הלכות שבת פרק י״ח

Rambam Hilchos Shabbos Chapter 18 – Shiurim of Hotza'ah

Introduction to the Chapter

Speaker 1:

Baruch Hashem, we are learning the Rambam Hilchos Shabbos, Sefer Zemanim. We are holding at Chapter 18. Baruch Hashem, we are already holding at the eighteenth chapter.

Before we continue, we must thank all those who support our shiur, and at their head the great supporter, the sponsor of our shiur, the rabbinic leader and supporter of Torah, our friend R' Yoel Eli Wetzberger, may the merit of Torah stand by him.

The holy Rambam says... Let me give a brief introduction.

Speaker 2:

Ah, you can say it, I just want to tell you a little bit, it should be a brief introduction before you speak.

Context: From Reshuyos to Shiurim

Speaker 2:

In this chapter the Rambam goes, we have already spoken a lot about the halachos regarding hotza'ah (carrying out), the lands thereof, what makes reshuyos (domains), the four reshuyos, the four reshuyos, how one can fix them, how one can make a reshus hayachid (private domain), how one can fix a karmelis, and so on.

Here we are going to learn the entire chapter of shiurim (measurements) of hotza'ah. We discussed that one is liable when one carries, according to Torah law in a reshus hayachid or in a reshus harabim (public domain), or if it is a rabbinic prohibition. What is the shiur? Because for all of the thirty-nine melachos (prohibited labors), the Rambam stated for each melachah its shiur, and by hotza'ah one places the shiur of all things, because hotza'ah, one can carry everything. All other things, when the melachah is cutting hair, it's how much hair. But when it's carrying, one speaks of all things.

The Importance of Learning Shiurim

Speaker 2:

Essentially, the entire chapter, there isn't so much lomdus (analytical study) in it. But we know the Gemara says that even when there is an obligation to be me'abir sedra (review the weekly Torah portion), it says there even Atros and Divon, even things where there is no purpose in the names of cities, and the Targum goes and translates the names the same or slightly different, there is no purpose in the names. But the Torah is not only here when there are beautiful things and one can make a pilpula tava (good analysis), a nice explanation, but one also needs to know the halachos. The Rambam said that if it's important enough for the Gemara, for the Tanna, for the Rambam, it's important enough for us to learn, right?

Speaker 1:

Yes, but I believe even more than that, there are first of all great secrets. But secrets are only an excuse, when one doesn't know what to say one says it's a secret. But I actually know the secret, as you explained, I just want to explain the secret of what you said.

Hotza'ah Gives Kedusha to the Entire World

Speaker 1:

That Hilchos Shabbos, the simple meaning is that there is a certain perspective, a lamdan (scholar) or a Jew who even is just a Jew who keeps Shabbos, suddenly the entire world looks different to him. Yes, he now thinks that when one goes in the street, there are streets, there are small streets. This is a reshus hayachid, there are mevo'os (alleyways), there is a mavoy sasum (closed alley), there is reshus hayachid, reshus harabim, karmelis, makom patur (exempt place). The entire world essentially on Shabbos receives a kedusha (holiness). Every thing in the world, every area, has a certain status.

This is a reshus hayachid. Regarding this, specifically hotza'ah is the greatest melachah, you know, in the halachos. Although it is the smallest melachah in physical action, this is the greatest melachah regarding the most halachos, because just as this is very well brought out regarding the shiur, here the entire world comes out. That is, choresh (plowing), yes, it makes the Land of Israel rest on Shabbos, the ground, the Land of Israel. We learned at length a bit more about the animal, okay. But it's only one small action. The rest of the world...

Hotza'ah – The Melachah of the Urban World

Speaker 1:

One can even say more deeply. I said earlier, we mentioned in one shiur, the urban world, right? "Ani melachti ba'ir" (I worked in the city), the urban world, there one does almost none of the thirty-nine melachos. Let's say bishul (cooking), let's say. Also, one needs to be very good at this is the cooking that the verse originally spoke of, it's only like a toladah (derivative). Today one uses all kinds of machines with things. But even then, it's not... okay, a little. But generally, most melachos are meleches hasadeh (field work), melachos that one does in work, not in the city.

The one great melachah that happens in the city, okay, one can fix it, one can make a mavoy, an eruv, a lechi, a tzuras hapesach, all things, is this. So this is the melachah that includes the entire world, and with this Shabbos comes upon the entire world.

Shiurim on All Objects in the World

Speaker 1:

Therefore it is not only on the areas, like the reshuyos of Shabbos, which we learned in the last few chapters about reshuyos of Shabbos. It is also on all the objects in the world. A small dried fig, I don't know what, one cannot do... one can be soches (squeeze) it, another two, three things. But besides that, there is a significance, and every thing in the world has a certain shiur of hotza'ah.

And the Chachamim (Sages) generally are very fond of being involved in shiurim, right? In the Torah no shiurim are written. There is a shiur of melachah l'Moshe miSinai (law given to Moses at Sinai), and one doesn't need to mean that either. Every shiur, regarding mechitzah (partition) this is what they say melachah l'Moshe miSinai, halachah l'Moshe miSinai means that there is a certain secret, it's not written in the Chumash what is a mechitzah, it's also not written in the Chumash what is the minimum that one needs to be motzi (take out) in order to be liable for a chatas (sin offering) on Shabbos.

Shiurim According to Purpose of Use

Speaker 1:

But the Chachamim, they look, they assess the entire world here, what is truly a piece of hotza'ah.

I mean, the last thing I wanted to say is a bit different, and this is a very nice introduction, but it's not because they made a shiur of hotza'ah, on the contrary, rather a thing that is significant one is liable when one takes it out. For each thing one must look what is significant according to the use of that thing, not the use regarding carrying out, but why does one carry this at all? Someone carries a seed not because one carries a seed, but because one is going to plant it, so the minimum planting, and so with each thing. So by hotza'ah, on the contrary, one looks into each thing what is the melachah thereof, what is the purpose of that item, not regarding hotza'ah, but the purpose regarding how one uses it.

Speaker 2:

I understand that it's not regarding hotza'ah, you're right, because hotza'ah is a general thing for all things. But you're also right that there is in each one some benefit, one looks why does one take out kechol (eye paint), in order to be kochel (paint) an eye, whatever.

The Judgment of the Chachamim

Speaker 2:

But I think yes that there is in this a certain da'as (judgment), you know, it's not just like... it's not like the Chachamim went around and sent messengers to the market and sought empirical evidence, made extensive research to see what is the smallest thing. Certainly, part of this is that, it must be connected with reality. But there is also a certain estimation, that is, a certain shikul hada'as (weighing of judgment) that says that this is being kochel one eye for example, maybe two eyes, who says that one eye is the minimum? There is a certain shikul hada'as of the Chacham, you can call it a halachah l'Moshe miSinai, which says this means already something done.

So what he says that means, one has completely done something that is worth this, but it's not a thing... in other words, what I want to bring out is, one could not have found the entire chapter without the Chachamim, just go and look what is the smallest thing. Because then there would be a question, what is the smallest thing? It must be something. So only the Chachamim who tell us, they reveal to us, they teach us, they weigh what means the smallest thing.

Discussion: For Whom Are the Shiurim?

Speaker 1:

Let's consider this. It's like this, the person who carries the thing hotza'ah on Shabbos, he carries it, yes? He's not crazy. And if he carries it, and it's truly less than a shiur, and also for him it's not proper, perhaps one needs to think that perhaps he's not called a metaken (one who fixes) at all.

So the motzi (one who takes out), let's say he found a reason why he wants to carry out sand which is even smaller than the shiur of Chazal, but he's going to do something with it, seemingly he still has a problem. A question arises, perhaps he will be liable, because he found a smaller use. So this whole thing here makes sense when we're talking about a shogeg (unintentional) or something we don't know. If someone actually carried out, he carried it out because he wanted to carry it out. He obviously has a need for it. One needs to understand at all why the Chachamim come to give the shiurim.

Speaker 2:

If something looks like a chumra (stringency), that the shiurim are l'chumra, not l'kula (leniently).

Speaker 1:

I mean you're right. It is, one will actually learn at the end of the halachah, it will say there that if someone has a reason, even during all these shiurim. So it says, we'll come to Halachah 20. But I understand, I'm looking quickly, all these shiurim are indeed regarding hotza'ah simply. If someone has a special intention for something less, he will certainly be liable for the less.

Hilchos Shabbos Is for Shogeg

Speaker 1:

But you're right with what you said, one learns all of Hilchos Shabbos, Hilchos Shabbos is for a shogeg, not for a meizid (intentional violator). So, and a shogeg didn't know, he didn't know why he was motzi, he forgot that it's Shabbos, okay.

Speaker 2:

But you also don't mean that a small seed remained in his pocket by mistake, because that's not a shogeg at all in the usual sense. That is he wasn't aware at all of what he's doing, he didn't know at all that this means carrying.

Speaker 1:

A shogeg is, one forgot that it's a melachah or that it's Shabbos.

Speaker 2:

And you said that it's a question of mis'asek (unaware action) or like k'le'achar yad (backhanded manner), such things.

Mis'asek and HaMotzi Stam

Speaker 1:

No, I'm saying, many times when one carries something that is smaller than the shiur, because it remained dirty. We're not talking about that a bit of sand remained on the jacket and that means taking out sand. One speaks when he carries out sand, even if he's a shogeg, but it's not a shogeg that he wants the bit of sand to go out, rather he's truly mis'asek, he took a bit with his hands and he walks out because he... But haMotzi stam (one who takes out simply), he didn't think why he's doing it.

So the Torah calls it, haMotzi stam. All shiurim, almost all shiurim in the Torah, what I'm saying here, that very many shiurim exist in the Torah, or certainly shikul hada'as, everything is until stam. If you want specifically to exchange, like... what's an example? I don't want to bring examples that can make it too complicated. But in any case, this is the normal. I said what is normal, but if someone wants specifically, but... okay.

