Laws of Resting on Yom Tov, Chapter 4 (Auto Translated)

Chapter 4: Additional Preparations for Food — Kindling and Extinguishing

Introduction to Chapter 4: Preparations for Ochel Nefesh

Good, shalom aleichem rabbosai (greetings, gentlemen). Gevaldik (wonderful). We’re going to learn the fourth chapter of Hilchos Yom Tov (Laws of Yom Tov). Good. With the merit and strength of all the donors and participants and listeners and promoters, and those who engage with us, all sorts of people who have to do with this. Gevaldik.

So. This chapter is basically a continuation of Hilchos Yom Tov. In the previous chapter we learned about actually making food, hachanas ha’ochel (food preparation). This is a bit further, not exactly… it still means for the most part, the laws will be about things that have to do with preparing food, but not so directly, not cooking, but rather preparations for cooking. So one could say, everything about Yom Tov is going to have a bit to do with food, because that’s the heter (permission) of ochel nefesh. Ochel nefesh is permitted, and after that there are many ways that are forbidden mi’d’oraisa (by Torah law), mi’d’rabanan (by Rabbinic law), and the opposite. All other things are good. One could say, you may not build, you may not prepare a fire. So many of the avos melachos (primary categories of labor) fall away that are completely forbidden just like Shabbos. What you would have thought is permitted on Yom Tov, here you need to go into the details of what is actually permitted.

So the Rambam is going to bring various laws. And if one wants to make some sort of general principle about them, there are those among other poskim (halachic authorities) who call them machshirei ochel nefesh (preparations for ochel nefesh). Right, but let’s not make that general principle, because the Rambam doesn’t make it.

Foundation: The Rambam’s Approach — Details More Than Principles

I haven’t spoken about this, and I’m very uncertain whether the Rambam believes in all these general principles, because I see that often people ask about the Rambam, he’s not consistent, if he held that the principle is [such and such], but the Rambam never wrote the principle. The Rambam holds that if it says in the Gemara the halacha, the halacha is true. The fact that there’s a reason, perhaps the reason isn’t even so important. You don’t have to believe the reason. I mean the Rambam doesn’t, for example in Choshen Mishpat he won’t say that if there’s a ship that sounds like it belongs to two people one should say such and such, rather he says there’s a type of chazaka (legal presumption) that’s called such and such. Almost throughout the entire Torah he does many more details than principles. He’s not so interested in the lomdus (analytical reasoning). Lomdus is for learning be’iyun (in depth), for whoever wants to understand, but if he wants to know the halacha, one needs to know the halacha.

Because the Rambam will say that there are 613 mitzvos, and within the 613 mitzvos there are still very many details of mitzvos d’rabanan (Rabbinic commandments). One could say under the general framing the Rambam’s approach makes sense. There are 613 mitzvos, leaving thousands of mitzvos d’rabanan. I’m not sure if I would say it that way. Okay, I have other ways to think about this, I don’t want to get into it now. I just want to learn the laws of Yom Tov. But basically, when one lives Yom Tov, when one does melachos (labors), there are many details in the melachos of what one may not do and what one may do, and that’s what one needs to learn.

Foundation: Halacha as Decisions of Beis Din

It could perhaps be like this, that whoever makes a principle, then encounters very many details that don’t fit with the principle. One needs to answer why the detail is different from the principle. But if one doesn’t make any principle at all, one just says the halacha, and one doesn’t get confused. Right, because my theory is that the Rambam believes that the decisions of the Gemara are like the decisions of the Sanhedrin, one must follow what the Gemara said. But that doesn’t mean one must believe in the principles that the Gemara said.

Ah, you say very well. Because if one goes with principles, it’s simple that one learns a principle into the Torah, and now it must fit. But if one doesn’t do it that way, rather the authority comes from the fact that this is how the Sanhedrin made it, or this is the custom of Klal Yisrael (the Jewish people), it doesn’t have to fit with some sort of certain simplified principle. It could be that the Sanhedrin contradicts itself, so what? They can’t? They can’t rule in this case one way and in that case another way? They can. It could even be that there were essentially two batei din (courts), which we are obligated to both, but we can’t answer the question. Because I ask you, this is a very interesting analytical inquiry, but the Rambam would say that’s the halacha, yes? One must follow the beis din. “The judge who will be in your days,” whatever the halacha is, the general beis din of Klal Yisrael.

What is the beis din? There’s a question, so he says, machshirei ochel nefesh. Today a Jew asked a question of a rav whether one may do such and such, sharpen a knife. He said, no. Tomorrow someone asked whether one may prepare a fire. He said, yes. The Jew asks, what do you hold? The rav says, fine, it’s actually a good question. You know what? Or yesterday he asked another rav, and that rav held that way. Today he asks, the rav asks thus: does he need to change yesterday’s halacha too? Because… no, it can’t go that way. Today’s rav can’t condition himself on the previous rav, because let’s say there are rules about how one may argue. So, it can certainly be that our halacha may be inconsistent, and it could be that it must be inconsistent. If one understands the theory of halacha as decisions of beis din, it could be that whoever holds it’s consistent contradicts himself, because it must be that there’s a consistency if one goes with many people whom one must follow all of them, and not all of them held the same principles.

Foundation: A Detail Contains More Than a Principle

True. There’s also, it could be that according to the principle of ochel nefesh it would have been permitted, but there are still many things the Chachamim (Sages) don’t want one to do tircha (burdensome labor), one should be busy on Yom Tov with non-Yom Tov things. And the Rambam doesn’t have to explain every thing whether this is the prohibition, because this wasn’t permitted with the Torah’s ochel nefesh, or whether this is a prohibition from another [source]. It is relevant if one is d’oraisa and one is a prohibition d’rabanan, and the Rambam will indeed write. Whether it’s actually a prohibition or it’s only a gezeiras chachamim (Rabbinic decree), but if one is just speaking the halacha without going into the root of the halacha, one can… That is, I’ll say another foundation why I think that perhaps the details are more important than the principles. Also later in the chapter in some halacha the Rambam says a principle, mipnei mah asru zeh v’hitiru zeh (why did they forbid this and permit that)?

But there could be such an interesting thing: a detail is always included in more things than the principle. What do I mean to say? So it says generally, ochel nefesh l’tzorech shelo l’tzorech machshirin, efshar la’asoso (ochel nefesh for a need, not for a need, preparations, it’s possible to do it), all these types of principles. Then there’s the matter of tircha and oneg Yom Tov (enjoyment of Yom Tov) and simchas Yom Tov (joy of Yom Tov). Etc. comes to such things. So when I ask you a practical question, may one make a new fire on Yom Tov? Now, the Rema, let’s say, brings one reason, the rav brought a different reason in the ma’aseh (incident), there’s a dispute, but it could be that in this lie four other reasons, because a reality, as the Tzanzer Rav said, that everything he does has three hundred reasons, that’s the reality of the world. A person who does things, he includes very many things. It could be that all these combinations and all these things together make the prohibition. When you couldn’t have learned that from the principle, because it’s also a bit and also a bit lo l’tzorech (not for a need), and also a bit this, and also a bit that.

The Rambam brings, I say that the actual laws are more certain, clearer than the principles, because the principles, in each detail there could be four principles that are relevant to the… Okay, we’ve gotten used to the fact that for a child one can say no, and that’s it, and that one must deal with. But the Rambam, we are all children compared to the Torah, compared to the Chachamim, and one says such and such, kazeh re’eh v’kadesh (thus see and sanctify).

Halacha 1: Ein Mamtzi’in Es Ha’esh — Making a New Fire on Yom Tov

The Rambam’s Words: Three Ways of Making Fire

Ein mamtzi’in es ha’esh (One may not bring forth fire). It’s interesting his language, because we look at when one makes a fire as if one has created something, but one hasn’t created because the fire existed potentially. Let’s say, two stones that one rubs together, there’s some power of fire in the stones, and one brings it out. So one may not bring out fire, meaning make fire, and there are a few ways of making fire, from where one can have fire.

The Rambam says, one may not make fire not from wood, not from stones, and not from metals. The Rambam explains, how is the process of making [fire] from one of these items? Such as, the way one does it is shochachin noshin zeh bazeh (rubbing them one against the other). We know for example flint, one rubs them one on the other, or one strikes them one against the other. Ad shetetzei ha’esh (until the fire comes out). We know that one does this with flint, but it appears that with wood and metals one can also make a fire in this way of rubbing them and they become hot and they give out fire.

V’chen (and likewise), another way of making fire is haneft hechad bi’yoser (the very sharp naphtha). Naphtha is a type of oil that is already refined oil, chad bi’yoser shehu kamayim (very sharp that is like water). I mean that crude naphtha is more like black pitch. And from this one extracts something white, like water, and this has in it a power that if one shakes it, one makes energy and makes it hot, it begins to burn, ad sheyidlak (until it ignites).

Or, a third way how one can make fire, kli zach kasheh (a clear hard vessel), o zechuchis mele’ah mayim (or glass filled with water), shemani’chin oso keneged ein hashemesh (that one places opposite the eye of the sun), one places it toward the sun. People know that children do this, one takes a magnifying glass, and holds it toward the sun, toward a black thing. Something for some reason draws the heat from the fire… from the sun. From the sun. Ad sheyachzor nogah (until the light returns) — its brightness, meaning the fire, l’fishtan v’chayotza bo (to flax and the like). That is, one places the glass vessel toward flax, as we do toward paper, one can do toward something that ignites easily, v’chayotza bo v’yidlak (and the like and it will ignite). All these things one may not do.

The Reason for the Prohibition: Shelo Hutar Ela L’ha’avir Me’esh Metzuya

Now the Rambam explains why one may not. Kol zeh v’chayotza bo asur b’Yom Tov (All this and the like is forbidden on Yom Tov). All these, this, or some other way how you’ll find a way how to make fire, asur b’Yom Tov. Why? The Rambam says thus, shelo hutar (for it was not permitted) — the Rambam tells us immediately, he thinks, a person wonders, as we learned earlier that hav’ara (kindling), lighting a fire, one may do, even shelo l’tzorech (not for a need) one may do. And here he says that one may not at all. The Rambam says, what we learned that one may, shelo hutar b’Yom Tov ela l’ha’avir me’esh metzuya (it was only permitted on Yom Tov to transfer from an existing fire). On Yom Tov one permitted something else. On Yom Tov one permitted to make a fire from a fire. On Shabbos this is usually called mav’ir (kindling). On Yom Tov one said that this one may do on Yom Tov, kindle from a fire. Aval l’hamtzi esh (But to bring forth fire), create a new fire, not create a new fire, but create a new fire that doesn’t exist b’fo’al (in actuality) at least, this one may not do. Why? Sheharei efshar l’hamtzi’ah b’erev (For behold it’s possible to bring it forth on the eve). We’ve already learned a principle that all melachos one may only do if one cannot bring it forth on Yom Tov, if one couldn’t do it before Yom Tov. But if one could have done it erev Yom Tov, one may not do it.

Explanation: The Distinction Between L’ha’avir Me’esh Metzuya and L’hamtzi Esh

Therefore, what we said that hav’ara is permitted even shelo l’tzorech, is when there’s already a fire. When there’s already a fire, one may even if one could have done it before Yom Tov, yes? Even the candles you could have lit before Yom Tov, on this there’s the heter of “mitoch shehutra l’tzorech (since it was permitted for a need).” But making a new fire there isn’t this heter. One may only in a manner when one couldn’t have done it erev Yom Tov. All these things one could have done erev Yom Tov.

The Raavad’s Objection: Because of Molid, Not Because of Efshar La’asoson Me’erev

Right, now it’s important to mention that the holy Raavad didn’t agree. The Raavad says that in the Gemara it says that it’s a matter of molid (creating something new), and not of “efshar la’asoson b’erev (it’s possible to do them on the eve).” That is, because it’s hard to understand, as you just brought out, it’s a bit hard to understand why “efshar la’asoson.” Every fire is “efshar la’asoson.” What’s different about the action of bringing out fire from creating? One could also have lit the candles. Why do you say one cannot? Because it will burn out.

The Prohibition of Creating Fire and Extinguishing Fire on Yom Tov — Hilchos Yom Tov Chapter 4

Halacha 1 (continued) — The Prohibition of Creating Fire on Yom Tov

Speaker 1:

Why? Sheharei efshar l’hamtzi’ah b’erev. We’ve already learned a principle that all melachos one may only do if one cannot bring it forth on Yom Tov, if one couldn’t do it before Yom Tov. But if one could have done it erev Yom Tov, one doesn’t do it.

Therefore, what we said that hav’ara is permitted even shelo l’tzorech, is when there’s already a fire. When there’s already a fire one may even if one could have done it before Yom Tov, yes? Even the candles you could have lit before Yom Tov, on this there’s the heter of mitoch shehutra l’tzorech. But making a new fire there isn’t this heter. One may only in a manner when one couldn’t have done it erev Yom Tov. All these things one could have done erev Yom Tov.

The Raavad’s Position — Molid Instead of Efshar La’asoso

Right. Now it’s important to mention that the holy Raavad didn’t agree. The Raavad says that in the Gemara it says that it’s a matter of molid and not of efshar la’asosom b’erev.

