Previous daf

1)

(a) Rebbi Zeira initially explains that the Tana forbids Bi'ah (marriage) on Motza'ei Shabbos because of Cheshbonos -meaning that he might make an inventory of things that he needs for the wedding feast, which is forbidden because of the Pasuk in Yeshayah "ve'Daber Davar" (even if he does not write it down).

(b) The problem with Rebbi Zeira's explanation is - that Cheshbonos shel Mitzvah are permitted on Shabbos.

(c) Mitzvah calculations; undertaking to give Tzedakah; looking into communal needs; Piku'ach Nefesh all have in common - that they fall under the category of Cheshbonos shel Mitzvah.

(d) And for the same reason, one is also permitted on Shabbos ...

1. ... to arrange a Shiduch for one's son or daughter.
2. ... to employ a Rebbe to teach one's son Torah.
3. ... to employ a tutor to teach him a trade.

(a) Rebbi Zeira's real reason for the prohibition of marrying on Motza'ei Shabbos is - because we are afraid that he might take a bird for the feast and Shecht it on Shabbos.

(b) Nevertheless, we are not afraid that, when *Yom Kipur* falls on Monday, someone may Shecht a bird on Shabbos for Erev Yom Kipur. If we had been - Chazal would have postponed it until Tuesday.

(c) One reason for this distinction is because, whereas for a wedding, one needs to prepare a feast for all the guests, on Yom Kipur, people are only preparing for their own immediate family. Alternatively - when Erev Yom Kipur falls on Sunday, one has the whole night to Shecht, wherea in the case with a wedding that is due to take place on Motza'ei Shabbos, one is hard up for time.

(d) Originally, we gave the reason for the prohibition of marrying (performing Bi'ah) on Friday night, as making a wound. Now, we change it to the same reason as the prohibition of marrying (performing Bi'ah) on Friday night - because we are afraid that, finding himself short of meat for the feast, he might take a bird and Shecht it after Shabbos has already entered.

(a) We learned in our Mishnah that a Besulah goes under the Chupah on Wednesday. The B'nei Yeshivah asked whether they were permitted to consummate the marriage straightway, or whether they had to wait until after nightfall. They might be obligated to wait - because of the fear that, if time (however short) is permitted to elapse between the Chasan's discovery that the Kalah is not a Besulah and the time that Beis-Din convene, his anger will cool down and he will forgive her. If, on the other hand, he delays the Bi'ah until nightfall, he will strike whilst the iron is hot.

(b) We resolve the She'eilah from Bar Kapara in a Beraisa, who says that ...

1. ... a Besulah who marries on Wednesday - consummates the marriage on Thursday, because of the B'rachah that Hashem bestowed upon the fish on that day.
2. ... an Almanah who marries on Thursday - consummates it on Friday, because of the B'rachah that Hashem bestowed upon Adam on that day.

(c) Clearly then, a Besulah who married on Wednesday, would consummate the marriage on Thursday only because of B'rachah (which is a good idea, but not obligatory. From which we can infer that, if they did care about the B'rachah, they were permitted to consummate it on Wednesday (because Chazal were not concerned that his anger might cool down in such a short time).

(a) One of the reasons that an Almanah performs Bi'ah on Thursday (in spite of the B'rachah of the fish) is because the B'rachah that was given to Adam is more worthwhile. The other reason is - because of a Takanas Chachamim ('Shakdu') protecting an Almanah, to ensure that the man does not just consummate the marriage on Thursday, and then go off to work on Friday. So they initiated the marriage on Thursday and the Bi'ah on Friday, followed by Shabbos, where he cannot go to work anyway (leaving three days of celebration).

(b) One of the differences between the two reasons is manifest in the case of a man who is out of work (to whom 'Shakdu' is not applicable). The other difference is - when Yom-Tov falls on Friday, and he cannot go to work anyway (in both cases, they will be permitted to consummate the marriage already on Thursday, should the reason for the prohibition be because of 'Shakdu'.

(a) bar Kapara extrapolates from the two Pesukim "af Yadi Yasdah Eretz, vi'Yemini Tafchah Shamayim" and "Mikdash, Hashem Konenu Yadecha" - that the work of Tzadikim who built the Beis-Hamikdash) is greater than that of Hashem (seeing as the reference to Hand in the first Pasuk is in the singular, and in the second Pasuk, in the plural). See Agados Maharsha.

(b) bar Kapara explains that the Pasuk ...

1. ... "ve'Yabeshes *Yadav* Yatzaru" - is written without a 'Yud'.
2. ... "Yadav *Yatzaru*" (in the plural) - refers to the fingers of Hashem's Hand (like the Pasuk writes in Tehilim "Ki Er'eh Shamecha Ma'aseh Etzbe'osecha").