Speaker 2:

Okay, and haMotzi stam even most of the shiurim are very stringent, because haMotzi stam, what should he do with this? He has truly a small thing, it's indeed a small thing, but one can be liable for kares (excision) from this, it's truly a drop, and he's liable for a chatas. He's not liable like... we're not talking about any meizid, the meizid needs to thoroughly really know what he's doing too.

But by the way, a shogeg doesn't matter. One needs to know what is the halachah of someone who forgets in his pocket. I mean that it perhaps doesn't mean any akirah v'hanachah (picking up and placing down), because he's mis'asek, but he's liable for a chatas in such a situation. One needs to look in the poskim. It's not a ma'aseh (action) without meleches machsheves (thoughtful work), because one speaks about this a lot, for example places where one argues about eruv, one says that even if there are reasons not to make an eruv, but people sometimes forget in their pocket. One needs to know if it's a real argument. People are truly motzi, he forgets that... people forget sometimes, today when most Jewish cities have an eruv, people forget altogether that there isn't an eruv. Okay, it's a funny situation, but let's not go into this.

Let's learn once Hilchos Shegagos. We haven't learned the halachah, right? We learned the first chapter, mis'asek, but it's not the other sugya. Okay, let's learn haMotzi.

Halachah 1

Speaker 1:

Yes, so the Rambam says thus:

One who takes out an object from a reshus hayachid to a reshus harabim or from a reshus harabim to a reshus hayachid,

Seemingly also. He doesn't say. I don't know. Seemingly the same shiur. Seemingly the shiur needs to be the same. Seemingly. I don't know, a Rosh Yeshiva would have needed to ask such a question now. Because the av melachah (primary category) that the Rambam calculated that hotza'ah from reshus to reshus is the essence which usually one calls hotza'ah. This is called hotza'ah, being motzi from a reshus. Yes, it's interesting.

One is liable, he is not liable until he takes out from it a shiur that is useful for anything,

Rather he carried something, he was motzi something that helps him.

Shiurei Hotza'ah on Shabbos — Halachah 1 (Continued)

Digression: The Difference Between "Klum" and "Mashehu"

Speaker 1: Klum means something. It's just interesting that the Rambam uses the word klum, because klum means the opposite. Klum means not even... Klum is a negative of mashehu. Mashehu means a little bit, and klum means not even a little bit.

Speaker 2: As he said, klum means nothing, yes?

Speaker 1: No, klum doesn't mean nothing. Always, I mean we use it... Klum, I mean klum means something. I mean klum means not even something, and mashehu... what is the difference between klum and mashehu?

Speaker 2: Mashehu is usually, one speaks of a shiur.

Speaker 1: Mo'il klum speaks of the benefit. Benefit of klum. But it helps something. I mean that something, klum means... yes, because I mean that for example, ah... how is it said? Let's say it like this, usually when we say klum, it comes from a language that says "eino klum," it's not nothing. Klum doesn't mean nothing. Klum means something. Yes, eino klum means not something, that is nothing. But klum means the least something. One needs to look in the dictionary, but I don't have time now. I mean, but in any case, what is usual by people is the word mashehu, something that helps something. Klum means...

Speaker 2: He says that mashehu usually one says regarding the shiur, and keli means regarding the action, for example as you say.

The Foundation of Shiurei Hotza'ah: Significance and Benefit

Speaker 1: In short, only when one carries something that has some significance. If it's only a crumb and there's no way at all that this should be significant, the thing should be useful, because one doesn't use a crumb of something, one is exempt.

So now one goes in this entire chapter here to calculate for each item, each type of thing that one carries out, what is the most minimal thing that one can use that thing?

Example: Tal — A Drop of Water

Let's just say one thing for an example: wine. Wine to drink everyone understands, one needs a glass of wine. You give me a bit of wine, what's the point? But, excuse me, not wine, let's say another thing that appears later, tal, a drop of water. A drop of water to drink, one needs a glass of water. What does a drop help me? But the drop is useful when one prepares the makeup to put on the eyes, one needs a bit of something wet to make when it becomes hardened. Simply, one found a way how even something that usually clearly one thought isn't significant enough, one found a minimal action where the small shiur does have significance, and therefore one is indeed liable.

Halachah 1 (Continued) — Shiurei Hotza'ah for Different Things

We'll see inside. "And these are the shiurei hotza'ah," says the Rambam, these are the shiurei hotza'ah.

Ma'achalei Adam — Like a Dried Fig

So thus, "One who takes out human food," if one carries out human food, the shiur is "like a dried fig." And one will indeed see, if one carries out several types of food, there doesn't need to be a dried fig of each one, but if between all the foods together there is a shiur of a dried fig, one is liable.

But how does one calculate the dried fig? For example a thing that has shells, says the Rambam, "and it should be like a dried fig from the food itself," the food itself needs to be a dried fig, "besides the shells and the pits," the shells, the seed from inside, "and the stems and the bran and the coarse meal," other types of shells by all other types of grains. The shells one needs to calculate extra, it could be that there is a shiur of shells, we'll see later the shiur of straw. But the significance thereof is food, there needs to be like a dried fig between all foods together. It's regarding food, the essence is the same shiur of food, almost all halachos of food we learned.

Speaker 2: Shiur of eating addition regarding a fast, yes.

Speaker 1: But regarding Shabbos, yes.

Wine — Quarter of a Revi'is

"Wine, like a quarter of a revi'is," a quarter of a revi'is. Because a shiur that means a significant drink is a revi'is, but wine one takes a third wine and one pours in another three measures of water, so a quarter of a revi'is is already the shiur to have a normal cup of wine with water.

"And if it is congealed," if the wine is congealed, the wine is in a solid state, yes, the shiur is "like an olive's volume."

Digression: Wine Crust and Pottery

Just interesting, I learned last night in a Mishnah in tractate Avodah Zarah, the Mishnah says a type of pottery that one may not have. What is this pottery? It says there in the Gemara that it's an invention of a Caesar of Rome, I don't remember at the moment, who came up with the idea that one can take clay and knead it, knead clay with wine, and afterwards the soldiers took it to the front, and when they urgently needed wine they could take the pieces of pottery and put them in water and extract the wine from them. We see that there was a need at times to have water and not a liquid, the crust, wine crust reminds me of this pottery, they sought ways how to be able to carry wine in a hard state.

Milk of a Kosher Animal - Enough for a Swallow

"Milk of a kosher animal, enough for a swallow", a swallow, a swallow of milk.

Speaker 2: Goes for drinking. Yes.

Milk of a Non-Kosher Animal - Enough to Apply to the Eyes

"Milk of a non-kosher animal", milk from a non-kosher animal that one doesn't drink, when does one use it? "Enough to apply to the eyes", one uses it to smear on the eyes.

Woman's Milk or Egg White - Enough to Put in a Compress

"Woman's milk or egg white", these two things get the same measure, milk from a woman and the white of an egg, "enough to put in a compress". When one has a powder for medicine or something, one needs to put in it some such thick liquid so that one can use it, one uses either woman's milk or egg white. That is the measure, how much one puts on the drug, on the medicine that one has made, which is called a compress.

Oil - Enough to Anoint the Small Toe of a Day-Old Infant

"Oil", how much is the measure of oil? A small measure, "enough to anoint the small toe of a day-old infant". Oil is used to smear on a person, but you're not going to say now that one needs oil for a large adult, it's enough oil for the minimum, when the minimum is a small child, but also the smallest limb of the small child.

Dew - Enough to Mix with Eye Powder

"Dew", yes, the measure of dew, "enough to mix with the eye powder". A woman has a powder to smear on the eyes, but for this one needs to add a drop of water so that it should become soft and one should be able to smear it, it should become a cream. The eye powder is the drug, kohl, yes, kohl, so he says, the kohl itself, the ink, the powder that one uses, kohl for the eyes, yes, kohl for the eyes, the makeup that one uses for the eyes, enough to mix with water, how much is needed so that one can together with a bit of water have enough to smear on the eyes, yes.

Water - Enough to Wash the Surface of a Mortar

Speaker 2: And water, perhaps one of them means the pieces, okay, I don't know.

Speaker 1: Okay, "and water", the measure of water, one also doesn't say a measure that is for drinking, but the smallest, "enough to wash the surface of a mortar". A mortar is a thing that one uses to make mash, not mash, to grind things, to pulverize things, and inside the mortar there is some hard part, one needs sometimes to wash, a little bit of water to wash inside the mortar.

Speaker 2: How do you say mortar in Yiddish?

Speaker 1: A mill, little mill, a small mill, yes.

Speaker 2: Today mill.

Speaker 1: Okay.

Honey - Enough to Put on a Wound

"Honey", honey, "enough to put on a wound". On a wound one would put a bit of honey, a little bit to put on a wound.

Blood and All Other Liquids and Waste - A Quarter Log

"Blood and all other liquids and all waste", blood or all other liquids, or anything that one pours out, "a quarter log". It makes no difference whether it's liquids that one will still drink, or these are liquids that are no good that one will pour out, the measure is a quarter log.

I would translate anything that is liquid, I would translate it that way. Straw and grain, which one doesn't know, yes, it means except. This is actually an exception from liquid things that have smaller measures, except for this it has the measure of a quarter log.

Measures of Straw - Different Types

Now one will speak about types of straw. Straw is hay, but it can be straw from many other types of grain. So he will enumerate each grain, what is the order, which type of animal eats that type of thing.

Grain Straw - Mouthful of a Cow

"Grain straw", grain usually means wheat, no? Wheat with barley perhaps. Straw from grain, from grains, is "a mouthful of a cow", how much a cow eats. Cow is the standard, they learned correctly that cow is the standard that one calculates, yes, that one uses. They saw this regarding the red heifer.

Speaker 2: Right, but here there's more, a cow eats grain straw.

Legume Straw - Mouthful of a Camel

Speaker 1: "Legume straw" is more the order for a camel, so how much fills the mouth, how do you say it by a person? To fill a mouth, well, it's called a... I don't know.