That is, because it’s hard to understand, as you just brought out, it’s a bit hard to understand why efshar la’asosom, every fire is efshar la’asosom. What’s different about the action of bringing out fire from creating? One could also have lit the candles. Why do you say one cannot? Because it will burn out, I don’t know, one cannot. Why this one can?

So, one must say, says the Raavad, or he says that it says in the Gemara that it’s a matter of molid to another… Just as molid is that there’s already in the chicken already an egg, but now it comes out. So there’s fire here, but you’re molid the fire, and it’s forbidden as nolad (something newly created).

It will come out a great difference l’ma’aseh (in practice). Molid is when it was created, it’s a distinction. Everyone agrees, as the Maggid Mishneh brings here, that afterwards, if one transgressed and made a fire, one may use it. It’s not like an egg that was laid on Yom Tov which is forbidden as nolad. That’s forbidden. It’s only a prohibition of molid. To make a new thing is something that the Chachamim don’t allow on Yom Tov.

Digression: A Practical Question on the Halacha L’ma’aseh

I must mention here that the halacha doesn’t make sense to me, and one must understand it a bit better. I’ll say why it doesn’t make sense, and I have an argument here on the halacha. I mean, most contemporary rabbis don’t agree with the halacha, but earlier rabbis were some who did agree.

By us, when one says to light a fire, one speaks of either taking a match, or a lighter, I don’t know, what one has in the kitchen an electric spark to light a fire. It’s very hard to believe that this is some greater melacha and it’s some whole tircha, and one needs to prepare before Yom Tov a candle to take from it the fire, because one may not light. As we conduct ourselves, it doesn’t make sense.

It’s clear that all melachos of Yom Tov are made to minimize melachos on Yom Tov, not to increase problems for Yom Tov. It appears clear, whoever knows historically knows that… Once it wasn’t so easy. Whoever doesn’t have a lighter, it’s a tircha. Go find a stone, you can extract a fire. You know, it’s a whole job. Whoever goes camping, I know what it doesn’t have.

Yes, here itself, the Rambam says the kli zach kasheh, it’s a whole process, ad sheyachzor nogah al hapishtan (until the light returns to the flax). It’s a specifically difficult process. And usually in every house, every city, there was one who was appointed to have fire, so one could take from that fire. The defense of having a fire and being able to take from it was always very important historically, because it’s hard to find fire. One needs to find flint, it takes half an hour until one figures it out. It’s not so simple.

Laws of Yom Tov: Kindling Fire, Indirect Extinguishing, and Moving a Lamp

On this, the Sages said, can you have a fire? It was the normal thing that in every place there is a fire from which one takes. So don’t make new fires on Yom Tov. Today, when it’s easier to make a new fire than to keep a candle burning and take from an old one, obviously this law shouldn’t be relevant.

The Shoel U’Meishiv Regarding Matches

And so I found, the holy Shoel U’Meishiv, the earlier Shoel U’Meishiv, Nasan’s son, says that the custom in his city is that with matches one properly lights fires on Yom Tov. And he says that he must understand that this is not the tircha (effort) that the Sages speak of. A match, even the Rambam speaks, yes, haniftach ad beyoter, also sees it as more difficult. A match, you give it a light in a second, it was a new patent. Matches are one of the new things that came about in their time, the 19th century.

Is it certain that this is permitted? He says that such was the custom. I don’t know why… the Shoel [U’Meishiv] knows already, seemingly he doesn’t need to argue with the Rambam, he can’t look at it that a match is already like a fire. It’s already a fire, because nothing is lacking. Nothing is lacking, or a lighter, nothing is lacking. These things you still need to do something. I ask for him, you don’t need to do anything. I am correct, if I remember correctly, he says literally such a language that this is not called motzi esh (bringing out fire), this is already esh (fire) that is already more karov lifo’el (close to actuality), it’s almost there.

But the world doesn’t conduct itself this way, I don’t know clearly why. And not only that, but they even prohibit things, electricity, to light. Okay, let’s say, electricity is fire. There should have been a means, after all nefesh (soul) electricity. Just such a question on the custom that we don’t find any electricity, it’s not so simple. And the same thing to light a new one.

In short, it seems to me that the halacha lemaaseh (practical law) has been stretched too much, the way we had it before, if one must follow the rabbis one must follow them anyway. But we see, if one wants to understand the halacha, it’s certain that it doesn’t speak of a match. According to the Raavad, perhaps yes, because molid (creating) is not for tircha. Also molid means that it’s not the word tircha. It must be something else, another geder (category) of lighting than of making a new one.

Speaker 2:

You understand that it’s hard to believe that you understand what I’m saying?

Speaker 1:

Yes, okay, it’s already by us already a part of the tzivui (commandment) of Yom Tov that one must have a yahrzeit candle and one lights from it. Nu, already. I’m saying the halacha originally made Yom Tov easier, not harder.

Speaker 2:

Yes, okay. One must believe that the Torah came to make good, not to make difficult.

Speaker 1:

Already, further very good.

Halacha 5 — The Prohibition of Extinguishing Fire on Yom Tov

The Rambam says further, this we spoke about making fire. Now the Rambam goes to speak about extinguishing fire. There is havarah (kindling) and mechabeh (extinguishing), two melachos (labors).

The Rambam says, that which they learned that havarah was permitted even shelo letzoreich (not for need), this is only havarah. But it’s not simple that also the other part of the melacha, the ben zug (partner) of havarah, kibui (extinguishing) will also be the halacha.

“Af al pi shehetiru havarah beyom tov shelo letzoreich achila, aval asur lechavot”, that is, extinguishing one may not do, “afilu haesh shehuvara letzoreich achila”, even the fire that was lit letzoreich achila one may not extinguish. Why? “Kibui melacha hi, ve’eino letzoreich achila klal”. Extinguishing is a melacha, and extinguishing is never any tzoreich achila.

So says the Rambam, at least. Because many times one needs to extinguish so that the food shouldn’t burn and the like, but it’s not so simple. It could be that there is. But the Rambam argues this way. And not only that, we’ll see explicitly in the Rambam later situations where one may do kibui if there’s a need that you say to burn this way. But this is the rule. Therefore I say rules it’s not so useful.

Kibui Proves That the Prohibition Is Not Only Tircha

But here you also see that it’s not with tircha, because kibui is certainly no different than a melacha. Melacha is forbidden, a melacha d’oraita (biblical prohibition), a melacha from the 39 melachos is mechabeh. I don’t need to come to this. Ah, meaning, by havarah it’s already permitted, and it’s only that they forbade me perhaps leasoso (to do it), so seemingly it’s a matter of tircha.

The Rambam says, keshem she’ein bachaver. Right, because let’s say deeper, because the Rambam explained in earlier chapters, why did they forbid melacha she’efshar leasosa (work that can be done beforehand) miderabbanan (rabbinically)? Shelo yehei mevatel melacha, or that it should be busy. It must be that it’s speaking, it’s not because it’s a decree, it’s a din melacha (law of work), everything is always a practical thing that one shouldn’t do the melacha. Although tircha and melacha she’efshar leasosa is not the same thing. I can indeed understand that it’s a condition in melacha she’efshar leasosa that it should be a tircha. But kibui is a melacha, it’s a proper melacha.

The Distinction Between Esh and Ner

The Rambam says, “keshem she’ein mechabin et ha’esh kach ein mechabin et haner”. What does he mean to say that there’s no difference between a large fire or a small fire? Even when it’s not a tircha. A large fire is perhaps a tircha, one must bring perhaps… why would anyone think of a distinction between esh and ner and therefore esh? There are reasons, he’s going to speak soon of situations. A fire you can further say has no benefit in it, but a ner, perhaps someone wants to sleep, he wants to extinguish the candles. There is more of a sevara (logical reasoning) it should be a need. A need, perhaps means shaveh lechol nefesh (equal for all souls), the Rambam doesn’t agree with this, but it’s a certain need to extinguish a candle. A candle is a thing that one extinguishes.

The Law of Lashes for Kibui

“Ve’im kiba harei zeh lokeh bemalkos kemo she’orek uvoneh”, just as all melachos of Yom Tov one receives malkos (lashes), also kibui. This is because melachos, but kibui not, kibui is like all other melachos. This is the halacha of the Rambam, one must see various details later.

Tzarich Iyun: Can Kibui Be Letzoreich Achila

It’s a bit difficult to understand the… I believe the Rambam, when he says here “im kiba lokeh”, is when it’s shelo letzoreich achila. If it’s letzoreich achila, not when the fire was originally lit letzoreich achila. The kibui itself is letzoreich achila, perhaps even if it will be assur etzah (forbidden as advice), seemingly there won’t be any malkos, it will be derabbanan, like other things that weren’t permitted.

No, this has to do with the chakira (inquiry) that was done to other melachos when one does indeed everything doros. There’s no such thing. The straightforward understanding of the Rambam in chapter alef is also here that there’s no such thing. There’s no heter (permission) letzoreich achila for other melachos that are bemahusam (in their essence) not tzoreich achila. Not even d’oraita. It’s not only miderabbanan asseh (rabbinically positive), but it’s earlier the Rambam is clear that lokeh, let’s remember. If it says lokeh, it’s clearly implied that it’s forbidden mid’oraita.

You’re right that there are situations that we see even in the Rambam himself that letzoreich achila kibui will even be permitted, or the Rabbeinu shelo letzoreich iyun. Because there where the Rambam said lokeh, he also said the word shelo letzoreich achila. He says nothing about two, in boer. The Rambam says, kibur? In boi tzoreich achila klal. Klal gadol. Eh, is there such a thing of kibur that is indeed? Tzarich iyun. I say that it’s tzarich iyun. I love that it should be clear, and it should be tzarich iyun. Okay.

Speaker 2:

You’re going to go before this about gorem zein kibur. Kibur, gorem zein kibur, yes.

Halacha 6 — Gorem Kibui (Indirect Extinguishing)

Speaker 1:

The Rambam says this. There is a person who has a candle. An old-fashioned candle was a vessel in which there is oil, and in it one inserts a wick, and the wick sucks from below from the oil and it lights on top.

He found a way to extinguish it, not even blowing or something, but simply moving the vessel. He lifts it up so that the wick shouldn’t reach the oil below, or he moves it sideways so that the wick shouldn’t be near the oil.

The Rambam says, one may not do it. “Ein maslikin et pi haner lemala” — one may not move so that the pi haner (mouth of the candle) should be higher, moving the vessel, so that the candle should extinguish. Because this is also called kibui. It’s not the usual kibui, but it’s also kibui.

“Ve’ein masirin et hashemen” — also one may not remove oil from the candle. Just as we learned in the laws of Shabbos, that this is called mechabeh, removing oil that lies in the vessel. Although it doesn’t look like mechabeh, because the oil isn’t burning yet, but one views all the oil as already dedicated for the candle, and when one removes from the oil one is gorem kibui. These are things that are practical, that the Rambam tells us is not clear. I hold that removing oil, I don’t know if it’s kibui mid’oraita, but in any case the Rambam counts it as things that one doesn’t do.

Another thing that one doesn’t do: “ve’ein chotchin et rosh haptila bichli” — one also may not do by taking a knife and going to cut below the wick, below where the fire is. I don’t know exactly what this means.

Laws of Yom Tov: Extinguishing Fire, Indirect Extinguishing, and Moving a Lamp

Halacha 3: Gorem Kibui — Removing Oil and Cutting the Wick

Chotech Rosh Haptila Bichli

Ve’eino chotech et rosh haptila bichli, aval nofetz et rosha beyado.

The Rambam says, that one also may not do this by taking a knife and giving a cut to the wick below where the fire is.

What does wick mean? I don’t understand, I already asked what they learned from before, I don’t know what rosh haptila means from above when it became blackened. I don’t know, I don’t understand. It doesn’t make sense. Because the noftzas rosham means, one can’t mean that one may indeed remove with the hands, may one indeed remove the part that’s burning, because that would be kibui.

Right, so seemingly it means that many times when a fire burns, at the end it becomes like a piece… yes, it becomes so… yes, but by Chanukah candles people are busy with it that it shouldn’t become the coarse pieces that form on the canoid. This one may remove, not michli, but beyad one may indeed.

What is a concern that this will extinguish? Perhaps something like that. I don’t know what the… it’s not clear to me this halacha.

The Maggid Mishneh and the Opinions of the Rishonim

I saw, the Maggid Mishneh brings that there are these languages in the Gemara that it means, you who learn differently, because I didn’t understand, and the Rav said even bemachat (with a needle) one may, just as with a vessel one may not. Many other languages are more lenient in the sugya, because they hold that the kibui is not d’oraita. Consequently, the gorem kibui would be easier.

But the Rambam said clearly that kibui is lokeh, consequently, the gorem kibui he is also stringent.

The Raavad says that one may indeed even with a vessel, chuta zein rosh hapsulos. No, only with a needle, not with a normal vessel perhaps. I don’t know with a vessel what is the sense. I don’t know, perhaps the needle means another vessel? Not clear. I don’t know.

