Laws of Shabbat, Chapter 5 (Auto Translated)

Rambam Laws of Shabbat Chapter 5 – Lighting Candles on Shabbat

Law 1 – Definition of the Mitzvah: Obligation and Not Optional

Speaker 1:

The holy Rambam, Laws of Shabbat, the fifth chapter.

We are holding in the fifth chapter, we are now going to learn, and we are still holding in Laws of Shabbat regarding more things that have to do with preparation for Shabbat. We speak this way, Shabbat is now coming, we have already spoken about the general principles of the Laws of Shabbat, the last thing was about preparing the food, keeping it warm (meshahe), covering (matmin) the food. And now we go, the next thing that one does when Shabbat comes is hadlakat ner, one prepares the, one lights candles before Shabbat, the mitzvah of hadlakat hanerot (lighting the candles).

One can even say better, the Rambam is still holding here in the laws of melachah (work), that which one may indeed do melachah on erev Shabbat (Shabbat eve) that happens on Shabbat, we have learned in this various decrees of shehiyah and hatmanah and so forth. Now we are going to learn about another thing that one may do, and not only may one do it, but one must do it.

The Rambam says as follows, the Rambam begins as follows, the Rambam tells us first the definition of hadlakat ner b’Shabbat (lighting candles on Shabbat), that it is a mitzvah. The Rambam says as follows: “Hadlakat ner b’Shabbat einah reshut” (Lighting candles on Shabbat is not optional), it is not like there are certain mitzvot that are optional, “im ratzah madlik v’im ratzah eino madlik” (if he wants he lights and if he wants he doesn’t light), if he wants to light Shabbat candles he lights them, and if not, not.

What he perhaps means to say is, as we said earlier, one may light on erev Shabbat a fire that will burn on Shabbat and so forth, so also one may light a candle, this we learned earlier essentially, that one may light a candle. But the novelty now is not only may one, but one must. It is not optional.

And also what it is not, it is not from the types of mitzvot that are a mitzvah in the category of optional, a mitzvah that exists as a solution. He says, “v’lo mitzvah she’eino chayav lirdof acharehah ad she’ya’asenah” (and not a mitzvah that one is not obligated to pursue until one does it), it is also not such a type of mitzvah that there is no obligation to pursue it to be able to do it, like the mitzvah of eruv chatzerot (courtyard eruv) or netilat yadayim la’achilah (washing hands for eating), which is only if you want to be able to carry in the courtyard, or if you want to be able to eat bread with your hands in purity you should wash, but it is not a mitzvah that you must pursue. “Ela chovah” (Rather an obligation).

And in Laws of Blessings the Rambam gave us at length that there are three types of mitzvot: there is a mitzvah that is an obligation, optional, and a… yes. He says here that hadlakat ner Shabbat is neither optional nor… it is not that if you want it to be light it should be in such a manner. No, it is a mitzvah that one should light candles on Shabbat.

And also at the end of Laws of Shabbat the Rambam says, in the thirtieth chapter of Laws of Shabbat, that is the last chapter of Laws of Shabbat, it also states that ner Shabbat is part of the mitzvah of oneg Shabbat (Shabbat delight). He writes that the meal should be illuminated, it is oneg Shabbat and it is shalom bayit (domestic peace), all these things. There he goes to explain the reason apparently why it is an obligation. But here essentially the context is, as I told him, things that one may indeed do, and not only may one, but one must do the melachah from erev Shabbat.

Law 1 (continued) – Obligation of Men and Women

Speaker 1:

The Rambam says further: “v’echad anashim v’echad nashim chayavim lihiyot b’vateihem ner daluk b’Shabbat” (Both men and women are obligated to have a lit candle in their homes on Shabbat). It is an obligation on men and on women. He means, the reason why he says it is, because later he will say that it is a mitzvah that usually women do. But the essence is a mitzvah on everyone. If there is a house where there are no women, unfortunately, may they quickly be restored, one must also light Shabbat candles.