Speaker 2: Okay.

Speaker 1: "Mouthful of a camel", to fill the mouth of a camel.

One Who Takes Out Legume Straw as Food for a Cow

"One who takes out legume straw as food for a cow", if however he does differently, he is a clever worker, he gives legume straw to a cow, he is also liable, "even though the cow" usually a cow will prefer grain straw, "that eating" even though the cow doesn't like it, but the cow will eat it. It's also called eating.

Sheaves - Mouthful of a Lamb

"Sheaves", the straw or the thing that is called sheaves, also some sort of bad type of grain, "mouthful of a lamb", this a lamb eats.

Speaker 2: What is a lamb in Yiddish?

Speaker 1: A little sheep, a type.

Speaker 2: "A thin part of straw", he says. Okay.

Speaker 1: What does it mean a lamb is a little sheep?

Speaker 2: "A little sheep in general".

Measures of Carrying Out on Shabbat - Animal Foods, Wood, Spices, Seeds and More

Continuation of Animal Food Measures

Sheaves and Grasses

Sheaves, the straw or the thing that is called sheaves, also some sort of bad type of grain, mouthful of a lamb. This a lamb eats. What is a lamb in Yiddish? A little sheep, a type. But the thin part of the straw, he says. Okay. What does lamb mean? A little sheep. And a kid? A little goat. Okay. One needs to put pictures of all these things. Small animals. Grasses, mouthful of a kid. This is the order that a kid eats.

Garlic Leaves and Onion Leaves

Garlic leaves and onion leaves, little leaves of garlic or onion. So thus, if they were moist, the measure is large, because a person eats them. A person also eats the outer layers of garlic or onions. Or perhaps "leaves" doesn't mean the outer layers, but perhaps the leaves that grow on the... on the actual leaves. Yes. And dry, dry garlic or onion leaves, is no longer a human food, so mouthful of a kid.

Doubtful Moist and Dry - They Combine Leniently

Says the Rambam, what happens if part of it was moist and part dry? So thus, if they combine with each other according to their stringency. If part of it is, one doesn't go stringently and say that, let's say, mouthful of a kid is smaller, yes, seemingly it's smaller. One doesn't say that one goes stringently, but they combine according to their leniency, one looks at everything as the more lenient.

But why? If it's a doubt, why shouldn't one go stringently? We hold that a Torah doubt goes stringently.

For Example - Grain Straw and Legume Straw

For example, one took out grain straw and legume straw, and mixed in both of them a cow's mouthful, he is exempt, because legumes are not for a cow but for a camel. And a camel's mouthful, liable. And so all similar cases regarding Shabbat, one goes leniently.

Why exactly? Why shouldn't one say that it's a Torah doubt? It's not a doubt, it's a matter of which is stronger. Contradiction. Okay.

The Logic of Kal Vachomer in Measures

On the contrary. He says that usually it goes the opposite. That is, seemingly it's a logical thing. Let's say, by grain and legumes, a camel eats grain, eats legumes, but all the more so he eats grain, grain tastes better. So if you give, bring out... or the opposite, I don't remember legumes, I don't know which is better.

The point is, the lightest of the light is usually a thing that can work, the stringent can work for the light, but the light cannot work for the stringent. That's the logic. It's a practical logic seemingly. Or look not at all, which is always so. I would think that there's always such a type of logic. The lighter measure means the larger measure, right? The larger measure is useful, it's more useful, there's already more. If you say less, what should I do with grass with a bit more straw, like a kid. The kid won't eat it.

Measure of Wood

Okay. One who takes out wood, wood, the measure is enough to cook the size of a dried fig from a chicken egg. That is, the wood is used to make a fire, to cook. But we'll tell you, cook the smallest food, the food that takes the quickest, so one needs little wood for this. What is the quickest? An egg from a chicken, is not a large egg, and an egg but when it's beaten with oil and placed in a pot, one has already put oil, beaten with oil means whipped with oil, and placed in a pot, and then it takes very quickly. An egg dish with oil cooks very quickly, one needs only a bit of wood. So that is a small measure of wood.

Measure of Reed

One who takes out a reed, reed is from the straw family, enough to make a quill that reaches to its top. It must be enough to be able to make from it a pen. With a reed one can insert ink and use it like a pen. But a tiny pen that is enough that he should be able to grasp with his fingertips. And if it was thick or crushed, if it's thick, obviously it's not made to make into a pen, or it's crushed, it won't hold ink, its measure is like wood. And this is so because one also used it usually to heat, so there's a measure like wood.

Measure of Spices

One who takes out spices, the minimum spice, which food is a small food that a little bit of spice helps? Enough to season an egg, that one needs to spice, to put the spices on an egg. And obviously we see that indeed if one has a bit of one spice and from the other spice it's together.

Different Spices - Any Amount

And now one will enumerate different types of spices where the measure is even smaller than enough to season an egg, because if a person carries it it's a sign that he has a need for it, or one uses these types even in any amount. Because it's very powerful, a thing that has a very strong smell, even a drop of it works.

Pepper, I mean pepper, any amount. Tar, it was already tar, I mean, by the things that one may or may not use by the lights, is any amount. Good fragrance, he doesn't mean that one carries the smell, he means an oil that has a good smell, is any amount. Also bad smell is any amount. Types of spices, any amount.

Good purple, what does it say here by good? Good. Good, versus... Okay, any amount. Versus not. Purple is an expensive thing, so any amount. Even a good piece, he brings that one can use it as a sample to show. If it's not a good piece, one needs to have a measure of cloth for weaving.

Rose bud, a rose that hasn't yet opened, that is still a bud, interesting language, is one. Indeed when it's already opened it seems the measure becomes something else, but when it's still closed it's still strong, the smell from it is strong, and so even one.

Types of Metals and Things from the Side of Holiness

Hard types of metals, hard metals, such as copper and iron, any amount.

Dust from the altar, an interesting law. Things that have importance from the side of law, indeed if it's just a bit of sand it's worth nothing, but if it's sand that crumbled from the altar, or from altar stones, or from what was cut from books, from a Torah scroll fell crumbs, crumbled parchment from an old Torah scroll, or with pieces from the mantle of the Torah scroll, also the measure any amount.

"The case of a turban one puts it away for burial". Usually, when one doesn't use it, even a bit of it, one puts away for burial. But one needs to speak to one needs, any amount? Okay. We already learned the law, it speaks of a Torah scroll, and a case has the holiness of Hashem's name, that it has holiness and one must bury it. Yes, one must bury it, but here he says that because one buries, even a bit of it has importance.

Coal and Flame

"Coal any amount". Also any amount. "And one who takes out a flame is exempt". Master of the Universe, he carries a flame, but he carries it on nothing. For example, I don't know, he lit his finger.

What does it mean he carries it with nothing? On his garment or what? It seems that he puts on a small match, a small toothpick, there's no measure of carrying out, somehow. But he takes coal, flame, flame doesn't count. But a bit of coal is basically a stick that has on it fire.

No, it means that anything that can hold fire the measure is any amount. A large piece is called coal, because the fact is a crumb. But flame, one cannot take a flame without anything. Something must be. But flame itself is has no substance.

Yes, about this I'm saying something. The flame caught on something, I don't know, he manages to hold it on his hand or on his coat, I don't know, on his clothing. He doesn't carry the thing of the flame, but the flame itself. Has no substance. In any case, flame doesn't count. Okay.

Measure of Garden Seeds

"One who takes out garden seeds", kernels that are made to plant, the measure is even less than a dried fig. Because when it's made to eat the measure is a dried fig, but this is made to plant. And what is indeed the measure?

"From squash seeds", squash is called squash, I don't know whatever it is, "two". "From gourd seeds", I mean it's things that are listed in this week's Torah portion, yes, it was last week's portion. "From gourd seeds two, from Egyptian bean seeds", a type of bundle, "two".

Fibers

And fibers, fibers is a bit of wick from broom or from something, enough to put on the opening of a goldsmith's furnace, it catches fire easily. Goldsmiths want to put on their furnace, on the thing from which fire comes out, they put a layer of crumbs that should ignite quickly. The little bit that one puts on the opening of a goldsmith's furnace, from goldsmiths, is the measure.

Measure of Madder

One who takes out madder, madder is also some sort of wick of dye. The other part of the measure depends. He will say thus, if for eating, its measure is like a dried fig, like all eating measures. If for an animal, like the smallest animal measure, its measure is a kid's mouthful. Good. And if for dyeing, it seems that one uses it to paint, enough to dye a small garment, when one needs to paint a small garment.

Palm Branches of Boxwood and Carobs

Palm branches of boxwood and carobs, leaves from boxwood tree and boxwood tree, whatever that means, before they become sweet, when it's not yet sweet, it's not yet fit for human consumption, like a dried fig. On the contrary, but people eat it before it gets sweetness, and after when it gets sweetness it goes for animals, it seems. So as long as it's fit for human food, the measure is human food like a dried fig. But when it's already more animal food, it's like a kid's mouthful.

But leek and mustard and lupines and all other things eaten while unripe, these things one eats through pickling, a person eats it, he makes a pickle from it. But all these other things that one soaks at home, before they become sweet, the measure is like a dried fig. Because it's always eaten by people through pickling, therefore it's like a dried fig.

Measure of Pits

One who takes out pits, kernels, if for eating, is five, five kernels is the measure. If for kindling, is for heating, as we learned how much it is to make a small fire for a beaten egg, we had there. And if for counting, it seems that one would keep kernels to count, two. The smallest number that one needs to have to count is two. Okay, it's interesting. Usually one needs to have it because one wants to count larger numbers, but this is the minimum of counting.

And if for planting, I say, but one doesn't use it with two, but this is the minimum. And if for planting two. A person, planting is also two. Why two? It seems that from one doesn't grow.

