Transcript

Shabbos 2.2-2.5 · Time4Mishna

0:02
We're in the middle of discussing which oils and wicks are fit to be used for the Shabbos candles, based on what flame they produce. So wicks which don't allow the oil to be absorbed in them properly, they can't be used, firstly, because it's not an honor of Shabbos, because a good light won't be produced. And secondly, we're worried that somebody might come to tilt the lamp a bit and to try and play around with the wicks and the oil in order to increase the fire, which of course is forbidden on Shabbos. Now, we mentioned in the previous Mishnah that one cannot use Sharon Serifa for the Shabbat's candle refers to Truma oil, oil which was given to Karanim as the gift of Truma, which became Tommy and as a result needs to be burnt. And we explained that the reason why you cannot use it is a decree because of a Yomtiv which falls on Friday, because when Friday is a Yomta, then it's forbidden to burn Sherman Srefer, since it is forbidden to burn anything sanctified, such as Carbonus, which became invalid, or such as Truma, which is now Tommy. Although they need to be burned, they are not allowed to be burnt on Yontav. And so there are bot made a decree that you can never use it to light candles, because you may come to use it when to light candles, even on y. And really that's what the beginning of this Mishnah comes to tell us. The reason why you cannot use Sherman Serifa in general is because of the halacha that in Madli can be sherefa. Beyond that, one is not allowed to light with Shemon Serifa on Yont. And as we mentioned in the previous Mishnah, this is learned from a Posuk with regards to burning carbonas narabishmal. And Mar says in Madlikim, the Itron is not allowed to light using tar as his oil, even though tar generally is absorbed well into the wick and therefore would produce a good flame. So why can't you use it? The answer is for a different reason, because of the honor of Shabbos, because when tar is lit, it smells very bad. It gives off a very foul smell, and this may lead people to leave the room because of the smell, and they'll end up eating in a dark room. And since we explained that it's the honor of Shabbos to eat in a light room, and it also brings rejoicing and joy on Shabbos so you can fulfill the mitzvah of Oynik Shabbos, of being happy on Shabbos. But if you light with tar, then you may come not to fulfill those mitzvahs because you'll be eating in a dark room. On the other hand, the Chachamim permit all of the oils to be used, and it doesn't mean all of the oils, because the mission is now going to list a few oils which they permit. But it means that pretty much all oils, except for the ones mentioned in the previous Mishnah, are permitted. The agree that those which we said are invalid in the previous Mishnah are indeed invalid because of the poor quality flame which they produce. However, the following oils will be permitted, for example sesame oil, walnut oil, radish seed oil, fish oil, some sort of wild gourd oil, but itron with tar. So we see that the Chachamim are not concerned that somebody will leave and eat in a dark room just because of a foul smell over naft. And nature is also another type of tar, and although it is quite flammable, meaning if the oil itself sets on fire, it could lead to a dangerous situation. Nevertheless, the Chachom are not concerned about that, since they assume one would be careful not to allow it to set on fire, and therefore you can use it to light candles on Shabbos. Now, the final opinion in our Mishnah is a very strict one, and that is Rabbi Tyran Omer, Rabbi Tyrfon says in Madlikin Elo Basemen Zayas Bilvard, one can only light using olive oil because olive oil is absorbed the best and it gives the best flame, a very clear and still flame. However, although the other opinions agree that it is preferable to use olive oil, nevertheless they still say that the rest of the oils are also permitted, except for the ones mentioned in the first Mishnah, as long as the other produce a somewhat good flame. Mr. Gimla, at anything which comes out of a tree, for example wood, or anything else produced from a tree, one cannot use to light the Shabbos candles, since no real flame is produced independent of that wood. It's true the wood can set on fire, but the flame itself, which is not part of the wood, is certainly not a significant or good flame, and therefore it cannot be used except for flax and that which is produced from flax, for example linen. And the truth is, flax is not really considered a tree, it grows on the ground. However, there is a posse which refers to flax by Using the term eight, it calls flax, the flax of the tree. And therefore the mission has to tell us that really it is not considered a tree, at least in this regard, because it can produce a very good wick which will allow for a good flame. Now, whilst we're on the topic, says the mission of Khalid, anything which comes from a tree, for example wood, does not become tome with the tumor of tents. The halach is if a dead body body is in a house or it's under a roof, then anything under the same roof becomes tome. That is known as not to be confused with tumas, and that refers to the actual tent, the actual roof becoming tome. And if the roof is made out of something like wood, it's learned from bazookum that does not become tommy. So whereas everything inside that house would need to be purified, the house itself for the roof itself would not need to be purified, however elopish, except for flax, if the roof was made out of flax or linen which comes from flax, then the flax itself would gain, it would become tome itself. And this is learned using a gaze.