(c) He explains that the Pasuk there "u'Ma'aseh *Yadav* Magid ha'Raki'a" (in the plural) - refers to the Tefilos of the Tzadikim. And "Magid ha'Raki'a" - refers to the rain that the heaven sends down, demonstrating their righteousness.

(d) The name of the Bavli who asked bar Kapara these Kashyos - was none other than Rebbi Chiya.

6)

(a) bar Kapara explains the Pasuk "ve'Yaseid Tihyeh Lecha al Azeinecha" - by changing the vowels of "Azeinecha" to read "Oznecha", to teach us that when someone hears something that he should not, he should place his fingers (the peg to which the Pasuk refers) in his ears.

(b) That is also how Rebbi Elazar explained the pointy shape of the fingers. When he asked why the fingers are like pegs, he cannot have meant to ask why they are separated into five individual entities and are not joined together (like those of most animals) - because we already know that each finger has a specific purpose (from the fact that each one has a different name - as we shall now see).

(c) The five fingers are called Zeres, K'mitzah, Amah, Etzba and Godel. The Zeres - was used to measure the size of the Choshen (which was one Zeres by one Zeres), and the K'mitzah, to contain the Kometz of a Korban Minchah.

(d) The Amah was to measure the Amos of the various building projects of the Beis Hamikdash and of the holy vessels, and the Etzba for sprinkling the blood of the Chatas. Hashem created the Godel in order to place on it the blood and the oil during the seven days of Milu'im, on the right Godel of the Kohen Gadol , and also on the right Godel of the Metzora during his purification ceremony.

(a) Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael explained that, of the entire ear, only the lobe is soft - so that, when a person hears something that he should not, he can press the lobe into the ear.

(b) One should be careful not to listen to idle chatter - because, the softest of the limbs, the (lobes of the) ear will be the first to be affected by the fires of Gehinom.

(a) The B'nei Yeshivah asked whether it is permitted to make the first Bi'ah with a Besulah on Shabbos. Perhaps they were aware of the Beraisa above which forbade it, or perhaps they were not certain whether it is Halachah (See also Tosfos DH 'Mahu').

(b) In the first Lashon of the She'eilah, if the blood of Besulim is considered intrinsically joined to the body, then the first Bi'ah is certainly forbidden, because extracting it will entail causing a wound. Even if we assume the blood to be merely deposited in the body however, it might be forbidden - if it is the opening he wants (because creating an opening is a form of building), even according to Rebbi Shimon (who holds 'Davar she'Ein Miskaven, Mutar'.

(c) But it might still be forbidden, even if he really only intends to extract the blood - assuming the Halachah is like Rebbi Yehudah (who holds 'Davar she'Ein Miskaven, Asur').

(d) According to Rebbi Shimon, we take for granted that, if it is the blood he wants, it will be permitted. It is not a case of 'P'sik Reisha' ([inevitable] which even Rebbi Shimon concedes, is forbidden) - because, as will be explained later, it is possible to avoid both extracting blood and making an opening).

(a) The first Bi'ah with a Besulah will be permitted even according to Rebbi Yehudah - if we consider it 'Mekalkel' (even though Mekalkel is normally Asur mi'de'Rabbanan - see Tosfos DH 'Im Timtzi Lomar').

(b) The Bi'ah of a Besulah would be considered Mekalkel - because a Be'ulah is worth less than a Besulah (evident from the fact that the Kesubah of a Besulah is two hundred Zuz, whereas that of a Be'ulah is only one hundred).

(c) There is no shadow of doubt that if it is Mekalkel, the Bi'ah will be permitted - because even Rebbi Shimon, who is strict by Mekalkel, is only strict by Mekalkel ba'Chaburah (and we are currently holding 'Dam Mifkad Pakid', and there is no wound).

(a) In the second Lashon, we assume that the blood of a Besulah is intrinsically joined. The Bi'ah might nevertheless be permitted - because it is not even the blood that he wants, but his own pleasure, assuming the Halachah to be like Rebbi Shimon (Davar she'Ein Miskaven, Mutar).

(b) The Bi'ah would be forbidden according to Rebbi Shimon and permitted according to Rebbi Yehudah - if it is considered Mekalkel ba'Chaburah, where Rebbi Yehudah holds Patur and Rebbi Shimon, Chayav.

(c) In Bei Rav they cited Rav as permitting the first Bi'ah, and Shmuel as forbidding it - in Neherda'a (Shmuel's town), they reversed the opinions.

(d) The Si'man that Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak gave to remember who said what is - that each one strove to be lenient for himself (i.e. in de'Bei Rav quoted Rav as being the lenient one, and in Neherda'a ) Shmuel's territory, they cited Shmuel).