“Afilu ein lo mah yochal” (Even if he has nothing to eat) – even if a person has nothing to eat. We know that the candle is part of the meal, it adds to the atmosphere of Shabbat that it is light. But the Rambam says, even without that, even if there is no meal, the fact that it should be light is itself oneg Shabbat, without the meal. “Even if he has nothing to eat…”

Discussion: Obligation of Women – Meaning of “echad anashim v’echad nashim”

Speaker 2:

But that’s two things. Simply, I don’t know if it’s correct, but simply, when he says “echad anashim v’echad nashim,” he means that it is not a mitzvat aseh shehazman grama (time-bound positive commandment) from which women are usually exempt, even women are obligated. That is the simple meaning. We know that women do it, that’s obvious. The Rambam says it later. Yes, but simply that is the novelty, that women… precisely women do it because they are usually at home, they are in charge of such things. But that is the simple… simply that is a novelty, because women are commanded in all the mitzvot of Shabbat, it automatically comes with it. Why would they have said this already? That it’s not an extra mitzvah, it’s a branch of Laws of Shabbat. Okay.

Speaker 1:

The Rambam says there, the Rambam has already said that women are obligated in kiddush (sanctification), for example, he will say it in Laws of Kiddush, which he will see there, but prohibitions, it’s obvious that they are obligated.

Law 1 (continued) – A Poor Person Supported by Charity

Speaker 1:

And the Rambam says further, he says “afilu ani hamitparneis min hatzedakah” (even a poor person who is supported by charity), the Rambam means that one may on this… there is a concept that people should not simply go have benefit from charity, but even if he has nothing to eat, but lighting candles is very important, that he should therefore go be sho’el al hapetachim (ask at the doors). He should go asking, begging people. But essentially one says sho’el al hapetachim about food, right? Also about the meal.

The simple translation of this law is that it is a very important obligation. As the Rambam says, it is a mitzvah shetzarich lirdof acharehah (that one must pursue). One must know, not every mitzvah that is tzarich lirdof acharehah must one also go borrow money or take money. The Rambam doesn’t say, sho’el al hapetachim is not borrowing, it can mean asking people to give, seeking charity to give. But this is a type of mitzvah that is a concept of obligation. We know other places where such a law stands in the Rambam, yes, by the four cups, by Chanukah such a law stands. There is a stringency in this lirdof acharehah. Lirdof acharehah has different levels, not every mitzvah must one perhaps go. Perhaps here are mitzvot that we will see, if someone doesn’t have he is exempt. Here he is not exempt, he must seek even if he doesn’t have.

Discussion: Candle Before the Meal?

Speaker 2:

But there are still a few more things standing in this law. One, that even when there is no meal there must be a candle. But also that it comes before the food. It already states, if he made a little money, sho’el al hapetachim, he has a little money, he should with that money rather buy oil and a candle than buy food. I don’t agree with this. How do you see here that it states ner beito (his candle) takes precedence over oneg Shabbat? It states in the Gemara about this, no? The Rambam doesn’t yet say this law. You put the two laws together, one of them states this explicitly, as it states in the Gemara, when someone has only enough for a candle or for kiddush. He says, it states that ner Shabbat takes precedence, but there it states ner Shabbat and ner Chanukah, no? Ner Shabbat and oneg Shabbat. But he has nothing to eat, should he buy a candle to light? It doesn’t make sense to me. He should buy both. He’s going for money anyway, he should go for money for both, no?

Speaker 1:

Perhaps at once it won’t work?

Speaker 2:

No, but he is not obligated to ask for money for the meal.

Speaker 1:

No, that is indeed part of the mitzvah, apparently he should indeed ask for that. He doesn’t need to ask more, he already has enough money for a candle, he doesn’t need to ask more money for…

Speaker 2:

And he’ll starve from hunger?

Speaker 1:

No, the question is the third meal. To eat he may simply take charity. The question is the third meal of Shabbat. Normally a person survives on two meals, and for that one obtains money. That the third meal, to fulfill the mitzvot Shabbat properly, is the question whether he should go obtain money.

Speaker 2:

That’s charity, really.

Speaker 1:

It could be that this is also the law, it could be that this is also the law for the charity administrators. They need to know that they need to give candles for the poor people too, that if not they can indeed ask.

Speaker 2:

Yes, in the Gemara it states that ner Shabbat precedes kiddush hayom. That speaks of kiddush, it doesn’t speak of not having any meals. It speaks of the mitzvah d’oraita or d’rabbanan of kiddush on wine.