Measures of Carrying Out for Various Objects - Continuation

Kernels - Measure of Two

Speaker 1: And for counting, it seems that one would keep kernels to count, so two. The smallest number that one needs to have to count is two. Okay, it's interesting, because one needs to have it because one wants to count larger numbers. Ah, good, it's the minimum of counting, yes.

And for planting, I understand that one doesn't use it with two, but it's the minimum. And for planting, two. A person who plants is also two. Why two? It seems that from one doesn't yet grow, because the minimum measure that one plants is two kernels. The earlier ones already also saw that the minimum is two.

Hyssop - Measures for Different Uses

Speaker 1: For sprinkling, to sprinkle how much one needs to have hyssop. One uses hyssop. One who takes out hyssop, a type of plant, a type of grass, for eating, when the animals put together. For eating the measure is like a dried fig, for an animal the measure is a kid's mouthful, for wood, as we already said, the wood measure to make on an egg. For sprinkling, to sprinkle, because one uses it for purification, one uses hyssop and crimson thread, yes, so the measure is as much as one needs to sprinkle with it.

Innovation: Measure According to Torah Use

Measures of Carrying on Shabbos – Materials and Their Minimum Measures (Continued)

Speaker 1: It's interesting, this is already the second time, that when something is used for a Torah purpose, one must look at what the Torah measure for it is. As he says regarding "matzni'in ligenizah" (items set aside for burial). I think it's also because these things are practiced this way, I mean not just a decree of Scripture, that this is the measure for that thing, yes.

Nut Shells, Pomegranate Shells, and Dye Materials

Speaker 1: "Hamotzi klipei egozim uklipei rimonim," shells from nuts or from pomegranates, "o istis ufu'ah veshorshei hatzov'im," things that are used in paint, the measure is "kedei litzbo'a bahen beged katan." He tells us what is "beged katan." Earlier too he already said "beged katan." What is the measure? What does "beged katan" mean, the smallest? The smallest garment, he said, the smallest garment of a newborn baby. What is the "beged katan"? "Sevachah shemani'chin benot ashirim," such a small little hat that is placed on the heads of daughters, that is the smallest measure, the smallest garment.

Chemicals for Cleaning

Speaker 1: There are two points there. "Lachen, hamotzi mei aglah ben rabban," which is used as a chemical, "o neter alexandrit, o borit karshinah, o ashlag," these are types of chemicals, "vesha'ar kol minei menakkim," things that are used for cleaning, the measure is "kedei lechabes bo beged katan," to take such a small garment and wash it out.

Pre-Soaked Dyes – Prepared Paint

Speaker 1: "Hotza'at semanim sheruyin," one who took out dyes that are already soaked to be able to paint with them, something that has already been made into paint, not like the previous ones which will be an ingredient for the paint, one needs to have much less, because it's put in after the paint is made. "Kedei litzbo'a bo dugma la'oreg," a small measure, one who is a weaver, one who makes garments and needs to show his customer his colors, is a small measure how much one needs to have for the sample.

Ink

Ink on the Pen

Speaker 1: "Hamotzi deyo al hakulmus," ink that is already on the pen.

Speaker 2: No, if it's already on the pen he is liable for the pen.

Speaker 1: He means ink that is used with the pen.

Speaker 2: No, it's used both together. He is liable for the pen.

Speaker 1: "Shi'uro..." Why is he talking about the ink? He means "deyo al hakulmus," he means ink that will be used immediately on the pen. We'll look later, later he talks about it by itself. Okay, "shi'uro kedei lichtov mimenu shtei otiyot."

Ink in an Inkwell – One Needs More

Speaker 1: But "hamotzi et hadeyo bifnei atzmo," if "bekeset," which is a vessel in which the ink is held, "tzarich sheyehei bo yoter al zeh," he must have more than two letters, because a little will remain on the vessel, one needs enough that it should come onto the pen "kedei lichtov shtei otiyot." But if it's already on the pen, then, let's say that a portion of it we know will be lost, because it remains on the bottle, it remains on the vessel into which it's poured.

Doubtful Case: Combination of Inkwell and Pen

Speaker 1: "Hayah bekeset uvichli kedei ot achat, vehayah bakulmus kedei ot achat, o badeyo levado kedei ot achat uvakulmus kedei ot achat, harei zeh safek."

Question: Why Not Liable for the Inkwell Itself?

Speaker 1: But all these things I want to understand, for the inkwell one will be liable for carrying out the inkwell. Maybe it's a bit of a different question. Or perhaps the inkwell is nullified to the ink. The same thing I'm thinking about the pen, it's a bit interesting. Either nullified, or he didn't ask about it at all. Not for now. One must look later at the rules what this might mean.

Carried Out Two Letters and Wrote Them Outside Its Place

Speaker 1: Okay, "hotzi shtayim uchtavan chutz limkomo." Interesting.

Speaker 2: No, in practice, he already carried ink measuring two letters, "uchtavan chutz limkomo," before he landed he wrote it.

Speaker 1: You must mean that he didn't make any hanachah (setting down).

Speaker 2: What does that mean? We say that when he arrived there was no longer any ink there.

Speaker 1: But he is liable, "keshe'haytah lo hanachah sham." When he put it down on the paper, then it was put down.

Speaker 2: What does that mean? If the hanachah was... what does that mean? If the akirah (picking up) and the hanachah was in the same place, in such a case, afterwards he comes into a reshut hayachid...

Speaker 1: Right, we're talking about "hotzi," he went out from reshut hayachid to reshut harabim. "Uchtavan" at the same time, no difference, because he put it down on the paper, that is it.

Carried Out One Letter and Wrote It, and Returned and Carried Out a Second

Speaker 1: "Hotzi ot achat uchtavah," he took out ink measuring one letter "uchtavah," and he wrote it, "vechazar vehotzi sheniyah uchtavah," then he is exempt. Then he is indeed exempt, because there were two separate hotza'ot (acts of carrying out), and each hotza'ah was less than the measure. What does it mean? Not lacking in the first akirah. I'm not sure what the Hebrew translation is.

Kechol – Eye Cream

Speaker 1: Okay, yes, it's also a type of ink, a type of... again, "hamotzi kechol." Yes, kechol is something that is smeared on the eyes. Sometimes it's done for healing, sometimes it's done for adornment. How much is the measure? As much as one needs to have from the kechol, the cream that is called kechol, "kedei lichol ayin achat," to smear on one eye.

Distinction by Place – One Eye or Two Eyes

Speaker 1: "Uvemakom she'ein darkhan lehitkashet ela bichilat shtei einayim," by all these measures one goes with the smallest use that one would ever use the thing. It seems that generally, even to paint one eye is called a finished thing. But in places where it's not customary to go with only one eye, "hotzi lehitkashet," he took out kechol "lehitkashet ayin achat," is only half a measure. "Ad sheyotzi kedei lichol shtei einayim" he must have a larger measure.

Innovation: Measure Changes According to Place

Speaker 1: It's a bit interesting, because until now we haven't had this distinction between "bemakom." Yes, we had a good minimum. The minimum. It's said that one eye is also a minimum. It's said that one eye is only half the work. Okay. On this there is actually a dispute about the halachic ruling. The Rambam learned this way about... there is a... I saw here... the Ra'avad somewhat disagrees with the halacha. One must look in the Gemara.

Discussion in the Gemara: City Women and Village Women

Speaker 1: Because in the Gemara it says that there are those who conduct themselves to apply kechol to only one eye, and therefore... how is this... yes... it says in the Mishnah, "hakochelet ayin achat." The Gemara asks, what does this mean? One never does this. Rabbeinu said, yes, there are modest women who do this, because they cover their faces. And the Gemara says that the truly modest women would not leave two eyes uncovered. One eye is enough to see, you know... but the eye needs makeup, of course. Not so modest as to not even put makeup on the eyes. Someone teaches the girls that there's a special sin to put makeup on the eyes, which didn't even occur to the modest women of the Gemara, who would only apply kechol to one eye.

But anyway, the Gemara asks, doesn't it say in another place that one needs two eyes? The Gemara answers, "hacha be'ironiyot, hatam bevenot kefarim." Ironiyot, Rashi explains, are village women from the city, no? So, Rashi says this, ironiyot means village women, who don't need as much modesty, because there are no men around there, it's a more private place. Therefore they don't do that. So the Rambam understood that therefore it depends on which place. Why would the Rambam... the Ra'avad not agree? I don't know, I have a note, I don't understand why the Ra'avad disagrees. Um... I'm not sure, I don't understand why the Ra'avad disagrees. Anyway, we'll continue.

Pitch and Sulfur – To Seal a Hole

Speaker 1: Okay, "zefet vegofrit, kedei listom nekev." It means that pitch was used, when it's placed on a place and it's sharp, it seeps through and makes a hole.

Speaker 2: Wax, the measure of wax... I have a doubt about the word "zefet vegofrit," does it mean that it's sharp and makes a hole?

Speaker 1: No, no, it doesn't make a hole. Rather... it means "kedei listom nekev"? It means something that one places... one covers the hole, and in this one makes a hole.

Speaker 2: No, one does make, yes, yes, but in this one makes a hole, that's what he says. In this one makes... one places it on the... it means the wood, that when one will cut into the wood there will be... there won't be a good hole. One first puts in a piece of pitch, and in the pitch one makes a hole. It's enough to plug the larger hole and make a smaller hole, basically.

Wax – To Place on the Opening of a Small Hole

Speaker 1: Wax is "kedei" to cover the "nekev katan, kedei litein al pi nekev katan." It means that one made a hole in the barrel to take out wine, but one covers that hole with... with wax.

Glue – To Place on the Head of the Trap

Speaker 1: "Devek," glue, "kedei litein berosh hashavshevet." And this is something that needs glue, I know. I mean it's something that drives away the birds that come, so one puts... okay, something like that. It's a thing that conveys the object, I don't know what he means.

