Question: We do not decree that putting oil into melted wax is invalid because if he does not put the oil in it is indeed invalid, as even if he does not put it in it is only prohibited because he might use wax that was not melted.

Implied Question: This is despite the fact that there is a "double decree" regarding wax that was not melted, as we decree melted wax cannot be used because of wax that was not melted, and wax that was not melted itself is only invalid because one might come to tilt the candle on Shabbos. (Why, then, does Rabah say that this double decree can be made?)

Answer: This is not considered a double decree, as a person will certainly come to tilt the candle when the wax is not melted, as the wick does not draw the wax well. However, here that there is a Mitzvah for him to do so, there is no reason to say he will tilt the candle!

Answer: The Ri answers that our Gemara is not considered a double decree as Yom Tov and Shabbos are similar. This is as stated later (60a) regarding the decree against wearing a sandal with sharp nails (that even though the incident happened on Shabbos, they also cannot be worn on Yom Tov because Yom Tov and Shabbos are so similar).

Question: The Rashba asks that our Gemara makes a decree regarding Yom Tov due to Shabbos. However, later (124a) the Gemara concludes that we do not make such a decree!

Answer: It is possible that we cannot equate decrees of the sages to each other as long as they are not within the same Melachah.

Question: The Rashba asks that in the Mishnah in Beitzah (27b) there is an incident where Rebbi Tarfon asked what the law was regarding an animal that died and Chalah that became impure, and he was told that he should not move them from their place.

Question (cont.): According to Rabah, why shouldn't he move them? They are fit to be burned under his pot of food, as one cannot decree not to use them on Yom Tov due to Shabbos like with oil!

Observation: There is no question according to the reason that we do not burn Kodshim on Yom Tov.

Answer: One is pressed to say that we make a decree regarding Chalah on Shabbos due to the oil.

Question: The Beraisa implies by saying, "besides for impure Terumah oil" that one cannot use it to light for Shabbos or Yom Tov. This is unlike Rav Chisda, as according to him it can be used for Shabbos candles! (Why does the Gemara quote this Beraisa as supporting Rav Chisda?)

Answer: The Beraisa means as follows. All oils that they stated cannot be used to light before Shabbos can be used for Yom Tov. Certainly whatever can be used for Shabbos can be used for Yom Tov, besides for impure Terumah oil that even though it can be used for Shabbos, it cannot be used for Yom Tov etc.

Question: This is difficult, as it should have discussed this matter earlier when it discussed the laws of Chanukah.

Explanation: It is obvious that it is mentioned during Davening, as Davening is done in public and this publicizes the miracle. However, in Birkas ha'Mazon which is recited in (the privacy of) one's house there is not a lot of publicizing of the miracle (and therefore it is possible they did not institute that it should be recited in Birkas ha'Mazon).

Explanation: This is because Al ha'Nissim is a giving of thanks, not a supplication.

Explanation: This would be like Rosh Chodesh, as we say Ya'aleh v'Yavo in Boneh Yerushalayim. Since Ya'aleh v'Yavo is a prayer and supplication, they instituted it should be said in Boneh Yerushalayim which is also a prayer. In Shemoneh Esrei it was instituted to be said in Avodah, which is a prayer to return Bnei Yisrael to Yerushalayim.

Implied Question: The Gemara in Megilah (22b) says that any day where a longer reading would cause people to miss some work, such as a public fast day and Tisha b'Av, only three people are called up to receive Aliyos. On days where a longer reading will not cause people to miss work, such as Rosh Chodesh and Chol ha'Moed, four people are called up to receive Aliyos. (This implies it is forbidden to do Melachah on Rosh Chodesh!)

Answer: This was merely a custom (not a law) that people did not used to normally to work on Rosh Chodesh.

Implied Question: The Gemara earlier did not want to extrapolate from here that one does not mention Chanukah in Birkas ha'Mazon. (Why?)