Speaker 1:

Yes, the Rambam doesn’t speak here about the question of aseh Shabbatcha chol (make your Shabbat like a weekday). That’s not here in memory, I’m speaking about the question, yes, what he should do, he must buy Shabbat food and the like. The Rambam only says that he is obligated. Apparently the novelty is, food he does have, usually he receives in the tamchui (soup kitchen) a portion to eat, but they don’t distribute candles. Go seek candles. Or they should indeed distribute candles, but that stands in the law. It can’t be that the law is that a person should go to the houses. The law is that you should know that even a poor person has the obligation. Therefore, when you give tomchei Shabbat (Shabbat support), you should also give money for candles. No? That’s my own interpretation.

In the Laws of Pesach such a formulation stands, right? Even ani shebeYisrael yochal (even the poorest in Israel shall eat). On whom is the obligation? An obligation on the charity administrators that they should give him, no? It states that apparently the charity administrators don’t give candles. He should eat when it’s still light, and when it’s dark he’ll go to sleep. Shabbat, also Shabbat they don’t give him, they do give. But the person must as part of the mitzvah, apparently he should indeed obtain candles.

Speaker 2:

They should give. If not, the person will indeed go al hapetachim.

Speaker 1:

Yes, that’s what I mean. Anyway, it’s a great obligation. That is apparently the point. It’s a great obligation, it’s a great delight to be light on Shabbat.

Law 1 (continued) – Blessing on Lighting Candles

Speaker 1:

Yes, the Rambam says, the mitzvah comes with a blessing. Ah, the reason why it comes with a blessing is because it’s a mitzvah ledorot vechayim (for generations and life). No, even a mitzvah she’ein lah zman (a mitzvah without a set time), the Rambam says that both are correct. “Chayav levarech kodem hadlakah” (One is obligated to bless before lighting), before one lights the… before one lights the candles, one says “asher kideshanu bemitzvotav vetzivanu lehadlik ner shel Shabbat” (who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to light the Shabbat candle).

Ah, it doesn’t state in the Torah. The Rambam says, “kedin she’ar kol hadevarim shechiyvu bahem divrei sofrim” (like the law of all other things that the words of the Sages obligated in them). In Laws of Blessings the Rambam has already explained that also on mitzvot that are only obligated from the words of the Sages one also makes “asher kideshanu bemitzvotav,” and he explained there “bemitzvotav” to follow the Sages, the mitzvah of “lo tasur” (do not turn aside), or what does he enumerate there? Yes, the Rambam brings another verse. Vetzivanu (and commanded us), and the Sages commanded us lehadlik ner shel Shabbat, and therefore one makes this blessing here.

Yes, but apparently it’s still a novelty, because not everything that the Rabbis say does one make a blessing. For example, one doesn’t make a blessing on bitul issur (nullification of prohibition), on the prohibition of benefit, fire. But there are different things that the Rabbis say. There are things that they make from this a mitzvah and they make from this a blessing, yes?

That I want simply, it’s indeed more of a mitzvah than netilat yadayim, eruv chatzerot. Why? Because it’s a chovat haguf (personal obligation). Because it’s a chovat haguf, mitzvah ledorot vechayim. But I say, one can’t think of a thing that one must do from the words of the Rabbis and one doesn’t make a blessing. Okay, one must see according to the principles of blessings when yes and when not.

Law 2 – Using the Light of the Candle

Speaker 1:

Already, the Rambam says further, what happens with using the candles? When one lights Shabbat candles, do you mean to say that one may use the candles on Shabbat? May one be mishtamesh be’or hashem (use the light)? Yes, one may. This we already know from the opening to Mishnah Yoma.

The Rambam says as follows, “mutar lehishtamesh bener haShabbat” (it is permitted to use the Shabbat candle), one may use the Shabbat candle, but only one uses it in an easy way. But if something that one wants to look closely at, and one wants to read small letters, such a thing that has a concept of details at night, that one may not. “V’ish lo ya’aseh davar hatza’rich iyun harbeh” (And a person shall not do something that requires much examination), but one may not use the Shabbat candle for something that one needs strong examination.