Fat – To Smear Under a Wafer the Size of a Sela

Speaker 1: "Revav, kedei limsho'ach..." to apply fat is fatness, "kedei limsho'ach tachat rakik kesela." As much as one needs to smear when one bakes a wafer, one bakes a small bread whose measure is as large as a sela, one needs to have a little oil.

Earth – To Make a Seal on a Letter

Speaker 1: "Hamotzi adamah," what is the measure? "Kedei la'asot chotam al igeret." The seal was made with earth, it seems. It means one pressed a seal into the earth, as with other seals with wax. In the earth one sealed.

Clay – To Make the Opening of a Goldsmith's Furnace

Speaker 1: "Tit kedei la'asot pi kur shel tzoruf zahav," to make an opening of the furnace, of the oven that the goldsmith uses to light.

Manure – To Fertilize a Leek Patch

Speaker 1: "Zevel lach dak" the measure is "kedei lezabel bo kerishah," how much one needs to have to fertilize the earth where there grows a small piece of earth where one needs to grow one piece of kerishah, whatever, a type of vegetable.

"Chol gas," coarse sand, thick sand, "kedei le'arev bemelo kaf shel sidan sid," in the plaster it seems when one made plaster, one put in a bit of sand, how much one needs for one spoonful of plaster.

"Charsit," charsit is from the language of cheres, some burnt clay, he says, "kedei la'asot" also "pi kur shel tzoruf zahav."

"Se'ar," hair, "kedei ligbol tit la'asot pi kur," in clay one mixed in hair, it seems it's to make it harder or something, how much one needs for clay also to make the opening of a goldsmith's furnace. The opening of a goldsmith's furnace is a small measure that is used for several things.

"Sid," plaster itself is "kedei lasud etzba ketanah shel banot," to cover a small finger of a girl with plaster. Plaster it seems was used to give a color or something.

"Afar ve'efer," sand or ash, "kedei lechasot dam tzipor ketanah," one needs kisui hadam (covering the blood), one needs to use earth or ash, to cover the blood. A lot.

"Tzeror even," do you know how much is a tzipor ketanah? What is the smallest bird? Am I saying it right? I don't know.

"Tzeror even," "kedei lizrok bivhemah vetirgish," enough of a small stone that one should throw at an animal and the animal should feel it. As the Mishnah says in Eruvin, one throws it at things. Yes, a small measure.

"Cheres kedei lekabel bo revi'it." The measure of a small piece of pottery is the smallest small piece of pottery.

"Hamotzi chevel," a rope, "kedei la'asot ozen lekupah." For a bag, a sack, one needs to have an ear, a holder, a handle. This is the measure for a rope.

"Gemi" is also a small plant, but I think it's used like a rope, "kedei la'asot talui lenafah velichvarah." Also to make a thing to be able to hang a sieve or a strainer.

"Chitzin," also a type of grasses or small pieces from which one can make something similar to a rope, "kedei la'asot ozen lekupat hamitzrit." To make with this an ear, also a holder. Kupat hamitzrit is like our baskets, a woven basket, and the chitzin is also such a type of thing. It's an ear for this. It's like a lulav, as one makes from a lulav such woven things, from the chitzin one can make such a thing to hold the sack, the kupat hamitzrit.

"Siv," also some type of thing. Siv is the outside of the palm tree, one of the pieces that is around the tree of a date palm, "kedei litein al pi mashpech katan shel yayin." A funnel for wine one places such a piece so it should come out nicely or something like that.

"Mochin," cotton, "kedei la'asot kadur keveitzah." To make from it a small cotton ball whose measure is like an egg.

"Eitzim," a tree, "kedei la'asot tarvad." Tarvad is a small spoon, he says.

"Zechuchit," a piece of glass, "kedei ligror bo rosh hakarkad." The measure that one needs to have, one uses it to sharpen a needle or something. The point of a karkad is a tool that is used in sewing. The glass it seems is a sharp thing, one sharpens with it, that the head of the karkad should become sharp enough "az yuchal lishnot nimin ke'achat," that he should be able to cut two threads at once. Okay.

Measures of Carrying for Hair and Thread

Further, "hamotzi shtei nimin," ah, so with hair such things, always two is something the measure. "Shtei horiyot," what does he say here a bit? "Min zenav hasus o zenav haparah," from the tail of a horse or from a cow, is two. When the father says it, "hamotzi shtayim chayav," he means to say this is the measure, whatever, Tosafot says the nusach, the language. "Hotzi achat min hakasheh shebachazir chayav," because a pig has somewhat harder hairs somewhere in its tail, and then one can already use one. One can use it, he says, the shoemaker uses it for such a needle, for such a needle, then he is liable.

"Nitzrei dekel ve'ein chutei ve'eitz," ah, you didn't know that nitzrei dekel, nitzrei dekel is the little strings from the wood of a palm tree, is two, further only two can one use for something. But "chorei dekel ve'ein klipei hachariyot," one must turn more at the kollelim in Florida to know what we're talking about, this is the outside, is one, is one. In short, the point is, the two is soft, is the one something useful, I don't know exactly.

Measure for Wool, Cotton, Silk, and Similar Materials

"Mitzemer gefen," tzemer gefen means cotton, yes. "Mitzemer kelach," also something that is made from a... ah, he says that tzemer kelach is silk, silk. "Vetzemer gemalim ve'arnavim vechayah shebayam," and all other types of things from which one can make threads, is "kedei litvot chut orech arba'ah tefachim," one must be able to spin from this a thread of four tefachim. Yes, Friday he said "kemelo hasit," now he doesn't say anymore in tefachim, interesting. This is the same thing, right? Yes, yes, I think so. Sit kaful.

Measures of Carrying for Cloth, Sackcloth, and Leather

Rambam's Words:

"Hamotzi min habeged o min hasak o min ha'or," not already a sewn piece of merchandise, beit se'udah, now he says, a piece from a garment, merchandise, or from sackcloth, or from leather. Sackcloth I think means a garment made from straw or something like that. Then, "keshem shi'uran letamei, kach shi'uran leta'ot." There are measures of tumah, what is the minimum of a garment that receives tumah? And it makes sense, and it's the minimum garment. The same thing "leta'ot."

"Habeged," a garment made from proper merchandise, is "sheloshah al sheloshah." Yes, three tefachim by three tefachim. "Hasak," yes, you know that it says "sheloshah" in feminine language, one knows that it's tefachim. When it says "shalosh" in masculine language, one knows that it means amah, yes? Do you know the secret?

Digression: Grammar Rule for Measures

Because with numbers it goes opposite to all of lashon hakodesh, if you want to learn grammar. Anyway, you know, yes, that in grammar one says "shalosh amot" and "sheloshah tefachim." Although amah is feminine language, one doesn't say "amot." Right. So "shalosh" for feminine, and "arba'ah," which usually with a hei is feminine, with numbers it's opposite, with a hei is masculine, without a hei is feminine. As if masculine and feminine, whatever. So anyway, for three it's "sheloshah," it comes out that it's tefachim.

All the time you'll see, one says "arba" means amot, and "arba'ah" means tefachim.

Continuation: Measures of Cloth, Sackcloth, and Leather

"Hasak" is "arba'ah al arba'ah," sackcloth is four by four. "Veha'or" is "chamishah al chamishah," leather is five by five.

A sack is four by four. It's very large, yes, we're talking here about large measurements. Here the measurements become large, five tefachim by five tefachim. Earlier we were talking about a needle point, yes. But a garment, according to reality, yes, a garment is not a tissue that one can use less of. It's a garment, what can one do? So leather must be larger, five by five.

Measurements of Hotza'ah (Carrying Out) for Leather According to Stages of Processing

Now, we spoke last time about leather, let's continue speaking.

The Rambam's Words:

One who carries out leather that has not been processed at all, it is still soft, not leather that is already a garment, leather that has had nothing done to it yet, it's still moist, then its measurement is enough to wrap the smallest weight among weights. One can only use it for something as a weight. What does a weight mean? One makes from this a sack to place on the other side of the scale, one must have an honest weight. Ah, la'atzor means to wrap, not to use. La'atzor means to cover. Ah, the pieces of metal that one uses on the scale, one must wrap them with something.

If it was processed, yes. If it was salted and had been treated with gall-nut or with alum, that means it's already yes somewhat processed, but not completely. These are three stages of leather processing, we've already seen in several places.

The measurement is enough to write an amulet on it. An amulet is the smallest thing that one can write on it, this one can already write. Ah, right, but it seems that on an amulet one can write on something that is not completely processed, because there isn't, an amulet is after all an amulet, it's magic, whatever, I don't know exactly. He says that amulet means to cover an amulet, I don't know what he told him. Ah, to cover an amulet, he brings from Peirush HaMishnayos, because one cannot yet write on this leather. Yes, like tefillin that covers an amulet, yes, that sort of thing. Interesting. Like we use leather to wrap machzorim and such things. It seems that the avnei tzedek that was used was also a holy vessel. I had an esrog box that had avnei tzedek yihyu lach, which must be an exact measurement for a mitzvah.

If it was animal hide and the law is that it is not processed with alum, that means it is yes tanned but not with alum, then its measurement is enough to write a get on it. Then one can already yes write, but then it's not enough for an amulet, one must be able to write a get on it. A get is twelve lines, I don't know, perhaps a smaller get? Not clear. Yes, seemingly with our gittin one assumes that the measurement is quite large. Later one will see that there is a measurement of writing a mezuzah, Parashas Shema, not even a mezuzah, the parshah of Shema, I don't know. Does one see here that a get is smaller? Not clear. Or it means, yes, there are those who say that... okay, one must be precise.

When its processing is completed, one has already finished processing the leather, then one goes back to what we learned earlier that the leather is five by five.

Measurement for Processed Parchment

One who carries out processed parchment, it seems there is a level, a garment of leather is more processed than parchment, it's something else, not the same thing, I don't think so. Yes, it could even be that something that is less important will have a smaller measurement or a larger measurement, because one doesn't use it for cheaper purposes. Perhaps it makes sense? Yes. Do you mean? It should make sense that a garment should be a piece of merchandise is one piece of merchandise, one thread and suddenly a garment. Because one doesn't use a garment, what one uses is a thread. Merchandise isn't one thread. He means to say a thread is four tefachim that... okay. Yes. You should by this minute. A motzi.