5:19
Shava is when a word appears in two different places in the Torah, and because of that we apply halakas and laws from one of the places to another. So the Torah says that if a dead body is under a roof or under a tent, then the tent needs to be purified. And elsewhere, with regards to the Mishkan, the Torah also uses the word when talking about one of the coverings in the Mishkan. And the only part of the coverings of the Mishkan which came from a tree or from a plant was that which came from flax, which was later turned into linen, and the threads were made out of linen. So since over there the term tent refers specifically to flax out of all other things which come from a tree, so too, when the Torah says that the oil needs to be purified if a dead body was under the roof, so too over there refers specifically to flax out of everything which comes from a tree. Now, the second half of this Mishnah concerns a piece of cloth which measures exactly three by three at spots, spice three by three finger breadths. So a small piece of cloth. And the halach is that something is considered a beged, a piece of clothing or a patch of clothing only if it is at least 3x3etz b. Now, the main practical ramification of that is that it can become Tommy, because a piece of cloth which is even smaller than that is not considered an item of clothing or even a part of an item of clothing, and therefore it cannot become Tommy. Now, the halach is that something which is not set aside. When Yomtiv or Shabbos comes in to be used on that Shabbos or Yomtiv, then it is known as mukta and it is forbidden to use it. Now a severe form of mukta is known as nailad. And that is when the item was not even in existence, or at least it was not in the same type of existence. It wasn't considered the same item when Shabas Yomtov came in. So if that is the case, then it is also forbidden to use it on Shabasoyamtov when it does come into existence or when it does change existence. So the mission discussed is a wick which was made from a item of clothing which somebody folded. So somebody had a cloth which was exactly 3x3 at Spice, and he folded it and really made it into a wick. However, he did not singe the wick, meaning he did not touch the wick on any fire. So whatever cloth was there before is still within the wick. It's just folded up. So says to me that wick can still become tome, meaning it is still considered to be a 3x3 piece of cloth or piece of clothing. And therefore it can become tome. Just because you folded it doesn't mean it's no longer 3 by 3. It is 3 x 3 just folded. Nothing was taken away from the 3 x 3 cloth. However, a consequence of that is that the aim at Leakinbar one may not use that wick to light the Shabbos candle. And the Gamara explains that once again, we're discussing a Friday Yomtov. So when he is lighting the candle, it is Yomtov. And if you think about it, as soon as he lights the wick, it diminishes in size and it will now no longer be considered three by three, because right before it was exactly three by three. So as soon as it touches any fire, it is immediately less than three by three. And therefore it immediately changes from being considered a item of clothing to be considered just a piece of cloth which is not an item of clothing. And that is considered nailed because it has changed existence. It has changed from being a piece of clothing to just a small piece of cloth. And this poses a problem, because the halacha is that when you light a Shabbos wick, let's say you use a candle to light the wick, you have to keep the candle next to the wick for a couple of seconds for the wick to really take light. However, as soon as you touch the candle to the wick, it is already considered nailah. And halacha is you're not allowed to use nailah, but you are using it because you're keeping the candle next to it for the next couple of seconds. And so for this reason says that you cannot use this piece of cloth which is made into a wick, as your Shabbat candle on Yomtiv, since you would be violating Nailod, on the other hand, says that by folding the 3x3 cloth that it makes it considered less than 3 by 3 and therefore it is already at that point not considered to be a baguette, which means that by the time you light it, you're not changing it from being considered an item of clothing to not being an item of clothing because it was already not an item of clothing and therefore it's not considered nailah. Because we're discussing a case where the piece of cloth was folded away before Yomtov, so the whole way through it was not considered a item of clothing and therefore you can light it because no Loyalt is involved. As the mission says, Tahira, a 3x3 piece of cloth which is been folded cannot become Tommy. It will remain pure always, even if it touches something tommy.