Derabbanan or D’oraita?

But seemingly, the ein, when the Rambam says ein, it means miderabbanan. Otherwise he would have said that lokeh. Yes, this is certain that this is gorem kibui. Both things are not kibui. The kibui itself is a three. Consequently, the gorem thereof is derabbanan.

Other Rishonim learned that kibui itself, they learn that to do other melachos letzoreich achila or letzoreich ochel nefesh is not d’oraita. Consequently, kibui, we’re speaking here of a candle, the use that the use is… shaveh lechol nefesh, but chasa al hapsola, I don’t know what kind of shpena. No, chasa al hapsola is different indeed. Here even we’re speaking of a candle, from yetziros beis seuda, like this. These are things that have to do with… it’s not exactly an ochel, but it has to do with the… okay, further.

Halacha 3 (Continued): Aguda Shel Eitzim — Removing Wood from a Bonfire

Aguda shel eitzim shehedlika bemedura — kol eitz shelo achaza bo ha’esh mutar leshamto, ve’eino domeh lemasir shemen min haner.

The Rambam says further, so, when one made a campfire, and one takes a bundle of wood, it’s a group of pieces of wood, shehedliku medurim, one lit with this a fire, a large flame. So, there are the pieces of wood that aren’t burning yet, it’s piled up, and on the side there is what isn’t burning yet.

A person will think that removing one of the pieces of wood is the same as removing oil from a candle, just as one may not remove oil because this is called gorem kibui, because this causes it to extinguish faster, so one shouldn’t be allowed this either.

The Rambam says, this one may indeed. Kol eid shelo achazu ha’esh, mutar leshamto. Wood that hasn’t yet begun to burn, one may remove. Ve’eino domeh lemasir shemen min haner. It’s not like removing oil from a candle.

The Distinction Between Oil and Wood

I mean the commentators say that the distinction is, because oil in the candle already lies in one vessel, one views the entire vessel as burning. One can view that the wick burns every minute from a different drop. Or one can view it from the entire pile. Just as a person drinks from a spring, he drinks from all the water, or he drinks his drop of water. We say that the wick drinks from all the oil.

Which is not so by the aguda shel eitzim, each piece of wood burns. If the wood isn’t burning yet, one may remove it. Right, aguda shel eitzim is external, it doesn’t become one coarse thing, consequently removing doesn’t mean any prohibition.

Halacha 4: Kibui to Save Property

Ein mechabin et hadleika kedei lehatzil mamon beyom tov, kederech she’ein mechabin beShabbos — manicha veyotzei.

The Rambam says further, we have more about this kibui. The Rambam says, the prohibition of kibui is forbidden. You shouldn’t think that one can easily be lenient, but it’s very strict. And so far, that ein mechabin et hadleika kedei lehatzil mamon beyom tov, one may not extinguish a fire to save money. Kederech she’ein mechabin beShabbos, just as we learned by Shabbos, just as a fire broke out, there are entire laws that one may not extinguish. One may perhaps put up a barrier, surround it, there are things we learned that one may indeed do, but extinguish one may not, also Yom Tov one may not. Manicha veyotzei, he should let it burn.

Meaning, the more details one must look in the laws of Shabbos that one will indeed have. Basically, the same halacha of kibui licha will be like Shabbos. This is the halacha.

Halacha 4 (Continued): Kibui Mipnei Tashmish Hamita

Ve’ein mechabin et haner mipnei tashmish hamita, ela kofeh alav kli, o oseh mechitza beino uvein haner, o motzio lebayis acher.

The Rambam says further, one also may not extinguish the candles for a great need, for a tzoreich haguf (bodily need). Ve’ein mechabin et haner mipnei tashmish hamita. We learned earlier indeed by Shavuos, Yom Kippur we learned that when one lights a candle one cannot do tashmish hamita, it’s a halacha that asur leshamesh le’or haner (it’s forbidden to have relations by candlelight). And about this the Rambam said that there are two versions: specifically yes a candle, specifically not a candle. Specifically yes a candle is because this way one won’t be able to be meshamesh le’or haner.

So a person has here a candle, and this disturbs him from doing tashmish hamita, he will think that this one will indeed be allowed because it’s a tzoreich haguf or what. He says that one may not, ela kofeh alav kli. This one may indeed do.

Kofeh Kli — Covering the Light

We learned that there’s no Yom Tov prohibition of mevatel kli mehechano or something. One may cover the candles.

Kofeh kli is never any mevatel mehechano. Putting the pot on a vessel would lose it. Lifting the ner, he can remove it. Okay, the candles can extinguish, but I don’t know practically, but… but we’re not speaking exactly, it’s enough a large vessel, the candles will still have oxygen under it.

Ela kofeh alav kli, o oseh mechitza beino uvein haner, o motzio lebayis acher. It’s not muktzeh, a ner is not muktzeh. One may take it out to the other door. So it’s the most practical simple total thing. Carry out, yes?

No, interesting. He says, making a mechitza is a whole project. One can take out the candles. Again mechitza. By the way, a mechitza means putting a table. I don’t know what a difference. Maybe the tlisa.

Im Ein Yachol Laasos Echad Mikol Elu

Im ein yachol laasos echad mikol elu, harei zeh asur lechavot, uvo’el umeshamesh ad shetichbeh me’eileh.

Laws of Yom Tov: Extinguishing Fire, Incense Smoking, and Repairing Vessels

So, says the Rambam, if one cannot do any of these things, if one cannot do any of these things, it is forbidden to extinguish. One may not extinguish it. And one engages in marital relations until it extinguishes on its own. And here the Rambam goes, he states a law that is not just a law in the laws of Yom Tov, but a law in the laws of modesty, and a law in Even HaEzer. That one engages in marital relations until it extinguishes on its own, he must actually restrain himself, he may not… what is the law?

Discussion: Practical Difficulties

The law says about this that it’s not so complicated. Wait a minute, do you understand what I’m saying? Yes, wait a minute. We’re talking here if there’s a large candle, wait a moment. A candle isn’t so large. That’s why I’m saying this. A candle isn’t so large. What is a vessel? A candle can also mean a vessel that has oil in it. Everything can be taken. And sometimes the candles were larger. No, it wasn’t. They didn’t have free oil that lasts, it burns a whole night, and you’re not the Beis HaMikdash. And meanwhile, a candle burns out.

I want to bring this out, because the law comes from the Gemara. Someone asked Abaye the question. He said, what do you do? It seems simple to me that the reason for all these laws is because practically, take it out, then one may take it out. I didn’t know to take it out, what do you mean you didn’t? Give advice. Okay, wait.

Marital Relations Are Not Ochel Nefesh

But it could be that the main point he means to say here is that marital relations are not called davar hashaveh lechol nefesh, or are not called like ochel nefesh. It wouldn’t be davar hashaveh lechol nefesh. It’s called ochel lemachseh pihu, I know it’s called es halechem asher hu ochel, but this doesn’t mean that. Because the Rambam already said that extinguishing is not permitted because it’s never a need for food. Here he brings you something that is similar, which is a bodily need, yes, because it disturbs him from… but it’s only some sort of rabbinic prohibition, but you want to remove it. It’s not simple that…

Digression: Extinguishing for the Purpose of Ochel Nefesh

But the Rambam didn’t mention when a person has an oven and the fire is too strong, and his food is about to burn. Will one soon see? I’m almost certain that one should see such a law somewhere. I remember, but I didn’t actually see it in this chapter. Interesting, because they bring that it’s not ochel nefesh. No, the question is very relevant.

Digression: Lowering the Flame of a Gas Range

People want to know if one may lower the flame of the gas range on Yom Tov. It’s not clear if this is called extinguishing, because after all you’re making less gas come, but it could be that it’s like removing the oil perhaps. The answer is that one may, but this comes later. Because it’s clear, I say there again. Because this is actually by the food, this is actually a… one is engaged with the food.

But it’s very similar apparently to removing oil. You turn down so that less gas should come in, and in honor of that the fire should burn. It should come in, it’s very different, because more gas comes that you have. Yes, it doesn’t take away anything at all, I mean that one can extinguish also, because after all you stop, new should come, and it’s grama kibui. Okay, don’t ask me halachos, I’m very lenient. And you understand what I’m saying, today’s gas range doesn’t have any… No, preventing more fire from coming? It’s like a bundle of fire, do you understand? The bundle of stones. Not clear to me, it’s not permitted. I want to continue.

Law 5: Moving a Candle — We Don’t Decree Lest It Be Extinguished

It is permitted to move the candle while it is lit, and we don’t decree lest it be extinguished.

So says the Rambam, a person might think that extinguishing is so severe, the Rambam said that it could be a Torah prohibition that one should also not be permitted… It does say that the next pieces are extinguishing. Let’s see further. What would a person think that it’s so severe, extinguishing is so severe, one may also not hold the candle, because perhaps it will be extinguished?

The Rambam doesn’t make such a decree, and one may indeed hold a candle when the candle is burning. And we don’t decree lest it be extinguished, one doesn’t need to be concerned that it might perhaps be extinguished. Shema yichbeh, right? Shema yichbeh. Or yikaveh, it will be extinguished, no? Doesn’t mean that he forgot and blew it out, but rather, being afraid that it will extinguish on its own.

Law 5 (Continued): A Candle on Top of a Palm Tree — Prohibition of Placing on Something Attached

And it is forbidden to place the candle on top of a palm tree or the like on Yom Tov, lest one come to use something attached on Yom Tov.

The Rambam says further, and it is forbidden to place the candle on top of a palm tree or the like. A new law, which doesn’t have to do with extinguishing, but another thing. One may not place a candle which is built on the permission to move. One may move it, a person will also carry it, he will place it down on something that is attached to the ground, on top of a palm tree or the like on Yom Tov. Says the Rambam, one may not, lest one come to use something attached on Yom Tov. Shema yavo, this itself is indeed using something attached. Ah, could it be he’ll climb up on it?

Distinction Between Shabbos and Yom Tov

We learned in the laws of Shabbos that on Shabbos one may indeed place a candle on top of a palm tree on Shabbos. Erev Shabbos? Shabbos, Shabbos. We’re talking about erev Shabbos. We’re talking about erev Shabbos. Why? Because on Shabbos it is separated from it, it’s forbidden to use it. So it says in the Gemara. But Yom Tov where one may use the candle, he will come, because of placing the candle. Not to tear, to use something attached. This is the prohibition, using something attached is shema yitlosh.

They learned in the laws of Shabbos that on Shabbos one may indeed place a candle on top of a palm tree on Shabbos. Erev Shabbos?

Speaker 2: On Shabbos, Shabbos.

Speaker 1: We’re talking about erev Shabbos. Why? Because on Shabbos it is separated from it, it’s forbidden to use it. So it says in Yom Tov. But Yom Tov where one may use the candle, he will come, place the candle… not to tear, to use something attached. There’s a rabbinic decree. This is the prohibition, using something attached shema yitlosh, that he’ll go tear off a branch.

Discussion: Why Isn’t Placing the Candle Itself Considered Use?

Speaker 1: If placing the candle, why doesn’t placing the candle itself mean use?

Speaker 2: I don’t know. Weak use?

Speaker 1: No no. In chapter 21 of the laws of Shabbos stands the law that the same thing, the other side of it, that on Shabbos one may.

Speaker 2: Not sure. Okay. Yes.

Speaker 1: Further… other things that one may not do… or it could be that the Rambam means that it is forbidden to place means erev Yom Tov, and it should remain lying. That’s what he means.

Speaker 2: No, no, he means placing down on Yom Tov. Even erev Yom Tov one may not. What means shema yavo lehishtamesh, because he will now be busy with this. He may take it down and put it back, he’ll become busy with this, and then… that’s the prohibition. Because placing itself, would that itself have been called using the attachment.

Speaker 1: Are you sure?

Speaker 2: That’s what he thinks. That’s the question. Because that’s the way when we talk about Shabbos. When we say on Shabbos one may, on Yom Tov one may not. It means about the way that on Shabbos one may, one may not on Yom Tov.

Speaker 1: Okay, let’s continue.

Law: We Don’t Smoke with Incense on Yom Tov

Speaker 1: The Rambam says further, he goes to talk about smoking, but not smoking a cigarette. It seems that in the Rambam’s times there wasn’t yet such a phenomenon. Later authorities talk about this. But here it says: One may not smoke things. One used to use ketores to make smoked food or make a good smell on clothes.

The Rambam says: We don’t smoke with ketores on Yom Tov, because it is extinguishing. What does it mean it’s extinguishing? Because afterwards one is extinguishing. Or because perhaps the ketores itself, one places a bunch of spices on a fire, and with this one extinguishes it, and a great smoke comes out. Yes?

Speaker 2: Something is… yes, when one places on the spices, one extinguishes.

Speaker 1: What does it mean one takes a coal and one covers it with a bunch of fragrant things. Perhaps not one hundred percent it extinguishes it, but it can perhaps extinguish it.

Speaker 2: Yes, it sounds very weird. That’s called extinguishing? That sounds very weird. What does extinguishing mean?