Why? He goes on, “aval davar shetzarich ledakdek bo beyoter, o davar shehu kasheh lir’ot vetzarich ledakdek bo bire’iyah, asur la’asoto le’or haner” (but something that requires more precision, or something that is difficult to see and requires precision in seeing, it is forbidden to do it by candlelight). That is, such a thing that one may not bend over or check into something, is very inappropriate, because there is indeed a concern that one uses the candles, perhaps the candles will burn well, one will forget it, but something that one wants to use the candles, one will be afraid, that one will move the candles closer to the thing, or such a type of thing.

Speaker 2:

One won’t move the candles, it’s only muktzeh (set aside).

Speaker 1:

Yasher koach (well said). One is afraid that one will touch the candles, somehow tilt the wick to the oil, or something like that, there will be a proper prohibition of mav’ir (kindling).

Speaker 2:

A prohibition of mav’ir?

Speaker 1:

Yes.

Laws of Shabbat Chapter 5 – Lighting Shabbat Candles: Using the Candles, Time of Lighting, Obligation of Women, and Bein Hashemashot

Law 5 (continued) – Using the Candles and Time of Lighting

Speaker 1: Aha. Yes. We’re not going to get anywhere with this, but the novelty is apparently the permission. Perhaps someone thought that it’s like Chanukah candles, so holy that one may not use them. No, Shabbat candles are made to use, but it has the exception, not for examining.

That’s the small letters, it’s the opposite, there must be a practical difference according to whom it should come out to learn, you need to look in a book Friday night. Even greater contradictions, the stones don’t fall into the small letters.

Law 5 (continued) – Obligation of Women and Obligation of the Man

The Rambam says further, hamadlik, the one who lights the Shabbat candles, tzarich lehadlik mibe’od yom kodem sheki’at hachamah (must light while it is still day before sunset), he should light while it is still day before the sunset, not like a tamei (ritually impure person) who can immerse during bein hashemashot (twilight). One lights before the sunset. Yes.

The Rambam says, venashim metzuvot al davar zeh yoter min ha’anashim (and women are commanded regarding this matter more than men). The mitzvah of lighting Shabbat candles rests more on women than on men. Both essentially are obligated, it states that every house is obligated, only the actual performance of the mitzvah women must do because… because they are metzuyot bebeitam (found in their homes), they are more, they are found in the houses, because they take care of the melachet habayit (housework), therefore they should be the ones who light the candles.

But it doesn’t mean that because the job has been placed on the women, the husband can now exempt himself. But how can it be “ish ve’ishah” (man and woman), he runs the streets and all things. The husband is like the manager, he must make sure that it happens, he must turn around to command it, “velomar le’anshei beito erev Shabbat kodem shetechshach hadliku et haner” (and to say to the people of his house on Shabbat eve before it gets dark, light the candle). His job is to supervise this, make sure that one lights the candles, as it states in the Gemara that one must say there binichnesu erev Shabbat (when entering on Shabbat eve), make sure.

Yes, very good. So the Rambam, the essence is an obligation on everyone, in practice it is especially an obligation on women, but the husband also has an obligation, not an obligation himself to light, but an obligation to make sure that his wife lights.

Speaker 2: Hey, it’s a gag al gav (roof upon roof), why can’t she go directly?

Speaker 1: No, I’ll tell you why, “echad anashim v’echad nashim”. It means, first, every Jewish house gets candles. It means, the obligation of women is not that they bear the obligation, they are the same obligation, only they are metzuyot bebeitam. It means but also that in a house where the husband takes care, apparently according to how the Rambam looked at it, he will light, if the husband is osek bemelachet habayit (engaged in housework).

Only I mean that it is the custom that this is the mitzvah for the wife, she does it. And afterwards, the husband’s need is that he is responsible for his wife’s mitzvah, for her mitzvah, not for his own mitzvah, so that he doesn’t need to light himself, he needs to make sure that she fulfills her mitzvah.

Discussion: The Structure of the Rambam’s Approach

Speaker 1: It seemed to me, apparently, before I say that it’s a bit funny. First one says, who turns around at home? Okay, the wife takes care, let her take care. Turns out, she’ll forget, one still needs the husband to stand there and take care. She’s already more at home, she can already do it herself. She is metzuyah bemelachet habayit. And what does the husband do? He sits and learns, he’s not in the conversation, he only says “hadliku et haner” (light the candle). Okay.

