POINT BY POINT OUTLINE OF THE DAF
prepared by Rabbi Ephraim Becker of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
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 Yom Tov.
(b) Question: Why is this so?
(c) Answer: Because it creates (Molid) a fragrance in the garment.
(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 Kibuy and Hav'ara are permitted).
(a) Rav Geviha announced enigmatically that Ketura is permitted.
(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 Kibuy, 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): ZI was told that Ketura is smoking fruit and is permitted, as above.
3) GEDI MEKULAS
(a) (Beraisa): The Chachamim censured Todus (who allowed Gedi Mekulas) for causing Jews to eat Kodeshim outside the Azarah.
(b) Question: Is Gedi Mekulas really Kodeshim outside the Azarah!?
(c) Answer: Rather, the censure was that it is too similar, and may lead others to err and eat Kodeshim baChutz.
4) MISHNAH: THE HETERIM OF R. ELAZAR B. AZARYAH ON YOM TOV
(a) His Parah was allowed to go out with its strap between its horns (seeing it as an adornment not a burden).
(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 (Mekartzefin).
(e) (Chachamim): Neither is permitted.
5) THE REFERENCE TO THE ONE COW OF R. ELAZAR B. AZARYAH
(a) Question: How could we speak of his (one) cow when we know that his Ma'aser alone amounted to 13,000 head!?
(b) Answer: It was his neighbor's, but his silent acquiescence causes it to be referred to as his.
6) KIRUD VS. KIRTZUF AND DAVAR SH'EINO MISKAVEN
(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'Eino Miskaven is Asur, hence Kirud is Asur and Kirtzuf is Mutar.
2. (Rabanan): As above, but we forbid Kirud lest it be confused with Kirtzuf.
3. (R. Elazar b. Azaryah): Davar sh'Eino Miskaven is Mutar (like R. Shimon) and he does not intend to cause Chaburos, hence both are permitted.
(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. Azaryah.
(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. Azaryah 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 Tum'ah for each.
(b) These are the Kli Kibul (which receives the pepper at the bottom), the Kli Mateches (the metal of the mill) and the Kli Kevarah (the sifter).
8) THE BERAISA ANALYSES THE MILL
(a) The lower Kli is wood and receives Tum'ah because it has a Beis Kibul.
(b) The middle (sifter) is also wood and receives Tum'ah because of a Gezeirah (given its similarity to an weaver).
(c) The upper receives Tum'ah because, though it is largely wood without a Beis Kibul, it has a metal grinding base.
9) MISHNAH: A CHILD'S TOY WAGON
(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.
(b) (R. Yehudah): No Kli may be dragged except the wagon which does not dig a channel, but it only pushes down the earth under its wheels.
10) ANALYZING THE HALACHOS OF THE MISHNAH
(a) It receives Tumas Midras because the child is supported by it.
(b) It may be handled since it is considered a Kli.
(c) It may only by dragged on cloth, and, presumably, not on the ground.
1. Question: Why is this so?
2. Answer: Because it makes a Charitz, even though this is unintended.
(d) This follows R. Yehudah (Davar sh'Eino 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).
(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 a Charitz?
(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
11) MISHNAH: TRAPPING
(a) One must not catch fish in a Bibar on Yom Tov, 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 trapped.