Question: If someone intentionally left work for Chol ha'Mo'ed and it was declared banned as a punishment for him, and then he died, is the punishment extended to his heirs? In other words, is the punishment executed upon the individual (not applicable to heir) or upon the property (applicable to heirs)?

Source #1: It is forbidden to intentionally make a blemish on a Bechor to allow it to be eaten. If someone did this he is punished by having the animal permanently banned for consumption. In that case the punishment is extended to heirs.

Rejection: Disfiguring a Bechor is forbidden mid'Oraisa and is thus more strict than our case of Chol ha'Mo'ed, which is mid'Rabanan.

Source #2: It is forbidden to sell a slave to a non-Jew. If one does so he must, as a punishment, re-buy him at all costs. If the seller dies his heir must carry out the punishment also.

Rejection: Selling a slave to a non-Jew is a misdeed with on-going consequences (the slave will always be unable to meet his religious obligations under the ownership of a non-Jew), and therefore the punishment is also on-going.

Source #3: It is forbidden to do agricultural work on Shemitah. If someone did so it is forbidden (in certain cases) to take advantage of that work when planting crops in the eighth year. This punishment does not apply to heirs. Hence, the punishment of intentionally leaving work to do on Chol ha'Mo'ed also does not apply to heirs.

Similarly, if someone did ritual (but not physical) damage to someone's property (e.g., he made it Tamei), he is punished by having to pay for the property (strictly speaking only physical damage should be claimable in Beis Din). This punishment is not extended to heirs.

Real estate, slaves and animals (or, for that matter, anything else - Tosfos) may not be bought on Chol ha'Mo'ed, unless they are needed for the holiday.

These transactions are also permitted if the seller needs the money to buy food.

Question: May a worker do his work if he needs the money thus earned in order to buy food, just as a vendor may sell his wares if he needs money for food?

Answer: It is derived from a Mishnah (3rd Perek) that it is permitted.

Question: There is a Beraisa that says that a Melachah is permitted to be done on Nisan 14 (Erev Pesach) if that Melachah is permitted, under one circumstance or another, on Chol ha'Mo'ed. For instance, sewing is permitted on Nisan 14 because a non-professional may sew on Chol ha'Mo'ed. Haircutting is permitted because there are some people who may have their hair cut on Chol ha'Mo'ed. Now, if ALL Melachos are permitted on Chol ha'Mo'ed for someone who needs money for food, it should follow that all Melachos are permitted on Nisan 14!

Answer: Not every Melachah is permitted on Nisan 14 just because there is some situation in which it would be permitted on Chol ha'Mo'ed. Melachah on Chol ha'Moed is forbidden because of exertion, and only permitted do to potential loss. On Nisan 14 the Melachah in question must also be one that is needed as a preparation for the holiday.

One may not haul objects from one house to another, but it is permitted to haul them to his courtyard. (See Gemara)

One may not pick up an article from an artisan's shop (tailor, cleaner, framer) on Chol ha'Mo'ed. But if he is afraid that they might be stolen he may move them to a different, safer courtyard.

What the Mishnah means is that one may not haul objects from one house to another house that is in a different courtyard, but he may haul them from one house to another house within the same courtyard complex.

The Mishnah (above, 4:b) forbids picking up articles from the artisan's shop. Rava asked how this could be resolved with a Beraisa that states that articles MAY be picked up from - and brought to - an artisan.

Answer #1: The Beraisa is speaking not about Chol ha'Mo'ed but about Erev Pesach.

Answer #2: The Beraisa is speaking about a case where the client does not trust the artisan to keep his article for him over the holiday. Another Beraisa is adduced that shows that it is indeed permitted to pick up an article under such circumstances. (The Beraisa adds that if the article is needed for the holiday it is also permitted.)

Rejection: The second answer, while it may be factually correct, cannot totally explain the Beraisa mentioned in 6:a, because it does not account for why articles may be brought TO the artisan. Therefore Answer #1 is the correct one.

One may do Mechapeh on his sun-drying figs (to protect them from rain) on Chol ha'Mo'ed, but he may not do Me'abeh. R. Yehudah permits even Me'abeh.

Vendors of food, clothing and household articles may sell goods (discreetly) on Chol ha'Mo'ed that are needed for the holiday.

Trappers, grain-pounders and bean-pounders may do their work (discreetly) on Chol ha'Mo'ed. R. Yosi said that they (shopkeeprers, trappers, etc.) adopted a stringency upon themselves.

Question: What is meant by Mechapeh and Me'abeh?

Opinion #1: Mechapeh is to lightly cover with a few branches or stalks here and there; Me'abeh is to thickly cover with many branches or stalks.

Opinion #2: Mechapeh is to cover, whether lighly or thickly; Me'abeh is to concentrate the figs together into a pile and then cover them. (This opinion is corroborated by a Beraisa.)

Question: What did R. Yosi mean when he said that they adopted a stringency upon themselves? That the discretion required by the Tana Kama for storekeepers etc. was only a stringency, but not strictly required? (R. Yosi would then be Meikil.) Or that the trappers etc. took upon themselves an extra stringency not to work even discreetly although they were allowed to? (R. Yosi would then be Machmir.)

Answer: A Beraisa clearly backs the second interpretation.

(Abaye): (The Beraisa mentioned in connection with grain-pounders the terms Chilka, Targis and Tisnei.) They mean pounding the grain into two, three, and four pieces, respectively.

(R. Dimi): Chilka means shelled spelt kernels.

Question: A Mishnah elsewhere says that Chilka etc. are definitely Mekabel Tum'ah (because they have definitely been wetted at one point). This seems to support Abaye, because you can't pound grain unless it had been soaked.

Answer: You can't shell spelt without soaking it first, either.

Question: There is a Beraisa that says that Chilka is not called "grain." This makes sense according to Abaye, because the kernel has been pounded into something else. But according to R. Dimi, why should shelled spelt not be called "grain"? The question remains unanswered.

Story: R. Huna permitted spice sellers to open their stores on Chol ha'Mo'ed in the regular manner.

Question: A Beraisa states that a store that opens on Chol ha'Mo'ed, if it is on a main street, must leave the door half-closed.

Answer: It depends what the store is selling. The Beraisa is speaking of a produce store, where it appears that people are buying to stock up for the rest of the year. But the spices R. Huna was talking about are spices that are perishable and are bought only for immediate use; therefore it may open as usual.