Measurements of Hotza'ah: Parchment, Paper, Animals, and Tumah

One Who Carries Out Parchment and Paper

I think it makes sense. It should make sense that a garment should be a piece of merchandise, one piece of merchandise, one thread, and suddenly a garment, because one doesn't use a garment what one uses is a thread. Merchandise is not one thread, do you mean to say a thread is four tefachim... okay.

Yes, it has to do with what one uses. One who carries out parchment, we're talking about parchment, not leather. Leather is not parchment, right? Parchment that one can already yes write properly, very densely. One needs enough to write on it Parashas Shema until u'shartam, that is seemingly one parshah, it's called in the Gemara parshah ketanah sheb'tefillin, yes? This one can use for tefillin, and the smallest parshah in tefillin is Parashas Shema. The question is, why does one not use this for tefillin but for a mezuzah, enough to write a mezuzah on it, a complete mezuzah. It's a bit longer, yes? Shema with V'haya im shamo'a.

Paper, paper, enough to write on it kesher mochsin, which are larger than our letters. Usually paper one uses to write on, but here there is some measurement, it must be a bit larger than two letters. By the way, all measurements of writing are something like two letters. Here it must be especially large letters, like a mochsan, I think he means the one who takes the stamp, the tax, he writes on it such a signature, such a thing, a signature that he has already paid the tax, such a receipt for the tax, that sort of thing. And they write a bit larger? That must be, I don't know why.

One Who Carries Out Kesher Mochsin and a Paid Document

One who carries out kesher mochsin, he finds the kesher mochsin itself, he is liable. Not he finds, he takes out, what does he say, motzi. Even though he already showed it to the tax collector and was exempted with it, that means, ah, he doesn't need this anymore. He already showed the tax stamp, yes? One knows that one already paid the tax. A receipt, yes. Such a receipt. But it is still fit forever, even though he already went out with this piece of kesher mochsin, still, it's still worth something. Later tomorrow someone will come as proof, he will see that he paid. Or he means that he uses it for other proofs, he sees that he is an honest Jew, he pays taxes. Okay.

Anyway, one who carries out a paid document and erased paper, a paid-off document or erased paper, then it's not usable for anything. A paid document, even though it's proof, no, it's not proof of anything. A receipt in a store is proof that you pay tax, but there it makes a difference, but just such a paid document one cannot prove anything with. Or erased paper has nothing written on it, then it is enough to wrap the opening of a small flask of perfume, meaning a small bottle, he can use it for a small bottle cover.

And if there is on it enough to write two letters, which is what we learned earlier, what the measurement of paper is, he is liable, which is not worse than just a piece of paper.

One Who Carries Out Animal, Beast and Bird – A Living Thing Carries Itself

Good. Now we're going to learn about animals, a new type of burden. One who carries out an animal, beast or bird, even though they are alive, is liable. A person takes out any living creature, even if it's still alive, an animal, he is liable. But a living person, once it's a person, that is the rule, which means chai nosei es atzmo, that if a person carries another person, he is exempt, why? Because it doesn't mean that you're carrying a person, a person is a person, one doesn't carry him. Even if one does carry him yes, it's not an accounting.

But if he was bound or sick, if the person is tied up or he is sick, he cannot walk by himself, then one who carries him out is liable, because then it doesn't mean that he carries himself, because he can no longer walk by himself.

She Walked Her Son

Here is already another thing which is seemingly permitted, she walked her son, a woman may like walk with her child, even though he cannot yet walk properly, but she pushes him so one foot after another, as long as he takes one and places one, that means if she must lift him and both feet lift off the ground, basically she's carrying it. Like we had the beams together earlier, remember? Like one has a long piece of wood and one turns it over, the whole thing was never in the air. Here it's exactly the same thing. She doesn't hold the child in the air, because the whole time the child has one foot on the ground.

I think the heter is not about that. The whole thing was forbidden. Here it is seemingly permitted. I think that this is like a type of chai nosei es atzmo. Like I can walk with a large person holding his hand, because he walks by himself. The question is when does a small boy, a small baby, when does he begin to walk by himself? Certainly the boy, he cannot walk completely by himself, he needs his mother's help, he needs his mother's teaching to be there. But it's enough that he can move one foot and then another foot, so he walks by himself. That's how I understand the halacha.

But in any case it must also at least not be called hotza'ah, not a bad situation. Because we learned there that as long as the whole time a piece of it is on the ground, it's not completely lifted. Okay, it's not your chiddush, it's my chiddush, but do you agree with it?

What doesn't have to do with the law of hilchos Shabbos, and hamotzi? It's very similar. It's both a law in hotza'ah, or it's not hotza'ah because... no, it's not similar. Because he says "notel achas v'nosen achas". It's not similar, because what does it mean? One doesn't hold it in the air. But one cannot drag a person. One may not drag anything. Dragging means yes hotza'ah. But this doesn't mean dragging. Like we learned there, that a large thing where the whole time a part of it is on the ground, it touches, one rolls it, is exempt. But here it says that it's permitted. Okay, so there is a heter, because it's important for that person, first of all. The answer is because he walks by himself.

One Who Carries Out a Living Infant with a Purse Hanging on His Neck

Now, one who carries out a living infant, ah, he takes out a living infant, with a purse hanging on his neck, and the infant has hanging on his neck a... a purse? Kis, a bag, a purse, a small bag with money. Then he is liable for the purse, because the purse is not secondary to the infant. For the infant he is exempt, because chai nosei es atzmo. But the purse does not become nullified to the infant. Why? I don't know why. Because certainly, if it were an adult one would see that it is yes exempt. By an infant, it seems an infant with a purse has no connection. An infant has nothing to do with a purse. Either you're making a trick, or the infant goes to play with it, but that doesn't mean that the purse goes, that the purse is nullified to the infant. Even a cup and other things of an adult. But one who carries out an adult, even though he is dressed in his clothes, and his rings on his hand, he goes even with rings on his hands, he goes with various things, then he is exempt even for the clothes, even for the garments, because everything is secondary to him.

He says, that's not correct. Perhaps a cushion for an adult he is also exempt? He says no. Or an adult, if you carry out things that are normal to wear, yes. A cushion with an infant doesn't count, but an adult it seems yes, that you see something. We will look soon at another place about this.

But if his clothes were folded on his shoulder, he goes just with clothes folded, laid together on his shoulders, he is not dressed in clothes, but clothes that he holds on himself, he is carrying them, then he is liable. That means, it's not a trick that one can take out a living person with things, things that are truly nullified to him, is exempt. By carrying out a dead person for burial there is the matter of how much clothing one can put on that it should still be called nullified, but it's a different sugya. If one may do, we're talking folded, that one cannot do.

One Who Carries Out a Locust and a Vineyard Bird

Now we're going to learn further about living things, but here the aspect is what makes it worse, not larger. Do you already know why? Why is... ah, animal. Animal we learned that it's alive. So be it. One who carries out a living locust of any amount, a living locust is of any amount. Why? Because it's a measurement, a living thing has a measurement. Because it's an important thing, a creature, a whole locust, because it's a creature. And the Gemara brings what one uses it for, that a child should play with it. One can have some use with a... one doesn't look only as food, as something to eat. Dead, like a dried fig, then one needs a measurement like a dried fig, otherwise one cannot do anything with it.

A vineyard bird, a type of bird that hangs around in the vineyard, a small bird it seems, whether alive or dead, no difference if it lives or is dead, both are equal. Why? Because a non-kosher one cannot be eaten, and a dead one is less than a dried fig. But if one preserves it for medicine, if one uses it for medicine, it has some aspect of medicine the dead vineyard bird, even a little, for medicine a little is enough, so therefore it is liable. Liable for anything similar to this.

The Dead Body, Carcass and Sheretz – The Measurement of Tumah is Like the Measurement of Hotza'ah

The dead body, carcass and sheretz, these three things, as is the measurement of their tumah so is the measurement of their hotza'ah. Just as the measurement of tumah, so is the measurement of hotza'ah. Like the previous things we already learned that tumah and hotza'ah go with the same measurements. A dead body and carcass with a kezayis, because a kezayis from a dead body or from a carcass is metamei, and the sheretz is not metamei with a kezayis but with an adashah, and therefore for a sheretz like an adashah.

It's interesting that one doesn't look at the measurement like we looked regarding lehatzni'a, if there is a concept to bury, what was there? Like by a dead body. Perhaps indeed that, the measurement to bury a dead body is only a piece that is larger than a kezayis. Simply, yes, that is metamei. There is such a halacha. Metamei. There is such a halacha. Yes, one is very strongly drawn to suspect blood that one found, it could be that it's not blood. Perhaps that is liable, if it's truly dam niddah.

One Who Carried Out Half a Kezayis from an Exact Kezayis – A Melachah She'einah Tzrichah L'gufah

I just wanted to say, an exact kezayis. Yes, what if there was an interesting case? There was there an exact kezayis of carcass or dead body, and he carried out from it half a kezayis, he took out only half an olive. Seemingly he should say he did nothing, he took less than a measurement. But he is liable, why? Because he benefited with his action that the measurement of tumah became exact. This is very interesting, he did accomplish something yes. Forget that before there was tumah, there was in the house, let's say, a measurement of a kezayis from a dead body is metamei. Now he took out half of the kezayis, he purified the house, it was an important hotza'ah. This is seemingly a melachah she'einah tzrichah l'gufah, which the Rambam holds is liable. Very, right, it makes sense.

But one who carries out half a kezayis from a kezayis and a half, is exempt. If there was more than a kezayis, and it doesn't matter, he is exempt. Liable for anything similar from other tumahs. He says, a good point, that seemingly this means a melachah she'einah tzrichah l'gufah. Very good, but according to the Rambam it is liable anyways. Very good, so he also says about the dogs.