Speaker 1: So he brings that this means it, that one places on the letter, as you say, and there are indeed commentators who say that it’s not actually extinguishing. And with this they want to answer, let’s see further. And needless to say…

Discussion: What Does “Extinguishing” Mean by Ketores?

Speaker 2: There’s a weak coal and you place on it a mountain of ketores. But let’s understand, the point of placing the ketores is that it should become hot, it should give off… it’s not extinguishing to be. One should say it’s a davar she’ein miskavein.

Speaker 1: Ah, there’s a fire. The word is like this, there’s a fire, when one covers the fire it becomes only coals. That’s the word. Coals means extinguishing a fire, which we learned many times. That extinguishing the fire, that if coals remained doesn’t mean that it’s a fire. But the coals is a fire, one may not extinguish the coals.

Speaker 2: True, but it also means extinguishing the previous fire. Regarding the large fire it means extinguished.

Speaker 1: Okay.

Permission to Smoke Under Fruits for the Purpose of Ochel Nefesh

Speaker 1: The Rambam says, even for smell, even if one does it to smell, and smelling you would think that it’s a melacha of ochel nefesh, one may not. And needless to say, smelling is close to ochel nefesh, yet one may not. Certainly that one may not when it’s further than ochel nefesh, completely the house, to make a good smell in the house, or the vessels, this is forbidden.

But what may one do? When it’s actually ochel nefesh one may. It is permitted to smoke under the fruits, one may make spices smoke under fruits, in order that they be fit for eating, just as it is permitted to hang meat over the fire. Just as one may roast meat over the fire, no one says that one must be afraid that the coals will be extinguished with the meat. As much as earlier extinguishing, that’s extinguishing.

Speaker 2: Is this the seder ha’avara?

Speaker 1: Very good. Here one sees clearly that there is indeed an extinguishing that is permitted because it’s called a need of ochel nefesh. From this springs only such a weak extinguishing, a half extinguishing.

Speaker 2: Very good, very good.

Speaker 1: So say the righteous, that therefore one sees all that it seems that it is indeed, and others say no, that this is not the real extinguishing that was spoken of earlier, that it’s always forbidden. But not entirely clear to me.

Law: Sweetening Mustard with a Metal Coal

Speaker 1: Further, and one sweetens the mustard with a metal coal. Mustard one makes sweet, one removes the sharpness from it through roasting it with a metal coal. This one may do, because a metal coal extinguishes quickly. But not with a wooden coal because it is extinguishing. A wooden coal one may not.

Question: Why Is Mustard Worse Than Fruits?

Speaker 1: It seems that one places it in a batch of green… I stand, but why may one suddenly not? One just said that essentially one may? Why is mustard worse?

Speaker 2: He didn’t say how one smokes under the fruits, the process. Here he says something that one places in a coal. I don’t know if this smoking under the fruits, perhaps one does it in another way?

Speaker 1: It’s certain that it means with a coal. This is the same law, that this is forbidden for the purpose of the whole house or smoking is forbidden, for the purpose of ochel nefesh it is permitted.

Speaker 2: Yes, they say answers, I see. I see.

Rashi’s Answer: It’s Possible to Do Them Erev Yom Tov

Speaker 1: Rashi says, let’s figure out, in the Gemara this stands, Rashi says because the mustard is possible to do them erev Yom Tov, he sees that it’s not something that… but with a wooden coal is permitted, with a metal coal is permitted.

Speaker 2: Ah. Perhaps with a metal coal it doesn’t extinguish. Simply doing something one may, but something that is a melacha one may not. Or because…

Speaker 1: In short, if I don’t know, okay, already a thousand years ago there were righteous ones, and they learned the Gemara, and they didn’t understand so each one thought up an explanation. There are three explanations, there aren’t three explanations. There are three explanations. There’s almost a thing, there’s a thing a part from Rav Mottel Zoba. If there’s a question from answers, one knows that one doesn’t know. It remained that the Gemara. One of them wasn’t true. I don’t know the truth. That’s a problem. So it stands in the Gemara.

Law: We Don’t Extinguish the Wood So That the Pot or House Won’t Be Blackened

Speaker 1: And we don’t extinguish the wood, he says another thing that one may not do, and we don’t extinguish the wood so that the pot or house won’t be blackened. One may not extinguish… ah, this is that one may not. Although this will help the… by the pot there’s a novelty. The house I don’t know what novelty there is. He already said that one may not even extinguish a fire when a fire broke out. It’s forbidden in a house fire, it burned.

Question: Why Isn’t Extinguishing a Fire Ochel Nefesh?

Speaker 1: Can you ask such a question, why may one not extinguish a fire? It’s also ochel nefesh. But the Rambam doesn’t go with the broad ochel nefesh. It doesn’t mean that you won’t have where to eat, that’s not ochel nefesh. I don’t know why, but that’s how he is…

Here we’re talking that it’s full of smoke, I don’t know, it’s not a tasty place to eat. It’s true, one may not. Just as one may not… even saving the pot, that’s a greater part.

The Rama’s Answer: One Can Remove the Pot

Speaker 1: He brings that the Rama for example says, because there’s another way, you can remove the pot from there. One must know, according to the simple meaning and implication in the Rambam, one may not in any case.

One must know, if the fire will ruin the food, it’s actually directly ochel nefesh. You say the answer, take down the pot from the fire.

The Ran’s Question Regarding Fire

Speaker 1: He actually brings that others have spoken. The Ran for example actually said regarding fire, he brings, that the Ran argued my argument, that how can it be that extinguishing a fire is not ochel nefesh? He didn’t give up how to eat a Yom Tov meal? One must say, the Gemara speaks that the fire isn’t where he eats, the fire is simply in his storage, there he shouldn’t extinguish. So the Ran actually argues.

The Rambam’s Position: Extinguishing Is Biblically Forbidden

Speaker 1: The Magen sees that he’s stringent in all these things. The Rambam views that extinguishing on Yom Tov is actually a biblical prohibition, and even a grama, as they learned, it comes out that everything else is more forbidden.

That Yom Tov permitted us davar hashaveh lechol nefesh, everything that is important for a person like washing, burning half a house and he’ll have tremendous distress will be out of a person, he won’t have any appetite to eat, is weaker than…

You’ll remember that the Rambam didn’t say the language of davar hashaveh lechol nefesh. The Rambam said that washing is included in eating, some sort of such teaching. Just as on Yom Kippur one learned to one of the prohibitions.

Not clear that the Rambam doesn’t look like the Rambam holds that in general there’s a permission for all your needs, which is in the Gemara the languages that say such things. The Rambam looks like he holds that only actually eating. But others hold differently. The law is not clear that one must be so stringent, like the Rambam.

Law: Blowing on Fire — We Don’t Blow with a Bellows

Speaker 1: Another thing that has to do somewhat with fire. There’s already an existing fire. Earlier we spoke about making a fire. Here we speak when there’s a fire, he wants to make the fire larger. There’s a way to do through blowing on it. One can blow with a vessel, which is called a bellows.

The Rambam says, we don’t blow with a bellows on Yom Tov. One may not use the vessel, the instrument called a bellows. Why? Because this is done as professional work. Because this is the way craftsmen do. Goldsmiths, or people who do professional work with fire, do it through a bellows. But one blows with a tube, one may take a straw or some hollow thing from inside with which to blow. This is not a professional act.

Speaker 2: Yes.

Three Categories of Prohibitions on Yom Tov

Laws of Wicks, Repairing Vessels, and Sharpening Knives on Yom Tov

Laws of Wicks (Continued)

Speaker 1:

But one may break an existing wick with one’s hands, or squeeze it together, instead of twisting it is pressing. And one soaks it in oil, one may prepare the wick by making it wet with oil. I think this goes against the three things: against twisting one may do it by hand, against singeing not with fire but with oil one may, and against cutting, and one places it between two candles.

Twisting a wick means taking small pieces of material and making a wick from them. There is a way to do it through twisting, I think spinning, braiding. On this he says, but one may press together with one’s hands. And singeing is so it should light quickly, one burns it a bit, this one may not do, but one may put a bit of oil on it. And to cut a wick with a vessel one may not, but what may one do? One can do it with fire, and one places it between two candles, and lights in the middle, and the wick is found divided at the opening of two candles.

It has a whole complicated [procedure], one can simply grab it and put a fire in the middle and cut through it.

Speaker 2:

No, perhaps one must place it in a candle, so it should look as if… I don’t know.

Speaker 1:

Ah, apparently just like soaking it in oil, because as he said that it shouldn’t be done in the manner that a craftsman singes, and it shouldn’t be done in a… like the established way.

Speaker 2:

Okay, that’s perhaps practical.

Speaker 1:

Yes, on the contrary, explaining how one does it.

Laws of Repairing Vessels on Yom Tov

Speaker 1:

Okay, until here laws of fire, basically. Now one can learn other things that have to do with repairing vessels, such things.

The Rambam says, one may not break pottery, one may not break a pottery vessel. Breaking a pottery vessel means to have a vessel. One takes a pottery vessel, of a certain size, and breaks off that piece, now you’ve created a small vessel. And one may not cut paper to roast on it – both, whether the pottery or the paper.

Speaker 2:

Paper? I don’t know what that is.

Speaker 1:

Ah, both goes up to roasting itself.

Speaker 2:

Or do you mean one uses it in order to roast with it, some kind of parchment?

Speaker 1:

What is paper from the Rambam’s times? It’s not our paper, right? It’s perhaps papyrus. I don’t know, did they already have paper that’s made from wood like our paper? Not sure. Whatever it was that they called paper then, to roast on them. By both things you’re making a piece of a vessel.

The same thing, and one may not split from a reed to make it like a spit to roast salted [meat] on it. One may not take a… a reed, take a plant that is a hollow grass, sharpen it to be able to roast with it. This one may not do on Yom Tov. Because one is actually making a piece of a vessel.

A Spit That Became Bent

But a spit that became bent, not but, excuse me, I don’t know what one may not. A spit… you already have the skewer. A spit is a skewer basically, right? A poker that one uses to roast. A thing that has a point at the end, which became bent. And now one cannot… one must hold it by the fire, it became bent, he has no remedy for it. The word “nirtzaf” is somewhat an interesting word, it became avenged, it means bent, so he says. Even though one can straighten it by hand, even though one can do it with one’s hands, one doesn’t need any vessel, one may not fix it.

Interesting, even though it’s not a skilled craft, but it’s called repairing a vessel.

Two Vessels That Are Connected

Further, two vessels that are connected from the beginning of their making, two vessels that are connected, meaning the one who created them didn’t separate them, he made candles but they’re connected. Two candles or two cups, one may not separate them into two, one may not divide them into two, because he is repairing a vessel, he is repairing a vessel.

Discussion: Yogurt and Connected Vessels

Speaker 1:

Further… I’ll have to say that one also buys yogurt like this, I know what comes from two connected, it will be a similar thing. Now it’s not a vessel, it’s food.

Speaker 2:

Again, the vessel that it comes in the cup.

Speaker 1:

Yes, you buy something that comes from two together. Why won’t it be the same?

Speaker 2:

Okay.

Speaker 1:

He brings from below that it’s not kosher, because he mentioned this, this has to do with the topic of preparations for ochel nefesh. And the Rambam is very stringent on all these things. The entire section the Rambam is very stringent, it seems.

But it could be that if one will say that preparations for ochel nefesh is indeed permitted, except if it’s possible to do it yesterday, then, for example if someone doesn’t have another spit to roast, or one cannot roast. Let’s say, the law speaks that one can roast even when it’s bent, one just wants to make it better. But if he cannot roast at all, the Rema says that one may straighten it because it’s in the category of preparations for ochel nefesh, and it’s impossible to do it the day before, because it wasn’t broken yesterday and the like. But on this it says “the law is so but we don’t rule this way,” that one shouldn’t state the leniency, because people will err between when one needs it and when one doesn’t.

The next law, one says things, laws that one must keep as a secret. It stays here between us, rabbis. One must know what this means, this is also a foundation of laws. I’m just saying that all these laws have to do with the definition of preparations for ochel nefesh, which it’s not clear that… I mean, the Rambam holds that it’s forbidden, and others hold that it’s permitted.

Laws of Sharpening a Knife on Yom Tov

One May Not Sharpen with a Sharpener But May Rub on Wood

Speaker 1:

The Rambam says further, we’re speaking of vessels, now one speaks thus: one may not sharpen the knife and the spit, that one may not sharpen a knife in the regular sharpener. Perhaps it will be such a craft, as said before, because there is craft. But one may rub it on wood, on pottery, on stone, one may sharpen it on things that are not designated for this.

The Rambam says, this law is a secret. And we don’t rule this matter, the Rambam says it only here between me and my friends who study my book. Not for the common people, because the common people will say that there is a way of sharpening, they will think that one may indeed [use] a sharpener, so that they won’t come to sharpen it with a sharpener.

Speaker 2:

Yes, because the sharpener is one sharpener. Why is he afraid that when one will transmit the law one will only transmit half a law?

Speaker 1:

I don’t know, not transmit. People would want the law to be categorical, one doesn’t sharpen a knife on Yom Tov, without any way how one may.