Answer: One could push such a proof aside by saying that it specifically applies to fast days and Ma'amados. However, even though Chanukah and Purim do not have a Musaf sacrifice, one must mention them in order to publicize the miracle. We cannot extrapolate in the opposite manner that fast days and Ma'amados were said because of the Musaf, and so too it applies to Chanukah.

Answer (cont.): However, even if he did not say Al ha'Nissim in the Amidah on Chanukah or Purim we do not say that he must pray again, as stated explicitly in a Tosefta in Berachos (ch.4).

Opinion: The Gaonim explain that we do not normally say this prayer during Ma'ariv of a fast day and even during Shacharis, lest a person become sick or have a dire need to eat, causing the prayer he had previously recited to be a lie (when he said it is a day of fasting). The Chazan says this during Shacharis, as it is impossible that nobody in the whole community is going to fast (and he is representing the community).

Question: The Ri asks that if so, how can a person borrow a fast and pay it back? Won't this make him a liar before the enactment of (i.e. according to, see Maharsha) these Gaonim? When Rebbi Yehoshua in the Gemara earlier (11a) was asked, "Why don't you borrow and pay it back?" it was in a case where he already Davened Shacharis!

Question: This is difficult, as we seemingly do not need both statements of Rav. If we would know the law regarding Yom Tov that falls on Shabbos, we would certainly know the law regarding Rosh Chodesh when no Navi is read at all!

Answer: The Ri answers that one is derived from the other (and he did not say both).

Question: The Ri has difficulty with this, as the Mishnah in Megilah (21a) says that on Monday, Thursday, and Minchah on Shabbos we call up three people for Aliyos and we do not read a Haftorah from the prophets!

Answer: The "Navi" referred to here is Kesuvim, as they used to read a Haftorah from Kesuvim on Shabbos Minchah. This is as the Gemara states later (116b) that in Neharda they would normally read Kesuvim on Shabbos Minchah. The Mishnah in Megilah (21a) is referring to reading a Haftorah from Navi.

Explanation #1: Rashi explains that this refers to Rav Huna, Rav Yehudah, Rav Gidal, and Rav Achdavuy.

Explanation #2: The Ri states that Rashi should not have counted Rav Gidal in this list. Even Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi admits that one does not have to mention Rosh Chodesh during the Haftorah, since there is no Haftorah that is required to be read on Rosh Chodesh. This is indeed our custom, not to mention Rosh Chodesh in the Haftorah.

Question: The Riva asks, why is this unclear? Don't we say in Bava Basra (93b) that every Tana who adds a statement is coming to add (a leniency)?

Answer #1: Since there are three Tanaim mentioned here, it is possible to say that they are only coming to add to the law of Nachum ha'Madi who said that one can light with cooked fat. The Chachamim then said that one cannot even light with it if it is cooked, but if they put oil in it is permitted.

Answer #2: It is also possible to say that the Tana Kama forbade putting oil in it just as he forbade tar and wax, meaning that just as one cannot put oil in those, so too he cannot put oil in fat. It is unclear whether this is true or not, as it is possible that the Tana is coming to add a leniency (as per the Gemara in Bava Basra 93b).

Question: How can we derive Terumah from Kodshim? The law is that the burning of Kodshim does not push aside Yom Tov since he cannot benefit during the burning. We only say, "Since burning is permitted when needed it is permitted when it is not needed" when it is not needed for Ochel Nefesh if it is somewhat needed for heat or some kind of benefit. However, burning without getting any benefit at all is not permitted.

Question: However, since one is allowed to benefit from the burning of impure Terumah, why should it be forbidden? Why is it different from regular oil that can be burned and lit for his benefit? Why should Terumah be worse because it is a Mitzvah to burn it?

Answer #1: The Riva answers that it certainly is worse because the Torah forbade a person to have any benefit from it besides the benefit from burning it. If so, this burning is not considered for his benefit, but rather for the Mitzvah of burning. It happens to be that the Torah did not forbid his having benefit from it when he burns it.