Yes, it’s two mishnayot that the Rambam, the mishnah of “al shalosh mitzvot nashim metot” (for three mitzvot women die), and that mishnah one sees that those mitzvot are more than just a nice occupation, it looks like it’s a mitzvah on them. And afterwards there “sheloshah devarim tzarich adam lomar erev Shabbat im chashikhah” (three things a person must say on Shabbat eve at dark), he brings both. It could indeed be the Gemara is two opinions or two in one.

The Rambam puts together the two Mishnayot in a very interesting way. He means to say that the man should not think that the obligation has been placed on the woman and he is exempt from it. The obligation rests on everyone. The matter is done more fittingly if the woman does it. Good. Instead of the man running around underfoot and the woman yelling at him, let the woman carry the wood and let the man be the one who yells.

No, not yell. The Rambam doesn’t bring that. It says “le’ezra” (to help). From here we see that whenever it says “le’ezra” it doesn’t mean yelling, it means calmly, because the Rambam says presumably “le’ezra” – “so that she should receive advice from him”, constantly helping her.

Halacha 5 (continued) – Doubtful Darkness

What happens at doubtful darkness? If it’s already doubtful darkness, or as he said earlier, if it’s doubtful darkness and Shabbat has entered, or perhaps it hasn’t entered, regarding for example hatmana (insulation) one may still do it. But our halacha which is from the Torah, which we are afraid of, also in doubt, even when it’s a time of doubt one may not. Even the mitzvah of lighting Chanukah candles is a mitzvah, but we have a concern about desecrating Shabbat.

Speaker 2: Yes, but it certainly doesn’t override desecration of Shabbat.

Halacha 4 – Bein Hashemashot: Definition, Time, and Doubt

Speaker 1: The Rambam says, since the Rambam mentions the matter of doubtful darkness, we want to say a bit about what doubtful darkness means and what bein hashemashot means.

The Rambam says thus: “From when the sun sets until three medium stars are seen”, from when the sun goes down until one begins to see clear stars, three medium stars, not very large stars, because large stars can be seen earlier, small ones take longer, “three medium stars”, “this is the time called bein hashemashot” – between the two, between day and night, “in every place”.

Discussion: Explanation of “Bein Hashemashot”

Speaker 1: Why is it called bein hashemashot? I don’t know. What is the Hebrew translation? Between the sun has set and the sun has risen again?

Speaker 2: Ah, no. Between… I don’t know. Between the sun and the moon? There are two, shnei hame’orot (the two luminaries)?

Speaker 1: He brings two explanations. From the Maharal he brings an explanation. Bein hashemashot means between the days, the day goes that bein hashemashot is when it’s not clear if it’s today or tomorrow. He brings from the Gra another explanation, that bein hashemashot means between the sunset… between the two sunsets so to speak, between the setting of the sun, we see it going down the body of the sun, and there’s still the light, that it’s between the two sunsets. Both explanations can be understood.

I want to say, bein hashemashot means the two, the Almighty created first two shemashot, two great luminaries, that it’s between the sun and the moon, we don’t yet see the moon, we still see the sun… the moon is called… seemingly we already see the moon, yes, but when we see Rosh Chodesh at night, we already see the moon… we already see the moon. But the moon isn’t called a shemesh (sun), it’s called me’orot (luminaries).

Speaker 2: No, it doesn’t mean… no, it doesn’t mean… bein hashemashot, nu!

Speaker 1: Okay, in short that’s the time.

The Law of Bein Hashemashot – Doubtful Day Doubtful Night

And what is the time? What is the law regarding it? It’s doubtful whether it’s day or night, bein hashemashot is the time when it’s doubtful day doubtful night, and we rule stringently in every case, it’s the time when we are stringent both ways. Just as on Erev Shabbat one doesn’t do any work, on Motzaei Shabbat one still doesn’t do any work. As in Bameh Madlikin, one may not light because we are stringent. Hey, good.

One Who Does Work During Bein Hashemashot – Liable for a Chattat

And one who does work during bein hashemashot… the Rambam says very simply when bein hashemashot is, yes, people are terribly confused about so many minutes and so many minutes, the Rambam says, the Rambam doesn’t say what three medium stars are, that’s true, but imagine, medium stars then is the end of bein hashemashot. He can tell you that you need to see more than three stars in the sky, because if you only see three stars you might think they are large ones, but if you see several stars then among them there are already medium stars too.