9:51
And because of that, you can use it as a Shabbos candle, as a Shabbos wick. As we explained, Mr. Dala, the way that lamps were made in those days is that you'd have the actual lamp itself, so a sort of small bowl. And in one part of the lamp there'd be space for a wick. And the rest of the lamp was really filled with oil. But instead of pouring all of the oil which we're going to use into the lamp, the lamp might have been too shallow for that. So if they wanted the candle to last for a long time, they would add a small sort of container on top of the lamp and they would fill that container with oil and then make a very small hole at the bottom of the container so that the oil drips out of that container very slowly. And that way there'll be enough oil for the wick to be alight for a very long time. But at the same time, since it's going in very slowly, the lamp will not overflow with oil. Now, the mission says that according to the Tanakama, unless this is made in a specific way, it is forbidden.
10:46
A person cannot make a hole in the bottom of an eggshell. So he'll use this eggshell as the container on top of the lamp and fill it up with oil and put it on top of the lamp so that the oil drops slowly into the lamp as we described. And the reason why in this case it's forbidden is because the eggshell is not attached to the lamp. It is placed on top of the lamp, but it isn't stuck to it. And because of that, we are concerned that somebody who needs oil might see this lamp. He'll see that there's oil which is separate from the lamp. It's not actually part of the lamp itself. And he might take away the eggshell in order to use the oil which is in there. Or he might just pour out some of the oil from the eggshell. And that is forbidden. The reason why that is forbidden is because just like it's forbidden to put out a fire, it's also forbidden to remove some of the oil from the fire. Because the less oil which a wick is drawing, less clear and brightly the flame will be. So by removing the oil, it's like putting out the fire because you are reducing the fire, says the Mishnah.
11:48
Even if this container was not an eggshell. Rather it was made out of earthenware. So earthenware is usually quite dirty. And if you put oil into earthenware, you wouldn't really want to use the oil for anything other than the lamp. To use it to rub on your body or for cooking or something that would be considered disgusting. And therefore it's less likely that somebody will take the oil out of there in order to use it. It nevertheless, according to the Tanakama, we are still concerned that somebody might take that oil. And therefore it was forbidden to set up a lamp in this way.
12:18
On all of this permits this even with an eggshell. According to Beholder, people will realize that the eggshell is there for the sake of the lamp. And it's part of the lamp. And the oil is dripping into the lamp. And so people will not take that oil. Just like they won't take the oil from the lamp itself, they also won't take the oil from the eggshell. Now, everybody agrees if the potter or the craftsman attached the eggshell or the other, whatever the container was made out of, if he attached that to the lamp, so then muta, then it is permitted to use it. Because everybody will realize that it is part of the lamp and they won't take the oil out of it.
12:54
Because now the entire thing together with the lamp is considered one utensil so just like you're allowed to use a regular lamp on Shabbos, you're also allowed to use a lamp with this container of oil on top of it. It. All right. Now, the second half of the Mishnah brings a similar case. And in this case, it's even more likely that somebody will remove the oil, but even here will allow it.