Answer #1 (cont.): This is why it does not push aside Yom Tov, since it is like Nedarim and Nedavos that are not offered on Yom Tov according to the opinion that we receive them from "the table of Hash-m." According to this opinion, the baking of the Shtei ha'Lechem similarly does not push aside Yom Tov, even though they are eaten by people, because we only receive them "from the table of Hash-m."

Answer #1 (cont.): According to the opinion that they are offered on Yom Tov, it is because he holds that the main slaughtering and baking is for people. However, burning impure Terumah is certainly (mainly) for the Mitzvah of burning it and not for the benefit received when burning it. This is why it is forbidden on Yom Tov like burning Kodshim.

Question: The Ri understands that it is not possible to say regarding the burning of Terumah that it is from "the table of Hash-m." It is unlike the Shtei ha'Lechem where the baking is for Hash-m, as after the baking one must do Tenufah. Similarly, after the slaughtering of Nedarim and Nedavos, part of them are "for Hash-m" (put on the Mizbe'ach). However, no part of impure Terumah is given to Hash-m, and therefore one cannot say it is coming from "the table of Hash-m."

Answer #2: The Ri explains the reason that it is because one cannot burn Kodshim on Yom Tov to simply mean that we decree Terumah due to the possible use of Kodshim.

Question: Why should the decree be made because of Kodshim and because one cannot burn Kodshim on Yom Tov? We should make a decree because one might come to burn Terumah without needing to do so! Even if we do burn Kodshim on Yom Tov by saying that an Asei pushes aside a Lo Sasei, we certainly do not burn Terumah without needing to do so, as Rashi implies that it is not even a positive commandment to do so, rather it is only a Mitzvah mid'Rabbannan.

Answer: It is uncommon that a person will burn Terumah for no reason, as a person will not do so since he is allowed to benefit from it. This logic is apparent from a phrase in the Yerushalmi.

Question: If this is specifically a second morning and he cannot burn it on the night of Motzei Yom Tov, how is it apparent that the burning of Kodshim does not push aside Yom Tov? It must not be for this reason, as one cannot even burn it on the night of Motzei Shabbos! If so, it is a Gezeiras ha'Kasuv to burn it on the second morning!

Answer: The reason it cannot be burned at night is because the Torah did not want Kodshim burned at night. This is as we find regarding a Shelamim that it is not eaten on the night of the third day after it is slaughtered. Even so, it can only be burned on the third day, as the Gemara in Pesachim (3a) derives from the Pasuk, "on the third day it will be burned in fire." This teaches you burn it during the day etc.

Question: This is difficult. Since the Pasuk is referring to Shabbos, how do we know that we should derive, "and not the Olah of a weekday on Yom Tov?" Perhaps it specifically means that the Olah of a weekday should not be burned on Shabbos, as it is more stringent than Yom Tov!

Answer: Abaye holds like Rebbi Akiva who derives later (114a), "Olas Shabbos b'Shabbos Acheres." This teaches that fats of Shabbos can be offered on Yom Tov. If the Pasuk had to permit the Olah of Shabbos on Yom Tov, it must be that the Olah of a weekday cannot be burned on Yom Tov.

Answer (cont.): This is because Rebbi Akiva holds that Nedarim and Nedavos are not offered on Yom Tov, as stated there (ibid.). Rebbi Yishmael argues there and understands that "Olas Shabbos b'Shabbato" teaches that the fats of sacrifices from Shabbos are offered on Yom Kippur. However, he does not require a Pasuk to say that they are brought on Yom Tov, as he holds that Nedarim and Nedavos are brought on Yom Tov.

Explanation: Rashi explains that just as leprosy pushes aside Avodah (i.e. a Kohen with leprosy cannot perform the Avodah), and Avodah pushes aside Shabbos, yet Milah pushes aside leprosy, Shabbos that is pushed aside etc.

Question: This is difficult, as later (132b) Rava does not hold of this Kal v'Chomer, as he holds that the reason leprosy pushes aside Avodah is not because it is more stringent, but rather because the person is not fit.