The Rule: One is Only Liable for the Need of the Measurement

Okay, now we're going to take the rule from all these things, you shouldn't think that all these things are a decree of Scripture that this is the measurement. We're talking about all these things one is only liable for the need of the measurement, then it is worth like simply, not need all these things.

Measurements of Hotza'ah: Rules and Definitions

The Rule of Measurements of Hotza'ah – Hotza'ah for Seed, for Medicine, for a Sample

Speaker 1: Very good, so he also says below.

Okay, now we're going to learn the rule from all these things. You shouldn't think that this is all a decree of Scripture that this is the measurement. More than a minute, all these things, hotza'ah with a measurement applies, then when he carries out simply, he doesn't have there some interest, he has some intention in the hotza'ah. He takes out this, each thing has a measurement like we have all these measurements.

Ah, when he carries out for seed, for medicine, or to show from it a sample, and similar to this, these are three ways that one can think that one takes even a little. For seed, because he's going to plant the amount, like we saw earlier, even for seed. Now, for those things, simply one doesn't need less than two, but someone wants specifically to plant one. Or for medicine, he has some recipe for medicine, and in medicine is something that often the recipe is small, so he takes only a little. Or to show from it a sample, he doesn't want to sell, he only wants to give to taste, to show a sample. And similar to this, any other reason that he has a reason to take less, he is liable with any amount. Then he is liable.

One Who Hid and Forgot Why He Hid It

Laws of Shabbat Chapter 18 (Continuation) — Changes in Intention, Nullification of Vessels, and the Peddler's Basket

Now an interesting case comes up. There was a person, he now says that a person can make his personal Shabbat measure, the measure of hotza'ah (carrying out), smaller, because he takes it l'zera (for planting). Now, this person did as follows: matznei davar lizri'ah o lirfuah o lidugma, he put away something for the sake of one of these reasons, v'shachach lamah hitznio, and he forgot why, why he put it away in the cupboard. He took it out, because now it's just ordinary. Then, chayav hu daf b'chol shehu. He is still obligated according to his previous thought of why he put it away. Why? She'al da'at machshavah rishonah hotzi. Even though he doesn't remember now why there's even a small piece of whatever lying there at all, but when he hid it away, he did clearly establish what the importance of the thing is, and a person goes according to his previous thought.

But ish acher, a second person takes out from the same cupboard the same thing, ein chiluk bein da l'da, k'shuro, because the person didn't have that intention. Yes?

Discussion: Does the Very Act of Carrying Out Make It Important?

Speaker 1: What we see clearly here is, we don't say that the fact that he carried it out itself already says that it's important to him. We don't say that. It must be objectively important, or that he had an intention lizri'ah, it must make sense. We don't say that the fact alone that he carried it out, obviously he wanted it. He didn't want it to be there, he wanted it to be there. There's a difference, but he doesn't need so much, he doesn't have a shiur (measure).

Nullification of the First Thought

Speaker 1: But how can one, let's say a person hid away something that he needs, how can one, when is it indeed that he retracted, it's no longer an important measure for me? Like a gezeh she'hotzi korah l'toch ha'otzar, it was thrown into the pile with all the other things. Perhaps mekomo nikar, that one can actually find it, one can, it's not really so mixed up that one can find it, but nevertheless, he was mevatel his machshavah harishonah. He no longer needs it lirfuah or lidugma, l'fichach im chozer v'notelah, eino chayav ad she'yotzi'enu k'shiur.

A Thing That People Don't Normally Hide Away

Speaker 1: Now we're going to learn things that, I mean it's not a matter of a shiur, but a thing in general. When we say that it's batel b'da'ato (nullified in his mind), do we say batel b'da'ato because it's not a normal thing, or for this person is it important? Let's see.

Speaker 2: What's different from the previous law? I don't get it. A davar? The previous one says a shiur.

Speaker 1: I mean that what he's saying is, that when someone is indeed matznei (hiding away), it must make sense, lizri'ah, lirfuah. If a person has some craziness, it still doesn't make it important. It does make it. When he says one ra'uy l'hatzni'a (worthy to hide away), it does make it. That's what he's asking apparently here. Perhaps there isn't a matter of the shiur here, it's a matter of such a type of thing. It's not a matter of a shiur.

Here he says the opposite. We don't say that it must be objectively an important thing. If the person did indeed reveal his mind that this is important to him, then it is indeed a shiur.

Davar she'ein derech bnei adam l'hatzni'o, a thing that no one hides away, v'eino ra'uy l'hatzni'o, that means, it's not proper people basically. K'gon dam hanidah, okay, perhaps he wants it because he's going to ask a question. He's not talking about that. He's talking about afterwards. Echad v'hotzi'ah chayav. One person has... that one, the person, Rabbi Shmuel so-and-so ben so-and-so put away the dam hanidah, perhaps indeed because he has a question, for him it's a matter of kiyuma (preservation), he is chayav. U'sh'ar adam patur, v'lamah? She'ein chiyuvan ela l'davar hara'uy l'hatzni'a u'matzni'in kamohu. That means, a normal person, he doesn't want to say because the person put away the piece of dam nidah it became important. No, the person, for him it indeed becomes important, but it doesn't become important for the other people. Why? Because she'ein ra'uy l'hatzni'a v'ein matzni'in kamohu. The same thing.

We see here like this, that by itself, the l'chatchilah (initial state) is that if a person doesn't take a position, he is batel (nullified) to all other people, that's assumed, except if he takes a position. Then, if he doesn't take a position, he lowers himself. If he doesn't take a position, he is a part of the klal (general category).

Half a Measure in Carrying Out

Speaker 1: Hamotzi chatzi shiur patur. Yes, this is simple. It's a well-known dispute in halachah chatzi shiur. Chatzi shiur is certainly patur, it's forbidden but here he's talking about a fine, so he's patur. V'chen kol ha'oseh melachah, when a melachah is chatzi shiur, this is also from the previous things that were said how much is the shiur for example l'choresh or whatever it is, if he does half of that he is patur.

He says further, hotzi chatzi shiur v'hinicho v'chazar v'hotzi chatzyo acher, he is indeed chayav. That means, he didn't do both halves at once. A bit different than what we saw by the written.

Speaker 2: No, we understand, there, it's immediately, when he goes out it's gone, the other one it's gone.

Speaker 1: V'im kadam v'higbi'ah chatzyo harishon kodem menuchat chatzyo hasheni, that means he carried half and it's no longer lying there, yes. This is the law that we learned by the ketubah. The principle from that law. Then it's no, it's k'mo she'nisraf and patur. But hagba'ah it's not burned, it still has a hagba'ah. When it has a hagba'ah it gets placed in another place, the second one took it away. There's already nothing what. Something must indeed be able to join together.

Half a Measure Within Three Tefachim (Lavud)

Speaker 1: Okay. Hotzi chatzi shiur v'hinicho, v'chazar v'hotzi chatzi shiur acher v'hevi'o l'reshut toch shloshah, he carried out half a shiur and he put it down, afterwards he carried out the other chatzi shiur, and he didn't place it next to it, but he was in the lavud of it, he was in the three tefachim, he is indeed chayav, she'ma'avir k'mo she'hini'ach agav mashi. Because when he carried over the second time, he thereby made a complete shiur, and when it touched, almost touched, but the lavud-like touched the previous one, it was as if all at once together it's a shiur.

Aval im zarko, he only threw it, even if it flew over higher than the previous chatzi shiur, eino chayav ad she'yani'chenu agav mashi. Even if it flew over apparently, that's what it means, it must touch.

It's interesting the halachah of the chatzi shiur, that they need, because we don't say that they need to be actually together, but some togetherness must be. One must understand the lamdan's definition of what it means they need to be together. It makes sense, we'll consider about this.

Combining Half Measures to One Domain vs. to Two Domains

Speaker 1: Um, tanya, hotzi chatzi shiur v'chazar v'hotzi chatzi shiur b'he'elem achat, this is the halachah that we're learning now, but this is another tanya. L'reshut achat chayav, if he took it to the same domain he is chayav. This gets combined. Ah, not in the same piece just chatzi shiur, but l'shtei reshuyot, what does l'shtei reshuyot mean? The first piece he carried from reshut hayachid to reshut harabim, the second piece he carried from, the opposite. It doesn't make sense. L'reshut achat chayav, l'shtei reshuyot, he took to two different domains. Okay, so it doesn't combine.

So like this, im yesh beineihem reshut chiyuv alav, that means, if between the two domains where one lies and one, for example, the reshut hayachid divides in between, then patur. But im hifsik karmelit, which is only d'rabbanan that this is another domain, one will be able to connect it, and then it's like reshut achat v'chayav chatat.

Discussion: Why Doesn't Karmelit Interrupt?

Speaker 1: This is an interesting case. As you started in the shiur, that in hotza'ah we look at, why do we look at whether he completely went away from the place? If in between there was a reshut hayachid, he completely went away, because he went through another domain. But if he didn't go through a complete other domain, only a d'rabbanan other domain, it still means as if he carried both halves in the same place. Yes?

Speaker 2: Yes, I don't get exactly. But the same... That means, because the two domains where the two halves are carried, are basically the same. One doesn't go far. One has hours, but it's the same domain. Yes, one must understand better, because earlier it looked like one must place both in the same place. That's what I don't get. I again misunderstood the fact in the halachah. It must be that they are also in the same domain. I don't get it. Do you understand what I'm saying? It's apparently another condition in the same law. Why do the two conditions agree?

Speaker 1: Perhaps the word here is "b'he'elem achat"? Earlier it didn't say "b'he'elem achat". It must be that it was b'he'elem achat, and not just such an interruption. But the previous hotza'ah didn't have the word... But I mean it's still from the same halachah, because not... All these halachot we're talking b'shogeg. All these "chayav" doesn't mean chayav b'shogeg, because b'meizid also, but the halachah doesn't talk about shogeg, about meizid almost never.