Presumably whoever lives in a city where it’s very hard to see the stars initially, he looks a lot at the stars so that they should be seen, there are certain planets which are seemingly large stars that one can actually see earlier. Okay.

The Rambam says, what happens… One who does work during bein hashemashot, Erev Shabbat or Motzaei Shabbat? If done inadvertently, he is liable for a chattat, in any case liable for a chattat.

Discussion: Why Liable for a Chattat in a Case of Doubt?

Speaker 2: Why is he liable for a chattat? He did both!

Speaker 1: He did both. Ah, he did both. Liable for a chattat, in any case liable… what?

Speaker 2: One Erev Shabbat… one Erev Shabbat and one Motzaei Shabbat.

Speaker 1: But so entirely, it’s interesting, but entirely you look at it, it’s a doubt. Either it’s bein hashemashot day, or it’s bein hashemashot night. He did it at the same time, right? He did it at the same time for nothing. And it can’t be that it’s partly day, partly night. He did it exactly at night here and by day here.

So it could be that bein hashemashot gets a status, as you say, that we are at the same exact time. Or one can say as you say, but the Rambam… both have a status of a doubt. I rule that so, it’s a doubt.

Speaker 2: No, the Rambam says it’s a double doubt, no, a doubt in knowledge. A doubt in knowledge or a doubt in reality?

Speaker 1: The Rambam sounds like it’s a doubt in halacha. It’s a doubt in halacha, because the halacha is not determined at the same minute. If it’s a doubt in reality, it could be that now it was earlier and now it was later.

Very good. So regarding this, in any case, the same time, from this he must have been seen at the same time. Exactly ten minutes after sunset, whatever. He lives in both, he says, for example, liable for a chattat. Either here you did a transgression, or there you did a transgression. But only a chattat seemingly, I believe that regarding, he doesn’t say stoning, because then there’s a problem with action, with doubt, with other things, doubtful things. But a chattat.

Medium Stars – Detailed Definition

“And these stars”, he says in, he says “medium stars”. What does he mean to say? He says “not large ones that are visible during the day”, not the large ones, certain stars can be seen during the day.

Speaker 2: No, no, planets.

Speaker 1: Before sunset. If you look carefully, large planets like Venus and Mars, can often be seen already before the… on the western side there are stars that can be seen, if the stars are exactly there at that time, etc. And not small ones that are only visible at night. Also not small ones, it doesn’t need to be, that’s later at night the small stars first come out. Bein hashemashot is between the two times, when we see the medium ones. When these three medium stars are seen, it is certainly night.

The Rambam Doesn’t Bring Any Times in Minutes

The Rambam doesn’t bring any times, like the walking of a mil or three mil. Or other such measurements, that it says he only brings the subject of the stars. And so I also think, so it is also if I remember the halacha in the Shulchan Aruch. That is, it could be, in the Shulchan Aruch it says something else, but it could be, and the Pri Chadash brings the measurement, it could be that all these measurements are only if one cannot see the stars. It could be that if one can see the stars it is according to all opinions already night. So there are those who argue at least. Okay, I don’t want to get into politics.

Chapter 5: Lighting Shabbat Candles – Wicks, Oils, and Their Laws

Continuation: Time of Lighting Shabbat Candles – The Matter of Stars

He only brings the subject of the stars. And so I also think, so it is also if I remember the halacha in the Shulchan Aruch. That is, it could be, in Shulchan Aruch it says something else, but it could be, in Shulchan Aruch the measurement is indeed brought. It could be that all these measurements are only if one cannot see the stars. It could be that if one can see the stars it is according to all opinions already night. So there are those who argue at least. Okay, I don’t want to get into politics, it’s big politics. If you ask the halacha about this, you’ll get into a fight with the administration.

Right. The problem that you’ve written many times is that up on the mountain is one time and down on the mountain is another time, and it’s really close, even the same city. Okay, and what’s the problem a bit? Ah, it’s really not a problem. I didn’t know you were going out to look at the stars. Okay.