One must say that ruling to the masses means to say that when one goes and one gives a lecture on Erev Yom Tov at the synagogue, whatever is called in the Gemara “perek,” then one shouldn’t say this law. But the Rambam is made for scholars, even though every Jew should learn Rambam, but this is not the masses, this is not… here one can say everything, on this you can indeed say the law clearly. One must know, when one gives a lecture one cannot even say everything that the Rambam says.

In What Case Are These Words Said

Speaker 1:

In what case are these words said, that one may not sharpen.

Speaker 2:

On the contrary, I would have said that he may, that he has wood or stone.

Speaker 1:

Ah, that’s what the Rambam says here. But in any case, when he may, is when he cannot cut. If the knife can still cut, if the knife cannot cut… I mean, here he speaks regarding that one wants to use it for a slaughterer’s knife, and it’s not damaged. It’s a bit [dull], but it still works.

Speaker 2:

But you mean not able to cut at all.

Speaker 1:

But if the knife doesn’t cut anymore, then one may not sharpen even on wood. Then one may not sharpen it at all. Why? Because then he is desperate, then he wants very much, lest he come to sharpen with a sharpener.

Speaker 2:

I would have thought, do you have the explanation of the Beis Yosef? Because then you’re repairing a vessel. As opposed to when it’s sharp or a knife, you’re just making it better.

Speaker 1:

But it doesn’t say it’s not forbidden, because it’s perhaps because it is indeed a need for preparations. We don’t know the rules that the Rambam has about the rules. But in any case, then it’s forbidden, because he will indeed do it in a forbidden manner.

Law: They Forbade Examining a Knife of an Am Ha’aretz on Yom Tov

Speaker 1:

The Rambam says an interesting law, therefore they forbade examining, how does one understand the word “to show.” To examine, to examine. A Torah scholar may not examine a knife of an am ha’aretz on Yom Tov. Why? We’re speaking here actually of a slaughtering knife, which one shows to the rabbi. The purpose of the rabbi who comes down to the city, he must check the knives.

Speaker 2:

Yes.

Speaker 1:

One may not look at a knife of an am ha’aretz on Yom Tov? Because what? Because we’re afraid, perhaps the sage will find that there’s a nick? The am ha’aretz doesn’t know that there’s a nick, the rabbi will find that there’s a nick. And he will say to him, he will say to him, this is forbidden to slaughter with because of nicks, that one may not slaughter with this. And he will be forced to sharpen with a sharpener, don’t tell him anything.

It’s interesting, because it will be carried out, when you don’t tell him, it’s obvious that he’s going to slaughter now and it won’t be a good slaughter.

Speaker 2:

Again.

Speaker 1:

The rabbi may not tell him anything. He may not look. The rabbi… again, let’s remember, it says in the Gemara already that one must show the knife to a sage before one slaughters, so he should check if it’s nicked. So is the custom, the law of the enactments of the Gemara. One comes knocking at the rabbi’s door on Yom Tov, one is going to slaughter on Yom Tov so he may look at the knife, the rabbi says, sorry, it’s closed today, we don’t look at knives on Yom Tov. True?

Speaker 2:

Why actually not? If there’s a nick, he’ll do it in a manner that’s not permitted, because truly he also has a way that’s permitted with wood or stone.

Speaker 1:

No, one may. No, then one may, one may. But the problem is only that the am ha’aretz, as is known, this is the basic problem of the am ha’aretz, he doesn’t know any difference between a sharpener and wood. He’s right, the am ha’aretz, it’s not such a big difference. But…

Speaker 2:

No, it’s just a technical thing, but he won’t understand the difference. Therefore one doesn’t let him.

Speaker 1:

And not that one doesn’t let him, a Torah scholar may use the leniency, and not only may he use the leniency, he may also look.

Speaker 2:

No, it’s not an am ha’aretz because he may not use the leniency.

Speaker 1:

It says “we don’t rule to the masses.” We don’t rule, there are two levels. Normally the rabbi should check, and we say one may only do it on wood. But we learned that one may not say to the am ha’aretz only wood, because the am ha’aretz won’t pick it up, therefore he’ll know that it’s nicked. He asks, it’s the same thing. Therefore one doesn’t show him because of this. Why? Because he’ll do… he doesn’t understand the difference of when it’s with…

Speaker 2:

What’s the same thing? It’s all rabbinic, weak rabbinic, because one adds decrees upon decrees, yes? One adds decrees upon decrees.

Speaker 1:

Very interesting, there’s no Torah law here at all. Even when one does it indeed on a sharpener, it’s apparently only a weekday act or what. I don’t understand the problem. And therefore what… there are three levels of… they forbade doing it on a sharpener, they only forbade even doing it on a non-sharpener because of this. And here one may not even tell him that it’s nicked.

Speaker 2:

Yes, it’s the same as the second.

Speaker 1:

And we’re speaking here what is truly for ochel nefesh, that he should be able to slaughter. And I have a solution. The Rambam says, why is the solution? And a sage. The solution is not the solution. There’s always a solution. And a sage is not the solution. There’s always a solution. And a sage is not the solution.

Laws of Yom Tov Chapter 4 – Splitting Wood, Shop Shutters, and Building with Vessels

Law 9 (Continued) – Solution for the Sage

Speaker 1:

But once he has checked the knife, he cannot tell his am ha’aretz to use the knife. What should one not do?

Again, this is the solution, because the sage may look for himself and may also sharpen with a… it says “and stone for himself,” he looks himself, and if he needs to fix it, he fixes it himself, all while the am ha’aretz doesn’t see.

If the am ha’aretz comes and asks, what about the knife? Can the rabbi look at my knife? The rabbi says, no, no, I don’t look now on Yom Tov, but I prepared a knife for you. Take it, bring it back.

This is practical, very practical. The rabbi has an easy Yom Tov, he may not examine blemishes and he may not examine knives.

Law 10 – One May Not Split Wood on Yom Tov

Speaker 1:

Law ten. Yes?

Speaker 2:

Yes.

Speaker 1:

Is it good to hold this?

Speaker 2:

Yes.

The Rambam’s Language

Speaker 1:

One may not split wood on Yom Tov. So let’s learn.

Until now we learned about… let’s say that we learned about like the vessels, about fires. Afterwards one spoke about vessels, and specifically about knives. Now one will speak about also like a kind of repairing vessels essentially, but one speaks about wood, pieces of wood. It’s connected, because it’s wood that one will use for the fire, to burn.

The Rambam says, one may not split wood on Yom Tov. One may not break or split wood on Yom Tov, not with vessels that one usually does it with, not with an axe or a sickle or a saw, three types of vessels with which one breaks wood. But one may only do it with a kofitz, with something a… kofitz he says is a knife that one uses for meat, and it’s not the normal way to use it on wood. And even then, on its sharp side, one does it with the sharp side. But not on the wide side, a knife has the wide side and the side with which one cuts. To chop wood it’s easier to use the wide side. The Rambam says, no, one shouldn’t use the wide side, because that is more like an axe.

The Reason for the Prohibition and Permission

Speaker 1:

The Rambam says, why did they forbid with a large axe? Why do we forbid the wide side? Why do we forbid the axe? So that he shouldn’t do it in the manner that he does on a weekday. He shouldn’t do it in the manner that he does on a weekday. For breaking wood is indeed possible that he didn’t have to split before Yom Tov. The very thing that one may in any case is a leniency, is a leniency that one said one may not.

Laws of Yom Tov — Temporary Construction, Stones for the Bathroom, and Caring for Animals

And why wasn’t splitting permitted at all, just as other things that are possible to do before Yom Tov are generally not permitted? Says the Rambam, because it’s possible that he will encounter a thick piece of wood and won’t be able to cook with it. It’s a normal situation that even if a person has prepared wood, he will encounter a thick piece of wood that is hard to burn. A smaller piece of wood ignites quickly, catches fire quickly. A thick piece of wood, he won’t be able to, and he will be prevented from cooking, and you will prevent him from cooking. Therefore they permitted splitting with a change, they permitted that it may be done with a change.

The Great Principle

Speaker 1:

Very good. You see here clearly the great principle, and all similar matters, all similar things, meaning things that are somewhat possible to do, somewhat not, somewhat only in a domestic manner, not in a professional manner and the like, for this reason they permitted what they permitted and forbade what they forbade.

In other places it’s said that it’s better when it’s done on Yom Tov. Here that’s not the point. Rather the point is that it’s difficult for a person to calculate when he chops wood that each piece of wood should be exactly what he needs to burn. This is something that’s done while burning, then one sees which wood is good. Because of this they were lenient a bit, but they weren’t further lenient that it should look like the way it’s done on a weekday.

Very good.

Innovation: A Jew May Not Be Stuck

Speaker 1:

And we also see my great principle that there’s no such thing as being stuck. Being stuck is not the Torah. The Torah always has a solution. There is a solution, one needs to find which solution. Understand?

Because entirely, except, the only person who is stuck is one who is wicked. It’s something that can be properly prepared beforehand, and you’re just the wicked one who didn’t? Yes, but understand? That we see clearly that one doesn’t become stuck, one may not become stuck, a Jew may not be stuck, this is the innovation of Yom Tov.

Law 11 — A Woman Should Not Enter Among the Wood

Speaker 1:

Yes, further, the Rambam says further, “A woman should not enter among the wood to take from them a brand to roast with it.” A woman should not go into the place where the wood is kept – they had such a thing as a wood house, a place where the wood is kept – to take a brand. A brand is a brand saved from fire, it’s a small piece of coal, a small piece of wood. A brand is a piece of wood. Saved from fire, it hasn’t burned.

Yes. Why? For the same reason, because… you know why? This is also something for sharp minds. Because he goes among the wood that hasn’t yet been broken. Ah, that means, when it wasn’t broken before Yom Tov, and now one goes searching among the wood. One may not go searching among the wood.

The language is also interesting, the woman who… a woman goes, a man doesn’t go.

Speaker 2:

Yes.

And One May Not Support the Pot

Speaker 1:

“And one may not support the pot” – let’s see – “and one may not support the pot nor the door with a split beam.” One may not take a piece that broke off from a beam, one may not take it to lean the door on it. The door or the pot? Or the pot, yes.

Why? “For they only permitted moving wood on Yom Tov for fuel alone.”

Explanation: Distinction Between Muktzeh and Moving

Speaker 1:

Essentially such a piece of wood is… muktzeh in moving. Muktzeh? This is muktzeh on Shabbos too, that’s the truth, except if it’s prepared. All this speaks of what is not prepared. Yom Tov should have been prepared because one may burn it, because one can use it for fuel. But that it’s prepared for fuel doesn’t make it permitted in moving.

Let’s remember, there is a prohibition of muktzeh and a prohibition of moving. These are different things. The prohibition of moving exists on every piece of wood that isn’t a vessel. They said, on Shabbos eve one may not move wood on Shabbos eve, except when it has become a vessel. For fuel is not yet a vessel. For fuel is still, from the aspect of the prohibition of moving it’s still, of course, if one uses it for fuel one may move it. But for another reason it’s the same muktzeh because of its essence, basically. It’s muktzeh, a thing that isn’t a vessel, you don’t move it on Yom Tov.

No, I say on Shabbos there’s no way to use it. On Yom Tov there is a way to use it for fuel, but it’s still not permitted for all the muktzeh because of its essence doesn’t change that.

Yes, but what? Because it can look like a vessel whose primary function is permitted. A vessel, aha. It must be a vessel whose primary function is permitted. It must be a vessel whose primary function is permitted. This is the Rambam’s language for muktzeh because of its essence.

Law 12 — Store Shutters

Speaker 1:

Now the Rambam goes on to say further things that are a matter of building, what one may and may not do.

Says the Rambam, stores – we’re going to learn later I think about commerce and trade, soon we spoke in the Satmar book about commerce and trade – but now we’re talking about opening, a person who sells food items, spices, may open his store on Yom Tov. But the stores used to be a platform that is surrounded with shutters, with such, how do you call them, gates such. Not a gate, more like a window or a door, something of that sort.

Speaker 2:

Yes.

The Rambam’s Language

Speaker 1:

Says the Rambam, one may remove the shutters from stores, that means open the store by removing the shutter, or return them. Or, one may even when one wants to close the store, one may also close it.

On this the commentators say, because we know that if we won’t let him close, he also won’t open. That means, the closing is not a part of helping people with ochel nefesh. One may do it so that he can take out spices that are needed from the store. There isn’t ochel nefesh there. There it’s that it’s essentially so that he can take out spices that are needed from the store and not be prevented from the joy of Yom Tov.

Hinge in the Middle vs. Hinge on the Side

Speaker 1:

Says the Rambam, the permission is only when it’s not really like a piece of building, like a piece of repair. When does this apply? When they have a hinge in the middle. When the shutters of the store have a hinge – a hinge is always the hinge that the hinge holds on – and it’s in the middle. But not a hinge that we call a hinge, just to remember. A hinge is more like a peg, you stick it into the window, and that’s a place where it lies. A male piece of wood goes into the frame.

Speaker 2:

Yes.