13:14
One cannot fill up a bowl with oil and put it on the side of a lamp. So you've got a regular lamp with a wick coming out of the oil, and you're going to light that part of the wick, but the other end of the wick, which you're not lighting and would usually just be in the lamp itself, you stretch that wick and you put the end of the wick into the separate bowl, which is filled with oil, so that the wick draws oil from this bowl as well, and the wick will burn for longer. So we're trying to achieve the same thing as in the first part of the Mishnah. Just in this case, the container of oil is not even on top of the lamp. It's a totally separate utensil. And so somebody is even more likely to remove the oil from that bowl since it is totally not part of the lamp. And therefore, according to the Tanakama, certainly this is forbidden. However, even in this case permits it, since it couldn't be a huda. Somebody will realize that it is part of the lamp, and that just like they can't take the oil from the lamp itself, they will also not come to take oil from the bowl in which the wick is drawn to Mishnah. Hey, the Mishnah is going to introduce us to an important concept which will come up a number of times throughout the Maserta. And that is, which literally means a form of work which is not needed for its own purpose. And what exactly this refers to is a big machlikis among the rishonim. We're going to take one approach, and that is that it refers to a malacha which is done not for its creative purpose in order to do something positive, but rather to prevent something which you don't want to occur. For example, and this is one of the examples which the mission will bring when it comes to the malacha of extinguishing a fire. If you're only extinguishing it because you don't want the fire to be there, that is not a creative purpose. You're not doing it for a positive result. Rather, you're removing something which you don't want there. So that would be considered.
15:07
Now there is a machlikas between huda, whether this is forbidden with Oisa, according to Shimon, it is not forbidden. Only something which is constructive and creative and leads to a positive result is forbidden mid arisa. However, according to be huda, even a malachshin tsurichilagufa is forbidden mid araisa. Now even Rabbi Shimon agrees that you can't do it Medjabonan. The discussion is only whether it's forbidden middaysa, and therefore by extension, whether you would be liable to the punishment for breaking Shabbos. Now, the first part of the mission is not referring to.
15:40
Rather it is referring to cases where somebody's life is at danger. So if you perform a malacha, which is generally forbidden at that time, in order to save somebody's life, then you are allowed to do that. In fact, you're obligated to do that. And therefore certainly you would be exempt from any punishment. And this applies even if it is possibly a danger of life. Even in that situation, you are obligated to break Shabbos.
16:03
Says the Mishnah, one who extinguishes the flame of a lamp because he is afraid of non Jews. For example, there was a certain time where the non Jewish nation who ruled the land wouldn't allow anybody to light any fire on their festival days outside of their idolatrous temple. And if they caught you with that, they might kill you. And so if somebody extinguishes his flame because of that, because he is fearful for his life, or when they list him because of bandits, let's say he doesn't want to be seen because of somebody who has a bad spirit, this could refer to some sort of depression, where the person who has this depression needs to be in the dark.
16:41
If you extinguish the flame for the sake of an ill person who is at risk of dying, shayishan so that he can sleep, and that will possibly save his life, Potter, in all these cases you would be exempt. And in fact it is permitted for you to extinguish the lamp. And in general you'd actually be obligated if it is a question of saving somebody's life. And now we come to the discussion of the if somebody extinguishes a flame when he has pity over the lamp, meaning if he is worried that the lamp will smash or something because it's been a light for so long. So to prevent that damage occurring, he extinguishes the fire if he has pity on the oil, meaning he wants to save oil and that's why he puts out the fire.
17:21
Or if he has pity on the wick, meaning he wants to save the rest of the wick. In all those cases, according to the town of Kama K, he is obligated, and this is the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, the one is still obligated from.
17:35
However, Yosi follows the opinion of Rabbi Shimon and therefore exempts you in all of those cases, with one exception, Absila, except for a wick. And this is referring to a slightly different case to what the Tanakama discussed. It's referring to when somebody sets a wick, a light and then very shortly afterwards puts it out. And the reason why he would do that is so that the wick was easier to light the next time, because the tip of it would have already been lit. So the mission says, except for that situation with the wick, because he makes it into some sort of charcoal, or like charcoal, meaning just like charcoal is very easy, easy to light, so too he did this in order that the wick be easy to light. But that means that by extinguishing it, he is doing something constructive with a positive outcome, namely that he has now improved the wick and there's a positive result on the wick. So it's not just that he doesn't want the fire, rather it's that he wants the wick. He wants the wick to be easier to be lit. And therefore, in this case, even Abhishiman and even your Biosi would agree that this is considered a malacha.
18:38
It is needed for its own purpose, meaning there is a positive outcome, and therefore you would be chayev for doing so.