aroma by rolling the branch of an aromatic
tree (which we know is permitted)!?
(e) Answer: By rolling the branch he is only adding to
existing fragrance, whereas here he is creating the
fragrance where none was there before.
(f) (Rava) It is even permitted to smoke fruit on coals, as
it is no different than roasting meat (a Shaveh l'chol
Nefesh where both Kibui and Hav'ara are permitted).
(a) Rav Geviha announced enigmatically that Ketura is
3) GEDI MEKULAS
(b) Question (Ameimar): If I understand its meaning
correctly, Ketura should *not* be permitted (whether it
is the skilled work associated with pressing the sleeve
of a garment, or it is smoking fruit which causes
Kibui, it is not permitted)!?
(c) Answer (R. Ashi): It refers to smoking fruit (which I
hold is permitted, like Rava above).
(d) An alternate rendition of the above:
1. (Ameimar) Ketura should not be permitted (it is
either skilled word or it is *Molid* a fragrance)?
2. (R. Ashi) I was told that Ketura is smoking fruit
and is permitted, as above.
(a) (Beraisa) The Chachamim censured Todus (who allowed
Gedi Mekulas) for causing Jews to eat Kodeshim outside
4) MISHNAH: THE HETERIM OF R. ELAZAR B. AZARIAH ON YOMTOV
(b) Question: Is Gedi Mekulas really Kodeshim outside the
(c) Answer: Rather, the censure was that it is too similar,
and may lead others to err and eat Kodeshim baChutz.
(a) His Parah was allowed to go out with its strap between
its horns (seeing it as an adornment not a burden).
5) THE REFERENCE TO THE ONE COW OF R. ELAZAR B. AZARIAH
(b) His animals was combed (scratched) with a metal comb.
(c) Pepper may be ground in his mill.
(d) (R. Yehudah) A metal comb may not be used (Mekardin) as
it causes a Chaburah but a wooden comb may be used
(e) (Chachamim) Neither is permitted.
(a) Question: How could we speak of his (one) cow when we
know that his Ma'aser alone amounted to 13,000 head!?
6) KIRUD VERSUS KIRTZUF AND DAVAR SH'EIN MISKAVEN
(b) Answer: It was his neighbor's, but his silent
acquiescence causes it to be referred to as his.
(a) Question: What is the difference between them?
(b) Answer: The former employs a comb with small teeth
which cause Chaburos, while the latter has thick teeth
which do not.
(c) The three opinions regarding these combs are:
1. (R. Yehudah) Davar sh'Ein Miskaven is Asur, hence
Kirud is Asur and Kirtzuf is Mutar.
(d) (Rava citing R. Nachman citing Shmuel, or, R. Nachman
alone) The Halachah follows R. Shimon, as evidenced by
the position of R. Elazar b. Azariah.
2. (Rabanan) As above, but we forbid Kirud lest it be
confused with Kirtzuf.
3. (R. Elazar b. Azariah) Davar sh'Ein Miskaven is
Mutar (like R. Shimon) and he does not intend to
cause Chaburos, hence both are permitted.
(e) Question (Rava): Why not say the Halachah is like R.
Yehudah, given the position of Chachamim!?
(f) Answer (R. Nachman): I hold like R. Shimon and I find,
in addition, that R. Elazar b. Azariah supports this.
7) MISHNAH: THE PEPPER MILL
(a) The pepper mill is made of three component parts, each
bearing its own name, which implies separate Tumah for
8) THE BERAISA ANALYSES THE MILL
(b) These are the Keli Kibul (which receives the pepper at
the bottom), the Keli Mateches (the metal of the mill)
and the Keli Kevarah (the sifter).
(a) The lower Keli is wood and receives Tumah because it
has a Beis Kibul.
9) MISHNAH: A CHILD'S TOY WAGON
(b) The middle (sifter) is also wood and receives Tumah
because of a Gezeirah (given its similarity to an
(c) The upper receives Tumah because, though it is largely
wood without a Beis Kibul, it has a metal grinding
(a) A toy wagon (in which the child may ride) may receive
Tumas Midras (were the child to be a Zav), it may be
handled on Shabbos and it may not be dragged on the
ground unless it is on a carpet of cloth.
10) ANALYZING THE HALACHOS OF THE MISHNAH
(b) (R. Yehudah) No Keli may be dragged except the wagon
which does not dig a channel, but it only pushes down
the earth under its wheels.
(a) It receives Tumas Midras because the child is supported
Hadran Alach YomTov
(b) It may be handled since it is considered a Keli.
(c) It may only by dragged on cloth, and, presumably, not
on the ground.
1. Question: Why is this so?
(d) This follows R. Yehudah (Davar sh'Ein Miskaven is Asur)
and not R. Shimon (as he taught in the Beraisa, that it
is permitted to drag even a chair or bed, provided he
does not intend to make a Charitz thereby).
2. Answer: Because it makes a Charitz, even though
this is unintended.
(e) Question: Then how are we to understand R. Yehudah's
position at the end of the Mishnah where he teaches
that the wagon impresses the ground and *does not* dig
(f) Answer: It is a Machlokes regarding the position of R.
Yehudah (the first Tana being concerned that, at times,
the wheels of the wagon will be stuck and instead of
pressing the ground it will dig a Charitz while the
second Tana assumes that the wheels turn freely).
*****PEREK EIN TZADIN*****
1) MISHNAH: TRAPPING
(a) One must not catch fish in a Bibar on YomTov, nor may
one feed such fish.
(b) One may, however, catch animals and fowl in a Bibar and
give them food there.
(c) (R. Shimon b. Gamliel) It depends on the whether the
Bibar is small enough to consider the animal already