Speaker 1:

And if it’s in the middle, then one may. It holds, I don’t know what it is. And it holds in the middle means it’s not like building. But if they have a hinge on the side, it’s forbidden. Forbidden.

Remember Friday night. But what is the thing with a yud kamatz? He’s afraid that he’ll insert it strongly, and inserting it strongly will be building or a concern of building. We learned Friday night this law. I already said then that I don’t understand exactly the reality, what is the peg that is apart from the hinge. I still have no idea.

And then you still don’t understand. And what will one do? I don’t understand, I don’t understand. It’s one kind of hinge called. It’s one kind of hinge called. It’s one kind of hinge called. It’s one kind of hinge. It seems that one just places it. It’s like a board. Even in a house when he places it.

You see that the permission here is… so that one shouldn’t refrain from the joy of Yom Tov, they permitted in a store that a certain hinge, a hinge in the middle one may. But when it has no hinge at all, it’s not a problem of building at all, one may even in a house.

Law 13 — Vessels That Are Assembled

Speaker 1:

Further says the Rambam, vessels that are assembled, such as a menorah etc., a menorah that is assembled from parts, an assembled menorah, or a chair or table that are in pieces. Says the Rambam, one may set it up on Yom Tov one may set it up on Yom Tov, provided that it not be fixed, but it should not be fastened.

Why may one? As it says regarding building with vessels. It’s not called building. There would be a question whether one may set up a house from pieces? No, but when it’s a vessel one may.

Stones of the Bathroom

Speaker 1:

Stones of the bathroom: One used to set up a platform on which one sat down like a bathroom. One may arrange them on Yom Tov, one may arrange them one on top of the other on Yom Tov, because it’s a temporary building, it’s not a real building, it’s only something that one sets up and takes down, and because of his dignity, they didn’t decree.

Discussion: The Reason is Human Dignity, Not Ochel Nefesh

Speaker 1:

The Rambam also doesn’t say here that something common is ochel nefesh or a need for ochel. No, this is human dignity. This is the permission of human dignity. We learned great is human dignity that it overrides a negative commandment in the Torah.

But you have something here that is connected with Yom Tov, clearly, directly connected with Yom Tov. Going out to the bathroom is connected with eating, yes?

Speaker 2:

No, I don’t agree. I don’t agree. It doesn’t feel right, it has nothing to do with this. The permission must be on Shabbos too. It doesn’t say here, because it must be on Shabbos too. The Rambam doesn’t say that it’s ochel nefesh.

Laws of Yom Tov — Temporary Building, Stones of the Bathroom, and Caring for Animals

Stones of the Bathroom — Continuation of Discussion: Human Dignity or Ochel Nefesh?

The Rambam also doesn’t say here that it’s something common to all or a need. No, no, this is human dignity. This is the permission of human dignity. We learned great is human dignity that overrides a negative commandment in the Torah.

But here you have something that is connected with Yom Tov, clearly, directly connected with Yom Tov. Going out to the bathroom is connected with eating, yes?

No, I don’t agree. I don’t agree. It doesn’t work out, it has nothing to do with this. The permission must be on Shabbos too. It doesn’t say here, but it must be permitted on Shabbos too.

The Rambam doesn’t say that it’s ochel nefesh, and they learned. The Rambam never says that there is ochel nefesh and not eating. So I refrain from saying this, but he doesn’t say it because he doesn’t hold to say it. And I think that this must be permitted also on Shabbos, I don’t see why not.

The same thing the Kli Chemdah explains, I think, they learned from the commentary on Shabbos, that it’s also permitted then. There are ways that were forbidden on Shabbos, if I remember.

But… in the laws of Shabbos it says… in the laws of Shabbos it doesn’t say about any stones of the bathroom. No, it does say other laws about them. It says about stones, beams that one brings into the house. It says about muktzeh, yes. Ah, not about the stones. Right, not about the… It says about the laws of muktzeh.

Other laws of Shabbos it said, one may return a menorah and the like, and what appears like building, and if he returned it he’s exempt. So on Shabbos it says that it’s forbidden, because it’s not appears like building to return.

So, what is Yom Tov? Should it be among other opinions? Yes, Yom Tov the thing of appears like building seems. Why not? Everything that was done, one learns. Why? Why should it be different?

Ah, did I say this law here? I don’t understand why it’s different. I don’t see that Shabbos should be different from Yom Tov. It’s not understood to me. He doesn’t explain. He doesn’t say it. I don’t know.

It does say like that, but there are things that are stricter on Yom Tov, and there are things that are more lenient on Yom Tov, and things of melachos. Ah, it can’t be. I don’t believe that it can be.

Digression: Store Shutters

By the stores, I think, it’s not literally translated as a store. I think that stores means a box, like something such… what do I mean? Something such, the building that was used, in which lie the things that are sold. That’s how it seems to me here.

Small fortresses, he doesn’t explain. I don’t know. Okay. I don’t know that it should be different in my opinion. We don’t understand on what… what one makes a bonfire, a fire… Very good.

Law 14: One Who Makes a Bonfire — Making a Bonfire on Yom Tov

Another similar building that is permitted, or ways that one does.

One who arranges wood, when he’s a perfectionist, when he makes a fire he will lay very orderly the wood one thing. No, always it needs. One shouldn’t do it that way. One who arranges wood, in a manner that one rests on top of the other until he arranges the arrangement.

It’s not just a perfectionist, a fire needs to have… air should enter. It should be able to burn. To lay a fire, just a fire, I want to say already a deed. Try to make a fire, a straight fire, without any air in between, it won’t burn. There must be air in between. And there’s a proper way. Whoever understands how to build a fire. A bonfire means like a bonfire that one was in camp. And there’s a way how one builds it. One can’t just lay things.

So this he says, you shouldn’t make it nicely proper as if it were during the week not… Yes, there’s a way how to do it not nicely. Yes, it works weaker. But not entering perfection is forbidden. This is because it helps for the fire. Okay. Like the once but not entering perfection.

Rather, either he pours out wood randomly, he pours out, he takes a pile of wood and he gives them a lay randomly, or arranges with a change, that he lays it out yes, but not the way one does it on Shabbos. With a change.

What is the change? What does the change mean? Placing wood on top, and another beneath it has been permitted to the ground. Not from bottom up, but somehow one can do it from top down.

Very simple, the way is so simple, he stands and he holds it. What one will see the next, I also wondered, and I’ll see that the answer is he holds it. He stands and he holds it. And he corrects one. That means, in short, he builds it a weird way. It’s even more effort, but it should at least not look like building. Yes.

Perhaps it’s not such a huge standing, how big is the bonfire? We’re talking about four pieces of wood, it’s not strangely difficult. Okay.

Law 15: Pot, Bed, and Eggs — Temporary Building with a Change

Pot on Stones

So, a pot. When one wants to lay wood under a pot, there’s a way of… stones. For this preparing stones. One builds a platform of stones.

So one doesn’t hold making a resting of stones underneath, one holds the pot, and one places the stones under it until it’s ready, but one doesn’t place them on top of stones. Not the opposite, not that one sets up stones and only then. And one places setting up the stones, right, seemingly.

Bed

The same thing is a bed. And a bed, one holds the boards, and one makes legs under them. A bed there’s a straight board, and under it there are four little legs. One may not build, first set up four little legs and have it easy. Rather the opposite.

Eggs

Says the Rambam here an even greater stringency, even eggs, one wants to cook an egg, or cook, or I don’t know what one does with it, to set it aside, one shouldn’t stand making a row on top of a row until they stand like a tower, one shouldn’t set up the eggs so they should lie nicely one on top of the other, that it should look like a tower, also because it’s something of a matter of building, rather he should change and place from top to bottom. So all similar to this requires a change.

Anything that has something… that reminds of building, one shouldn’t do the regular way. That means although it’s a building, temporary, it’s eggs, it’s not a building of eating, yes. But what does one do with a change? If children like to make with cups such a tower, it must be forbidden, only with a change. Same thing, entering perfection. It works out entering perfection, this was the question, but yes.

Discussion: Eggs — Building or Not?

Very good. Here we’re going to learn about caring for an animal. Says the Rambam, removing flies and lice from an animal. A person has an animal, and flies stick to it there.

Ah, ah, one minute, regarding the eggs that one says, he says, he claims in the name of the Shulchan Aruch HaRav, that this speaks of when one does it so that one should cook it that way. Something like that, he lays a fire under it, so the eggs cook nicely.

But just he piles them up, just to hold, then it’s not called… no building. It’s not like the other things, such a piece of wood there’s something of a piece of building. No, he actually builds with this a tent, he builds with this something, he builds a bed. One doesn’t build… there’s no such thing as a tower of eggs. What is this? One always heard a tower of eggs. Okay, no.

No, it seems that sometimes one cooks that way and one uses it that way roasted to hold the heat inside. Yes, could be. Further.

Law 16: Caring for an Animal — Flies and Lice

Here we’re going to learn about caring for an animal. Says the Rambam thus: A person has an animal, and on the animal come flies, and they torment the animal. May one remove the flies?

Halachos Yom Tov: Tumah and Taharah, Buying and Selling

Even when you remove a splinter, how do you remove a splinter, you know, you have to take something and remove flies. And when you do it you make a chavurah, and you make a… a little wound, and making a chavurah is forbidden for… We learned, a chavurah is from blood, yes? A chavurah is forbidden, but what is the heter?

What? Certainly, it’s forbidden. Chovel. Chovel, yes. And mefarek, or something like that. But here it’s permitted, yes. Yes, he doesn’t say why. He didn’t intend to make a chavurah. Okay.

It must be on Shabbos also. Perhaps on Shabbos it wouldn’t be permitted, but Yom Tov is an animal something that’s permitted, because you can… there’s no heter ochel nefesh for animals. Would you have thought all ideas? An animal on Shabbos, on Yom Tov is something that you can take care of. Shabbos is… with handling? You can take care of an animal on Yom Tov.

He says that there’s something one approaches, but then it must be on Shabbos also. There should be a difference, perhaps there’s no difference. Who says every thing that’s written here is only Yom Tov? A chazakah of them are also Shabbos perhaps. You need to know how this removal works and how you work in general. You probably can’t drag it. Okay, you go now, you drag it.

Halachah 16 (continued): Meyaldim es habeheimah — Helping Birth

Ve’ein meyaldim es habeheimah beyom tov. You’re not allowed to help birth an animal on Yom Tov. Probably it’s a tircha or what? However, you can help. Help.

So the Rambam explains, for example, advice is to help like this, ochaz bo shelo yipol la’aretz, he holds the newborn so it shouldn’t fall, venofei’ach lo bechotmo, he helps it breathe, he blows on it, venosein dad lesoch piv, he gives the mother’s teat so she should nurse the new animal.

And further, another thing you can do, haysah habeheimah tehorah, and pure animals have such a thing, they often have a craziness that they’re angry at the children who just caused them so much pain, verichaku es haveled. Mutar lizlof mishilyasah aleha. There’s an advice of… a segulah, it sounds like… I don’t know. An advice so the mother should remember that it’s her child. Spray on her from the mother’s shilya, from the… shilyah hayotzeis mibein ragleha, the… velisein kometz melach berachmah, or put in a piece of salt, a piece of salt in the womb where the child was there, kedei sheseracheim alav. These are ways how to remind the mother and arouse maternal mercy. Aval hateme’ah asur la’asos ken, lefi she’einah tzrichah elu. The impure one is always merciful on the child.

Observation: Beheimos Tehoros and Teme’os — Cruelty

It’s interesting, because I remember that many Rishonim say about forbidden foods, that animals that are cruel, you’re not allowed to eat them because they generate cruel traits. Does the Rambam also hold this way? No. The Rambam says such a thing. Could be, but what… here we don’t see it that way, here we see that the…

Okay, I’m just making a small comment, because cruelty can mean not only toward one’s own child, or generally cruel. Cruelty there means that they’re predators, predatory animals, they eat other animals.

Here it appears an interesting thing that pure animals have more of a hard time with their… well, something of a craziness sometimes that they… what happened with this? They have something of a craziness sometimes that they recognize stone counters. You need to arouse their mercy, when can you do such things. It’s segulos to me, I don’t know. I’ve never held in a farm, so I don’t know exactly what we’re talking about, so yes, it’s salt. You put salt in her womb, and that attracts her, and because of that he catches.

Speaker 2: I’m going to understand. Okay. Yes.

Kli Shenitma Be’erev Yom Tov

Speaker 1: Further, says the Rambam, now we’re going to learn about spiritual repairs of vessels, which is making tahor a vessel which is similar to tikun.

Says the Rambam, kli shenitma be’erev yom tov, and it’s tamei, and a Jew is an eater, for example is a Kohen, or eats chulin betaharah, ein matbilin oso beyom tov. Why? Gezeirah shema yidcheh oso betumaso. Specifically to leave it erev Yom Tov, because he’ll already tovel on Yom Tov.