A Measure That Changes in the Middle of Carrying Out

Speaker 1: Okay. Now an interesting further question that concerns the Jewish rabbis. Hamotzi pachot mik'shiur, v'kodem she'hinicho natfach v'chazar k'shiur, patur, which is not an akirah with a hanachah. Or, v'chen hamotzi k'shiur, v'kodem she'hinicho hitztamek v'chazar l'pachot mik'shiur, patur. That means, the shiur changed in the middle of the hotza'ah, he's patur because there wasn't an akirah with a hanachah with the same shiur, or with a shiur.

One Who Takes Out a Dried Fig's Worth for Eating and It Shrank – Renewal of Thought

Speaker 1: Now, what else about what can change the shiur in the middle of the action? Hamotzi k'grogereth la'achilah, v'nitztamkah kodem hanachah, okay, it became too small, one can no longer eat it, it shrank. The person didn't get lost. The importance for eating, for planting, for medicine is no longer there the shiur. He thought, okay, I'll use it for a smaller thing. Harei zeh chayav k'machshavto shenatan lo hanachah. That means, whether he had a shiur of akirah, he had one shiur, hanachah he has a new shiur, but between both there was indeed an akirah and hanachah. He is chayav k'lachma.

Laws of Shabbat Chapter 18 (Continuation) — Changes of Thought, Nullification of Vessels, and the Peddler's Basket

Law: One Who Takes Out a Dried Fig's Worth for Eating and It Shrank Before Placing Down

Hamotzi k'grogereth la'achilah, v'nitztamkah kodem hanachah. Okay, it became too small, one can no longer eat it, it shrinks. But the person didn't get lost, nitchashvah lo lizri'ah, lirfuah, she'einah tzrichah shiur. He thought, okay, I'll use it for a smaller thing. Harei zeh chayav, k'machshavto bish'at hanachah. That means, whether it was a shiur at the time of akirah, and at the time of hanachah he has a new shiur. But between both together there was a kiyum of akirah and hanachah. Right? He is chayav kula l'chumra for the smaller shiur, at least there was a shiur at the time of hanachah.

The Opposite Doesn't Work

But the opposite doesn't work. Hotzi pachot mik'grogereth lizri'ah, v'kodem hanachah chazar v'chashvah la'achilah, perhaps because it became bigger or just so. Ah, it didn't become, it's small, and he changed his mind, he is patur. Why? Because at the hanachah there wasn't a shiur. There was indeed a shiur, but not the same shiur that he thought. Interesting.

And If It Swelled Before Placing Down

V'im tafchah kodem hanachah v'na'aseit k'grogereth kodem she'hini'chah la'achilah, chayav. Why? Because here the Rambam explains a bit better, she'afilu nitchashvah v'nitchayev b'machshevet hotza'ah. He indeed thought to take a pachot mik'grogereth, but lizri'ah, which is chayav. Later, even when he wouldn't have thought, because l'chatchilah he took it for the matter of planting. Now he changed his thought, and there's a shiur. It has both.

The Principle

In short, the principle here is like this: if either in the akirah, or the thought at the time of the akirah, and either in the hanachah, the thought at the time of hanachah, there is a shiur, even if it's two different shiurim that he changed in the middle, he remains chayav. This is the chiddush.

Law: One Who Took Out a Dried Fig's Worth and It Shrank and Then Swelled Again — Doubt of Nidcheh

What is this? A new case, very important to know. Hotzi k'grogereth la'achilah, he took out a complete grogereth for eating. Now, it didn't change, but so, v'nitztamkah, it became too small, patur. V'chazar v'tafchah kodem hanachah. In the meantime, on the way, it had three states. Big, goes to small, back to big. A great doubt of nidcheh, ilu nidcheh. One can interpret nidcheh, it became void, but one can say no, as we said earlier. In practice, at the time of the akirah, at the time of the hanachah, there was a shiur. Therefore there's a doubt, this can bring a doubt of chatat.

Law: One Who Throws an Olive's Worth of Food to a Tamei House — Doubt of Completing the Measure of Tumah

Zorek k'zayit ochlin, another type of thing, yes? Zorek k'zayit ochlin l'bayit tamei, v'hishlim k'zayit zeh l'ochlin she'hayu sham, v'na'aseh sham hakol k'beitzah. That means, it makes even a minimum, the bayit tamei, so it's a k'zayit to k'beitzah. Right? Why? What's the difference? I thought that a k'zayit is metamei. For eating it makes a difference, yes. Food is metamei only a peshita k'beitzah. Aha.

So now he made a thing, as we learned earlier, that one changes the status regarding tumah, it can mean a shiur. But here it's indeed a doubt, why? He is in doubt im chayav al k'zayit, mipnei she'hishlim l'shiur tumah ilu nitchayev. What's the doubt? The question here is like this, a k'zayit for hotza'ah is less than a k'grogereth, he is patur. But one can say yes, that one explains that the k'zayit was indeed important enough for tumah, similar to what we had earlier, that he took out a k'zayit, and here is a doubt.

Here is a doubt, because here also the k'zayit is something more important than a regular k'zayit for tumah. So the question is, whether migu d'havah chashuv for tumah, does it also mean chashuv for hotza'ah. We learned clearly that it does indeed help. Right? Because even if he makes out a k'zayit when he takes it away, he is chayav even with half a k'zayit, we learned earlier. So it must be that here the doubt has to do with this, similar to how we learned that the domain becomes, in short, at the time of the akirah it became important.

Why Does It Say "Zorek" At All?

It's very interesting, because it's obvious that the throwing must succeed, he must also manage to aim exactly at the piece of food so it will become a... He lost it, he threw it in, and later someone added to it, so already... He at the time of his hanachah wasn't yet the... Why does it say "zorek" at all? Why not "mani'ach"?

There's a difference. When he carried it in it can still be the same thing. It can be when he carried it in, once it came into the house, before he went to the other food, that the hanachah is when he puts it down.

Law: One Who Takes Out Less Than a Measure in a Vessel — The Vessel is Tafel

Okay, now another law of things that are batel. We finished from the silences, now one learns things that are mitbatlin, bitul... I don't know how one calls it, matters of bitul, yes?

If a person took out pachot mik'shiur, but he took it out in a vessel, and the vessel actually has indeed a shiur, the law is that even if he took out in a vessel, he is patur. Why? She'hakli tafel lo. This is the question regarding the pockets, yes? Regarding clothes in a bottle, or the wine in a bottle. We learn here that the vessel is batel. That if you take pachot mik'shiur, and you take it in a vessel, even if you also mean to take out the vessel, you don't only mean to take out that, he is patur, as the Gemara says "she'hakli tafel lo". V'ein lo kavanah l'hotzi et hakli, l'hotzi et mah shebetocho, you're not taking out now the vessel, you're taking out the thing that's inside, and inside there's no shiur.

One Who Takes Out a Living Person in a Bed

L'fichach, hamotzi adam chai, afilu katan, we learned earlier that a living person one is patur, even if you take him out on a bed, he is still patur. Patur afilu hamet, she'hamet tafel, because a person who carries a bed takes a person, he has no deficiency to be...

If you will, this is indeed obvious, even the bed which is even a bigger and heavier thing, but it's all only tafel to the person. This is even if it's not on the person, it's the person on it. There's no difference, if a person takes out a bed, he means to take out the person.

Law: The Peddler's Basket — One Name of Carrying Out

This is simply a new halacha, another halacha which I don't know what's interesting about it. Ah, hamotzi kupat harochlim (one who carries out a peddler's box). We learned that spices and such things can have a very small shiur (measure). He takes out an entire kupat harochlim, a box of spices, it's full with all kinds of... the peddlers who go around have one box, and in it they have a bunch of different examples of all kinds of things that they have. So even though there is min b'meorav (mixed species), you can't calculate that he was motzi (carried out) here a hundred other types of tavlinim (spices) and go check each one's shiur, rather even if he carried out the box, even if it was carried on the hands.

The question is whether he is liable more than once. He is only liable ela achat (only once), he is only liable one achat, because shem hotza'ah achat hi (it is one name of carrying), because he carried one thing. We don't say that we look at each thing that was carried.

Shem Hotza'ah Achat — The Principle

Interesting. But otherwise... this is an important halacha. If a person carries out more than one thing, shem hotza'ah achat hi. It doesn't get divided according to the things. Although here, this is an interesting example, because we can have with one small hotza'ah many shiurim, nevertheless it is one hotza'ah, therefore one is only liable once for a korban chatat (sin offering).

Discussion: Whether It's About the Vessel or About Shem Hotza'ah

The question is whether it's because they are both in a container, or because of shem hotza'ah achat hi. What happens when a person holds in his hands several types of tavlinim? The container is a metzaref (combines), or even without that as well? Even to say that even if he took out the four species from the container and he carried it on his hands, that's not the container. That a container makes one thing we already learned. A kli (vessel) is metzaref, that's for a different matter. But here we see even not. Shem hotza'ah, hotza'ah is one thing, even if he takes out a bunch of things that have different shiurim and so forth.

Distinction of Separate Bodies

What kind is there? Yes. Ah, no, good. Shem hotza'ah achat hi. There are situations where yes, gufim mechulakim (separate bodies). For example, as he brings, haba al chamesh nashim (one who has relations with five women), he is liable five times, because although it is one he'elem achat (one lapse of awareness), but they are gufim mechulakim. By hotza'ah there is no gufim mechulakim, because it is only one thing that is called hotza'ah. This is the lamdus (analytical approach) that is called melachat hotza'ah (the labor of carrying out).

Conclusion of Chapter 18

Okay. Until here chapter 18. Now we know the shiurim of hotza'ah. The nafka minah (practical difference) is for oness chet (compelled sin), which almost none of these halachot should have any nafka minah l'ma'aseh (practical application). But nevertheless one may not even less than the shiur, just as in kol haTorah kulah (all of the entire Torah). Okay.