Previous daf

1)

(a) The Gemara thinks that straw etc., that became wet artificially might not be considered 'Mosif Hevel', since they are not as hot as those that are wet naturally.

(b) 'Muchin', which usually refers to sheep's wool (or one of its derivatives), is naturally *dry*, so how can the Mishnah include it among the list of things that are only Mosif Hevel when they are *wet* - unless *wet* in our Mishnah also means *artificially* wet?

(c) There is one part of the sheep where the wool is naturally wet: namely, the wool between the thighs, and that is the 'Muchin' to which the Tana of our Mishnah could be referring. Consequently, we have no proof that the Tana does not require the materials in question to be naturally wet.

(d) The wool between the thighs is so wet that it cannot be shorn, only plucked - which is what the word 'Marta' means.

(a) Clothes, fruit (wheat and legumes) pigeons' feathers, saw-dust and flax-shavings are all *not* 'Mosif Hevel', which means that one is permitted to use them to wrap a pot of hot food on Erev Shabbos.

(b) Rebbi Yehudah forbids the flax-shavings when they are fine, because he considers them to be 'Mosif Hevel'.

(c) Although the Gemara is not at first sure, whether Rebbi Yehudah refers to the shavings of wood (saw-dust) or of flax. It concludes from a Beraisa that the latter is in fact, the case.

(a) Abaye explains Rebbi Yanai (that Tefilin require a clean body) to mean that one may not emit a smell whilst wearing Tefilin. (Someone who is unable to do this should not wear Tefilin).
According to Rava, we assume everyone to be able to keep a clean body as long as they are awake; what Rebbi Yanai means is that he should not fall asleep whilst wearing Tefilin, in case he makes a smell or has an emission.

(b) The basis of their Machlokes, as we just explained, is whether a person who will remain awake needs to assume that he will not be able to refrain from emitting a smell. According to Abaye, one needs to assess oneself before putting on one's Tefilin - that he will be able to keep his body clean; whilst according to Rava, this is automatically presumed to be the case.

(c) Elisha Ba'al Kenafayim was so called because of the episode with the Roman officer, who, at the time when the decree prohibiting the wearing of Tefilin was in force, discovered Elisha wearing them. He fled the scene. The officer gave chase and, as he caught up with him, Elisha t removed them and held them in his hand. When the officer asked him what he was holding, he replied 'pigeons' wings (hence his title - 'Kanfei Yonah'). He opened his hands, and the officer (probably could not believe his eyes when he) beheld - pigeons' wings!

(d) Elisha referred to his Tefilin (just as he would have done to any object of Mitzvah), because Mitzvos, like Tefilin, protect Yisrael from their enemies and from other punishments.

(a) Although one may wrap a hot pot with both animals' skins and shearings of wool on Erev Shabbos, the difference between them is, that whereas the former are not Muktzah, the latter *are*.

(b) One arranges to move the pot by seeing to it that the lid protrudes from the shearings, in which case one may lift up the lid, allowing the shearings to fall off. Then he may take the pot.

(c) Rebbi Elazar ben Azarya forbids one to remove the pot (in case the shearings in which the pot was lying cave in, and he inadvertently moves them in order to re-place the pot). Consequently, he is permitted only to tip the pot on its side, but not to take it out.

(a) The concession to handle animals' skins may well not apply to skins designated for commercial use.

(b) Rebbi Yishmael b'Rebbi Yossi gave testimony that his father, Rebbi Yossi, who was a tanner, had skins brought from his store-house on Shabbos to sit on them.

(c) Beams that were designated for commercial use have a stricter Din than skins, because one tends to be more particular about them (due to the fact that they become easily spoilt - see Rabeinu Chananel). Consequently, they will remain Muktzah until one prepares them more substantially for one's own use.

(d) For the beams to become permitted, one needs to have in mind to use them for guests - 'to put bread on them for the guests'.

6)

(a) Tanned skins are subject to Tum'ah, untanned skins are not.

(b) The Mishnah is only concerned with the category of private skins. Consequently, it is confined to cases that fit into that category; Halachically however, he could indeed have differentiated between skins meant for one's private use and commercial ones.

(c) The Gemara finally comment on commercial skins is that it is a Machlokes Tana'im. Rebbi Yossi does not differentiate, as we learnt above; whereas the Tana Kama holds that commercial skins are indeed Muktzah.

(a) The connection between the Melachos of the Mishkan and the Melachos of Shabbos derives from the proximity of the Parshah of Shabbos to that of the construction of the Mishkan - in Parshas Veyakhel, and is based on the fact that they constructed the Mishkan using the 39 Melachos of Shabbos - exclusively.

(b) The second reason for the thirty-nine Melachos is because of the thirty-nine times that the word 'Melachah' (or a derivative of it ) appears in the Torah.

(c) If "va'Yavo ha'Bayso La'asos Melachto" refers to the sin to which Yosef was about to succumb, then Melachah cannot be taken literally to mean 'work', in which case it will not be counted in the thirty-nine times "Melachah" that hint to the Melachos of the Mishkan.

(d) Similarly, if "ve'ha'Melachah Haysa Dayam" comes to teach us that Yisrael had donated more raw materials than were needed for the construction of the Mishkan, then the word "ve'ha'Melachah" does not have the connotation of work.

(a) If the Pasuk "ve'ha'Melachah" etc., is to have the connotation of 'work', then it is referring to the work that was performed to the raw materials after they were donated - before they actually began with the construction, such as beating out the golden plates to make the golden threads and spinning the various threads for the curtains.

(b) It was the image of his father, Ya'akov, asking his whether he would be happy to have his name from the stones of the Efod - whilst the names of his eleven brothers would, which held him back from sinning with the wife of Potifera.

(a) Sowing and reaping were needed to obtain the dark-blue, purple and crimson dyes for the curtains (though this must have achieved already in Egypt prior to the Exodus). And transporting the planks from one domain to the other, were performed with the planks (when they took down the Mishkan - and reconstructed it at its new site) which were handed from the men at the old site to the men in the wagons, and from the men in the wagons to the men at the new site (as well as handing them from one wagon to another - which will explain the case in the next answer).

(b) One is indeed not Chayav for transporting an object from one Reshus ha'Yachid to another; the Beraisa is speaking about carrying from one Reshus ha'Yachid to another *via the Reshus ha'Rabim*.
(Incidentally, Hotza'ah and Hachnasah are not two separate Avos Melachos, as would appear from the Beraisa - See Tosfos, d.h. 've'Atem'.)