And just as we learned earlier, that you’re not allowed to leave over for Yom Tov labors that could have been done before Yom Tov. There’s a concept that you should still remain tamei and tamei. So he says, you don’t know. Could be it’s both. Already, you’ll be disgusted, someone will do the labor on Yom Tov. Just as we learned the other things. Basically, this is every davar she’efshar la’asoso erev yom tov. What should you have done erev Yom Tov? He says that Rashi is a problem.

Hashka’ah of Tamei Water

Speaker 1: But… ve’im hotzi lehatil mayim shebo, if a vessel became tamei with water, and the way how you make the water tahor is that you make hashka’ah with pure water, you put it in a mikveh until it touches the water. The water itself you can make tahor, because this is seemingly a clearer ochel nefesh.

Speaker 2: No no, not because of ochel nefesh.

Speaker 1: The water you can. He says, you can also, already in one way, matil es hakli bemikve ve’eino choshesh, you can already take. You can already tovel the vessel with the water inside, so that also the vessel should become tahor. Ve’eino choshesh, it’s a milsa dela shchicha that water becomes tamei, and there’s no gezeirah. Or because such a manner there’s no concern of hesech, because a person has tamei water, he must do it immediately. If not, it must be that there was some accident.

Speaker 2: No, no, it became tamei on Yom Tov.

Speaker 1: Yes, certainly, more than Yom Tov. But by water there isn’t the same gezeirah that there is on vessels.

Kli Shehayah Tahor Leterumah Verotzeh Lehatbilo Lekodesh

Speaker 1: Im od tzarich lehatbil mayim shebo, now we’re hearing for the vessel that was tahor for the body. Im od tzarich lehatbil mayim shebo, what did they say? Kli shehayah tahor. There’s a halachah that when you make something tahor, it needs to be tahor for the level of taharah that you want. If you want a higher level of taharah, if you want to eat kodashim, you need to tovel it specifically for kodashim.

It’s a principle in avodas Hashem, that you need to prepare yourself for the level of kedushah that you need. Kli shehayah tahor leterumah, that the chassidim went to the mikveh motzaei Shabbos when it becomes Yom Tov. Kli shehayah tahor leterumah, veratzu lehatbilah lekodesh, mutar lehatbilah, because this isn’t called fixing. He only wants to bring up a higher level, if it’s already tahor for terumah, he wants it also, the vessels should also be able to be used for kodesh, then you can tovel it yes.

Vechen Kol Kayotzei Bazeh — Tevilos Lish’ar Ma’alos

Speaker 1: Vechen kol kayotzei bazeh with tevilos for other levels. Ma’alos, that means bringing up a higher level, and kedushah you can yes. Vechen kol kayotzei bazeh means seemingly that a tahor person can tovel for a higher level of taharah. A tahor person why isn’t there the prohibition of taharah.

Speaker 2: What is the kol kayotzei bazeh? What else is there?

Speaker 1: Other types of levels. It doesn’t mean kodesh levels. I don’t know what. There are other levels.

Speaker 2: Yes.

Speaker 1: Okay, there are yes many levels. You’ll look in Hilchos Tumah Taharah with ten that every thing means a level.

Kli Shenitma Beyom Tov Bemashkin Teme’in

Speaker 1: Further, kli shenitma beyom tov, if it says so, kli shenitma be’erev yom tov, there’s a concern shema yidchenu betumaso, but kli shenitma beyom tov, you should serve it on Yom Tov.

He says like this, nitma hakli bemashkin teme’im sheheim velad hatumah me’erev yom tov. But what we learned you’re not allowed to, is when it became tamei really a strong tumah, for example an av hatumah. But if it became tamei bemashkin teme’in, which is a velad hatumah me’erev Yom Tov, it’s not really the third, all the vessels now need to become a third. Third is only a tumah derabanan, from the Torah there’s no third for tumah, matbilin oso beyom tov lefi sheyithar min haTorah, kemo sheyisba’er bimkomo. Bimkomo means simply in Hilchos Tumah Vetaharah.

Medlin Bedli — Drawing with a Bucket

Speaker 1: He says further, umedlin bedlisa veyithar me’elav, because a person has a bucket, a bucket is a vessel that you draw from the well. This you can yes dip into the well. Although when you dip it in, it’s also tevilah, veyithar me’elav, it becomes tahor, just as we learned about dipping with a pure spring, because it’s a trick, yes, because he does it in a manner of derech agav, it’s not noticeable that he’s fixing a vessel here.

Nidah She’ein Lah Begadim Tehorim

Speaker 1: The same thing, nidah she’ein lo begadim le’achrav. A nidah doesn’t have pure garments.

Speaker 2: A nidah used to go in garments of her niddah or what?

Speaker 1: He wants to make tahor and the vessel becomes hearing.

Speaker 2: Yes?

Speaker 1: A hint vetovlo bedavar. You can be clever, you can make a trick and tovel with her wash. That means, you need to learn in Shulchan Aruch in Hilchos Tevilah. How it works that there shouldn’t be any chatzitzos, it needs to be wet. Usually you don’t tovel with wash, but if she needs to have… she doesn’t have any other pure wash to put on, so she does better. A person can tovel, and automatically tovels together with her clothes, and she already has clothes to put on also.

Discussion: Kibus and Tevilah on the Nine Days

Speaker 2: Now on the nine days this isn’t an advice, because kibus is forbidden just like rechitzas haguf.

Speaker 1: So it’s not kibus.

Speaker 2: Prayer, yes.

Speaker 1: No, I’m saying, if someone will think that you’re not allowed to wash the wash, you should go not take with the wash. But it doesn’t help, because just as there’s a prohibition of rechitzah. I hear…

—

Halachos Mekach Umemkar Beyom Tov

Devarim Rabim Asru Beyom Tov Mishum Gezeiras Mekach Umemkar

Speaker 1: So now we’re going to learn more halachos Yom Tov, what is forbidden as mekach umemkar. They learned in Hilchos Shabbos that you’re not allowed to do any mekach umemkar because of shema yichtov. Also here, Yom Tov there are these principles.

Speaker 2: Wait, wait, so Yom Tov you can yes?

Speaker 1: Yom Tov there’s something of a heter, one thing, and they learned that you can new spices, you can also go to the person who sells spices. But you’re not allowed to… there are ways how you can yes do it and how you’re not allowed to do it. Halachos mekach umemkar.

Discussion: The Difference Between Shabbos and Yom Tov in Mekach Umemkar

Speaker 2: So basically, in other words, if I understand clearly, it’s simply mekach umemkar is permitted for the need of ochel nefesh, more or less.

Speaker 1: Shabbos also there are those who permit, they didn’t learn something permitted, you can take and say clearly that it’s…

Speaker 2: So I’m asking you, so the same thing is there or permitted?

Speaker 1: In Hilchos Shabbos it says that you’re not allowed to do mekach umemkar, in chapter 23, and what does it say about if you don’t say and so on? It’s clear that you’re not allowed even if you don’t speak, okay, but you’re not allowed to generate such a thing of things. But Yom Tov it appears that it’s more permitted.

The Rambam, many things forbidden on Yom Tov because of gezeiros mekach umemkar. There are the gezeiros mekach umemkar, they forbade on Yom Tov various things as the gezeiros. There is how.

Speaker 2: This I’m asking it’s for nothing, the Rambam doesn’t lay down that there are things that are permitted on Yom Tov because of this. He lays down that there are more things that are more forbidden.

Speaker 1: Although more forbidden than Shabbos?

Speaker 2: No. It’s not relevant, because Shabbos you don’t cook. Shabbos is as if from all your work doing. You’re not busy with this at all. Yom Tov you can slaughter and do and make.

Speaker 1: But they said that you’re not allowed to do this, everything I can him.

Speaker 2: You don’t slaughter, but you can bring such. You don’t know, eating seeing fruits. You can on Shabbos. Do you understand what I’m saying?

Speaker 1: Yes, automatically, it can also be relevant from mekach umemkar.

Speaker 2: Okay.

Speaker 1: No, it’s actually interesting the language, because he already said that everything that’s forbidden on Shabbos is forbidden on Yom Tov. He asks a question on this language is forbidden on Yom Tov.

Speaker 2: So what’s the basic answer? Yom Tov there is mekach umemkar that you can do more than you can on Shabbos, or not?

Speaker 1: There are things that were done less on Shabbos. First way how the Rambam says it, that many things were forbidden on Yom Tov like Shabbos, from their joy they can, and certain things were not decreed on Yom Tov like Shabbos. Why? There’s no nice thing that he says, he doesn’t say here a heter, he says here a prohibition, right?

Speaker 2: Yes, but he’s going to yes say things that you can yes do. You can take from the butcher, you’re not allowed to say “give me so,” but you can however yes say. And on Shabbos?

Speaker 1: Shabbos he didn’t make any distinctions. So, he says that Shabbos you’re not allowed to go to the butcher store and deal with him at all.

Speaker 2: The butcher store isn’t relevant to go on Shabbos anyway, because you didn’t understand the… I’m talking if he bought the meat.

Speaker 1: Shabbos you don’t do it. Shabbos you don’t do mekach umemkar at all, because they forbade everything shema yichtov.

Speaker 2: So, the Rambam made a mistake? Instead of saying “forbidden,” he should have said “permitted,” yes?

Speaker 1: No, I’m saying, Yom Tov they didn’t make such a broad prohibition of… Devarim rabim asru mishum mekach umemkar. Unlike Shabbos, every thing that is mekach umemkar on Shabbos is forbidden. Yom Tov, devarim rabim asru mishum mekach umemkar, they didn’t forbid categorically everything of mekach umemkar, only certain things of mekach umemkar.

Speaker 2: Okay, the chapter is written not very very so clearly.

Speaker 1: No, no, everything is very clear. And I see that you can borrow, for example, Shabbos a barrel of wine without saying, selling… it wasn’t standing. There are ways that you save easier, you can pay later. I would have thought that all these things should be permitted on Shabbos also. And conversely, there are prohibitions that are relevant to Yom Tov, that essentially is a prohibition of Shabbos also, it’s not relevant to Shabbos. But seemingly, that’s how I would understand it.

I’m sure someone talks about this, but the people on the side for whatever reason don’t help us either in these questions today of the difference between Shabbos and Yom Tov, I don’t know why.

Ein Poskin Damim Al Beheimah Beyom Tov

Speaker 1: So it is, he says “how.” “Devarim rabim asru beyom tov mishum gezeiras mekach umemkar, keitzad? Ein poskin damim lechatchilah al beheimah beyom tov.” Ah, you’re not allowed to say “sell me the animal.” “Ela, mah osin? Mevi shtei beheimos shavos zo lazo.”

Speaker 2: What is he talking about here? Two partners he’s talking about here, what’s relevant?

Speaker 1: Two partners, echad meihem mechalkin beineihem. So, he’s talking here about two partners.

Halachos Yom Tov: Laws of Buying and Selling on Yom Tov

Halachah 19: Ein Poskin Damim Lechatchilah Al Beheimah Beyom Tov

Ein poskin damim lechatchilah al beheimah beyom tov, ela mevi shtei beheimos shavos zo lazo veshochtim es achas meihen umechalkin beineihem. Ulemachar yode’im kamah demei hasheniyah, kol echad ve’echad notel damav.

It’s talking here about two partners, not about a business. It’s talking two partners have animals, yes?

Why partners?

Ah, again. Mevi shtei beheimos shavos zo lazo veshochtim es achas meihen umechalkin beineihem. You slaughter one of them and divide it. Ulemachar yode’im kamah demei hasheniyah, kol echad ve’echad notel damav.

Could be there are two, I don’t know if it comes in. It works with a partner also. The point is, instead of going on one animal and saying, “Rabbi Levi, how much does the animal cost?” No, the two animals are the same? Okay, very good. I take the animal today, I divide it with my partners, whatever it is. Tomorrow I go to the other animal, and you check how much that animal is worth, or perhaps they didn’t know before, and you pay that much for the animal. It’s simply such a… such a roundabout way, like a trick how not to talk about the money, but to know how much it’s worth.

Lo Yomar Zeh Atah Besela Ve’atah Bishtayim

Laws of Yom Tov Chapter 4 – Buying and Selling, Charity, and Packages

If there are two people who are dividing one animal, the one who… “lo yomar zeh atah b’sela v’atah b’shtayim,” I’m using the value of a sela from the animal, and you’re using two, “she’ein mazkirim shem damim,” I shouldn’t mention money, “ela l’chatzayim ul’shlishim.” Rather one says, I’m taking a quarter of the animal, a third of the animal, that one may say, but the value, one may not say I’m taking fifty dollars worth of the animal, rather I’m taking… and still it’s like a forbidden thing when we are.

Law 20: They Did Not Divide With Scales

“Lo chalku b’moznayim, she’ein mashgichin b’chol moznayim kol ikar,” one doesn’t look at scales on Yom Tov. It’s too similar to buying and selling, and scales when one puts things on scales. Not only don’t we look at it to calculate how much you need to pay.

Scales, if one wants to hang meat on scales because one doesn’t want to put it on the floor because one is afraid of mice, “afilu litein bo basar l’shomro min ha’achbarim asur mipnei she’nir’eh k’shokel b’chaf moznayim.” The Sages made great stringencies with the scale pan, not only that one shouldn’t use it for buying and selling, but one also shouldn’t use it for other things because it looks like buying and selling.

An Expert Butcher Is Forbidden to Weigh in His Hand

Furthermore, not only that, but an expert butcher whose hand is like scales, he lifts up a piece of meat and knows how much it weighs, may not weigh in his hand. “V’asur lishkol b’chli malei mayim,” one also may not weigh, for example one has a vessel that says on it this is a revi’it, and can one take a piece of meat and see if it weighs the same as the water? One also may not. I think one can weigh against it, meaning, one puts in a vessel that is full of water, and in that one puts in, one throws in a pot, and one sees what goes higher, that is goes higher, that is…

They Do Not Cast Lots on the Portions

Also, “v’ein matilin chalashim al ha’manot,” one may not make a lottery on the portions, to know who, make a lottery who will get the best piece of the animal through a lottery. This is regular meat. “Aval matilin chalashim al basar ha’kodashim,” Kohanim when they eat kodashim on Yom Tov, they may make such a lottery “kedei l’chavev et ha’mitzvah,” because there there is an aspect of making a mitzvah beloved. You see that just eating on Yom Tov is a mitzvah, but not the level of mitzvah.

Discussion: Dispute of the Rambam and the Ra’avad

There is a Ra’avad who disagrees somewhat with this law. What does he say? I don’t know, he says something. I want to know what.

Did you bentch for a reason apparently?

No, I wanted, regarding the topic of kodashim I wanted to understand. It says that the Rambam understood that chol means chulin, and kodesh means Yom Tov. But the Ra’avad held differently, that when it says kodashim it means from today, and chol means from yesterday. Meaning even kodashim, if it’s from yesterday, according to the Ra’avad one may not make a lottery, so I understand. That it’s meat that remained in the Beit HaMikdash not from today’s…

Permission for Lottery for His Sons and Household

Furthermore, bingo. “V’lo l’hatil manot shel chol b’Yom Tov.” The Rambam also brings that for his sons and household members one may. And the truth is, says the Maggid Mishneh, that the Rambam further agrees with the permission that in the house one may make a lottery, because the Rambam already agreed to this in the laws of Shabbat, that when one makes a lottery among the household children it’s not a real acquisition, it’s not real buying and selling. It’s politics at home, that’s not real business. That is permitted, and the Rambam, the Maggid Mishneh says that this is not a difficulty, the Rambam said this regarding Shabbat, so certainly on Yom Tov one may also.

Law 21: A Person Should Not Say to the Butcher Give Me a Dinar’s Worth of Meat

The Rambam says further, more laws of buying and selling, “lo yomar adam l’tabach,” a person should not say to a butcher who sells meat, the butcher, “tein li b’dinar basar,” give me meat worth a dinar. As he already said earlier, one may not call meat by the value of the… “ela tein li chelek,” give me a… Earlier he spoke about the division of partners, now he says regarding the butcher. “Ela tein li chelek,” give me a slice or half a slice. “Ul’machar osim cheshbon,” tomorrow one can calculate how much the portion is worth. It’s all so it shouldn’t look like buying and selling.

One Should Not Take From the Storekeeper by Measure or Weight

“V’chein, lo yikach mi’ba’al ha’chanut b’midah o b’mishkal,” one should not take from the storekeeper by measure or weight, “ela keitzad hu oseh?” The store is not a butcher, the store is the one who bought the groceries and the like. What then? He says, “malei li kli zeh, ul’machar notein lo shavyo.”

It’s interesting, it seems that words make a big difference here regarding buying and selling. It’s the same buying and selling, it’s just which language one uses. And we’re not talking here about idle chatter. But idle chatter we said such things, one shouldn’t speak weekday speech. This shouldn’t look like buying and selling.

Discussion: Why Words Matter

The deeper books are about writing, and it could be that it makes sense if one writes, one speaks with two pounds, he gave a writing, because that’s what one writes. Just to know how much, perhaps it makes sense this way. Perhaps it’s something to remember, to mention, or it shouldn’t be done in the way one does regularly, as we had earlier, one shouldn’t do with a vessel that one uses regularly.

No, it’s weekly, to speak about one doesn’t speak about money on Yom Tov Shabbat. It seems here also that during the week one should, one shouldn’t become confused, during the week one should speak broadly, one shouldn’t speak so rabbinically, if indeed one wasn’t allowed to do it on Shabbat.

Even a Vessel Designated for Measure He Should Fill

“Afilu kli m’yuchad l’midah, yimalenu,” that one may go with a vessel, I give the vessel, one may also use the vessel that is designated for measure, unlike scales. That is, scales are made only for buying and selling. This is a vessel that one can fill, you have how much written sizes. “Aval shelo yazkir lo shem midah.” As long as he doesn’t mention the measure, not a name of measure. It means the same thing, not say a liter, but say the vessel. Even though the vessel is a liter. Okay, that is…

Law 22: The Baker Measures Spices

Further, “ha’nachtom moded tavlin v’notein l’kedeirah bishvil shelo yafsid tavshilo.” The baker, the baker, the one who sells for the public, may measure, measure, when he distributes for his… ah, when cooking or when distributing for his people. “V’notein l’kedeirah bishvil shelo yafsid tavshilo.” Ah, because he cooks for a larger company, and he shouldn’t ruin it, it’s more important for him.

“Aval ha’ish lo timod kemach l’isah,” but he should do it approximately, yes. So they won’t spoil.

Yes, perhaps also because it’s easier. At home you know approximately how much is needed, but a baker has the expectation of people that it should always be the same. The cookies of homeowners all look the same, as we learned in these laws of finding. Cookies of homeowners are sometimes sweeter, sometimes less sweet. On the contrary, a baker sees it always the same, and yes, yes, yes, a baker is different. Yes, yes, it’s actually. A person has an expectation that the company always has the same taste. Therefore one may. But his wife at home, today will be in honor of Yom Tov sweeter.

One Should Not Measure Barley Before His Animal

“V’chein, lo yimod adam se’orim lifnei behemto,” he knows exactly how much his animal needs, he should not do it with a measure, “ela mesha’er v’notein lah,” he should give approximately, the animal will manage.

Law 23: It Is Permitted to Buy From the Storekeeper Eggs or Nuts by Number

The Rambam says further, “mutar likach min ha’chanvani beitzim o egozim b’minyan.” One may go to the storekeeper and say I want twenty eggs, even though a measure would be ten ounces of eggs, even though one pays presumably that way by weight. But what “shelo yazkir lo shem damim v’lo yazkir minyan?” As long as he doesn’t say ten dollars worth of eggs, he may say even though one knows that… or it’s I can number, even the amount, what does he mean? He owes him, he wrote down by me. He doesn’t tell him, so should the bill be. He says, I took from you ten eggs last week, I’m taking another ten, and the bill will be twenty. That one may not. “Lo yavo Yom Tov tein li asarah kedei sheilech esrim.” Because then he’s talking about money.

Law 24: A Person Goes to the Shepherd Who Is Regular With Him

“Holech adam eitzel ro’eh ha’ragil etzlo, o eitzel patem ha’ragil etzlo.” He is accustomed to go to that fattener and buy from him an animal. I mean he should go to the one he is accustomed to, because with him he can make the deal. Otherwise, he’ll go to a non-Jewish shepherd, he won’t understand the language.

Yes, he must do this. He should go to the one he already knows, and he will understand him with a hint. “V’likcho mimenu behemah u’tavlin kol mah she’yirtzeh, v’yishalem lo achar Yom Tov, v’eino choshesh shema yazik lo shum damim v’lo sechum minyan.” Yes, that’s the reason why he says “ragil etzlo”. Perhaps one may not have a new business? So he says.

Yes, no, because the other doesn’t speak immediately, it’s practical. It’s not a decree, one whom he already knows, the other will already settle after Shabbat, after Yom Tov, how much he owes.

Law 25: One Who Lends on Yom Tov Claims and Takes in Court

Now the Rambam says a new law like this: “ha’loveh b’Yom Tov, tove’a v’notel b’din.” If someone lent on Yom Tov, one may go after him to court. That is, he’s essentially speaking of this case, because the storekeeper didn’t give any money on Yom Tov, it was basically a loan, right?

Yes. So after Yom Tov he may claim him in court, say that we indeed didn’t discuss money, but… You can’t say, “Ah, didn’t you ask me for money?” He can also claim in court. “V’hu, she’im tomar lo nitein litov’o v’eino notel klum, nimtza nimna mi’simchat Yom Tov.”

Discussion: Difference Between Shabbat and Yom Tov

Yes, it seems that one may not… The Almighty says “lend on Me and I will repay”, but one may not claim in court. Here there isn’t the answer of “eino notel klum”. Okay.

As far as I understand, all these reasons are true also for Shabbat. It could be Shabbat simply that one needs an eruv, there are more things, there’s carrying, it’s not so easy to find who it’s practical on Shabbat. But all these things with… Shabbat is somewhat the expectation that on Shabbat a person has already prepared his meal. On Shabbat one is not so occupied with this. It’s true, it can sometimes be a question, but generally.

Today when there is very much prepared food, it could be. The stores are closed on Shabbat, because today’s stores…

No, it may be open. Today’s stores are closed because they don’t trust the person. Like the story, he indeed needs to have that he should write everything down then.

Laws of Yom Tov Chapter 4 – Buying and Selling, Charity, and Packages

Discussion: Buying in Store on Shabbat/Yom Tov – Packages with Known Measures

Speaker 1: It’s true, generally, today when you have very much prepared food, it could be. The stores were closed on Shabbat, because today’s stores… But there is such a thing that goes in silently. What? Stores are open. Today’s stores are closed because they don’t trust the person like the homeowner. He indeed needs to have that he should write everything down, then it’s still forbidden.

More small-town places, and that time in Antwerp, he goes Shabbat afternoon, he says, I’ll tell you tomorrow what I took. If one is in the country such a place there is perhaps an opinion, one needs to know, then one needs to learn the details, that one may take but one may not mention.

And today there’s a bit of a problem, because every item is already a package, it already says exactly what it is. Perhaps because of this one may? Because one says, I took two packages of rice, I mean I took two packages of brandy. What he sells there. There is a measure on it, but it’s not something that needs to be measured. One needs to look…

I remember, I see that the Rema brings from this below that one speaks of such a case essentially… It must be permitted. A thing whose measure is known, it could be that it’s more permitted. That one may say even measure? It’s a large package, it’s already measured.

Speaker 2: Yes.

Speaker 1: Okay, further.

Law 26 – Terumot and Ma’asrot on Yom Tov

Speaker 1: The Rambam says, “af al pi she’ein magbihin terumot u’ma’asrot b’Yom Tov”, just as one may not on Shabbat. We learned that one may not take terumot and ma’asrot on Shabbat, because it’s like fixing, it’s a bit of fixing. He calls it being magbiah, one may not separate.

“But if he had terumat ma’aser that he separated yesterday, he may bring it to the Kohen on Yom Tov.” But one may carry to the Kohen on Yom Tov what he already took yesterday. Because carrying to the Kohen doesn’t have any… is not fixing.

Ah, there is a dispute in the Gemara. In any case, we rule that one may. Apparently Shabbat will also be the same thing.

“V’ein tzarich lomar” that challah is fit for a dog, that certainly we’re not talking about charity on Yom Tov.

Charity Collectors on Yom Tov

Speaker 1: How so? Charity collectors. The Rambam already learned that in every city there should be charity collectors.

Speaker 2: Yes, did we already learn such a thing? Or do I remember such a language?

Speaker 1: He already gave Torah study, he will support Torah scholars, in Laws of Character Traits, he must live in a city where there is a charity collector. Do you remember?

Speaker 2: I don’t know.

Speaker 1: There is a charity collector. Nu, what do you want?

Speaker 2: No, it’s supporting the poor, they haven’t learned it yet.

Speaker 1: But it wasn’t stated that one must in the city.

Speaker 2: Ah, they learned that one can live in the suburbs if it has the ten things.

Speaker 1: Yes.

So the charity collectors may go around in the courtyards collecting… not money, collecting food to be able to distribute to the poor.

“Aval lo machrizin k’derech she’machrizin b’chol”, one shouldn’t make it in a way that one makes an official appeal, because that is still somewhat a way of business dealings that will come to writing or what.

He began “b’tzne’ah v’notein lo b’chelko”, one does it more modestly. V’notein lo b’chelko also he shouldn’t go with a regular box, but he should take it with him. Chelko, on his shoulder, but presumably on his garment that lies on his shoulder, on his large pants pocket, “u’mechalkein l’chol shechunah u’shechunah”. Neighborhood itself also, one shouldn’t make a large distribution on Yom Tov, but the collector simply should go to the area and distribute there for his needy.

Speaker 2: Okay.

Speaker 1: Not make it in a way that it looks like one is doing business on Yom Tov.

Even though we learned regarding charity, we assess charity on Shabbat, yes? One may even on Shabbat make calculations with charity, we learned after Shabbat. But here one sees that still there is a limit on actually taking the charity, there are indeed certain limitations.

Okay, until here chapter 4 of Laws of Yom Tov.