Chapter 5: Lighting Shabbat Candles – Wicks and Oils

Ashkenazic Custom: Chapter “Bameh Madlikin”

The Rambam says further. There is, now we’re going to learn the mitzvah of lighting Shabbat candles. There are various laws about which wicks one can use, all for kavod Shabbat (honor of Shabbat), that it should burn nicely, and so on. There is a whole chapter “Bameh Madlikin”. The Rambam says thus, the Rambam is going to enumerate all the laws, wicks, oils, what one may yes, what one may not. He says, before mentioning all the good things, he says, “for example”, the Ashkenazic custom is to say this chapter before Maariv on Erev Shabbat, Leil Shabbat. That’s the Ashkenazic custom. For the lesson one must already know the Mishnah by heart.

Okay. I know, perhaps Nusach Sefard doesn’t learn this. Those who learn “Bameh Madlikin” know it as well as those who say “Kegavna” know “Kegavna”. We have iron gentiles, yes. Another thing that’s said.

Halacha 5: Wicks That May Be Lit on Shabbat

Okay. “Wicks that may be lit on Shabbat”, he says, “are not made from something whose light flickers in it”. One may not use something where the fire struggles. A Shabbat candle is a matter of shalom bayit (domestic peace). One cannot let there be flickering, that the fire jumps around, it struggles around with the wick. The benefit is not, that’s not honorable, those aren’t nice lights.

For example, which types? Wool, wool, silk, silk is silk, and cedar wool, fake wool, wool that’s found on trees, erez is a cedar tree. And flax that hasn’t been beaten, cotton that hasn’t been combed, flax that hasn’t been combed. Ah, we saw flax at the dibru shel musaf in Bavel. And palm fiber, a piece from the tree, I mean between the wood and the outer shell there’s something more like a thin fiber. And soft wood or other types of thin wood, similar to them, because these things don’t hold the fire well, the fire doesn’t light well. Rather, one should only use wicks from something that the fire rises in it, from something that the fire holds well on it. For example, beaten flax, yes, flax that has indeed been combed, and linen garments, linen, and cotton, cotton, similar to them.

The Measure of Lighting

The Rambam says another thing, and one who lights, for the same reason, and one who lights must light most of what protrudes from the wick. So that, this is also the matter of Shabbat, lest he tilt, or extinguish, similar laws, so that he should use the fire well and he shouldn’t give rise to any questions in the matter. It could be that here it’s simply the matter of squeezing, that the lighting is when one makes the full fire. But it does say that it’s regarding lest he tilt, because if he uses things that don’t burn nicely he’ll come to… the Rambam doesn’t bring the reason here, but so he brings from below, so it says in the last in the Gemara, one must see exactly, but so it sounds that it’s also the matter. There are things that are from kavod Shabbat, and there are things that are regarding… ah, the Rambam does say, so that he won’t tilt. Ah, the Rambam does say, the Rambam does bring the reason which is like lest he tilt. Ah, so he’ll resolve it.

Halacha 6: One Who Wraps Something That May Not Be Lit Around Something That May Be Lit

The Rambam says further however, what happens if one makes a wick from two things, from some material that the fire holds well, and some that doesn’t. One who wraps something that may not be lit around something that may be lit, it’s like this, if to add to the wick in order to increase light, if he does it so the wick should be bigger, it doesn’t work, because if there’s a part in it that will disturb the light, it will further not be good. But if to harden the wick so that it should stand, if he puts it in simply to hold so the wick should stand upright, because according to the material of the cloth it would fall down, then it is indeed permitted. Why? Because then he doesn’t use the thing that may not be lit for the light, it won’t disturb him if it doesn’t burn well, it just needs to hold, it works out with it to hold simply on the wick.

Halacha 7: Placing a Grain of Salt or Bean

Yes, the Rambam says further, one places a grain of salt or a bean on the opening of the candle on Erev Shabbat so that it won’t burn on Shabbat, on Leil Shabbat. What does this mean? Why may one do this? Why shouldn’t one be allowed to do it? A grain of salt or a bean is a bundle on Erev Shabbat, these are things that one places to prevent the entire wick from being burned up. It’s simply a segulah (remedy), good, a thing that’s used for the lights. The novelty is, this is something that may not be lit, it’s not something that burns nicely, salt is not something that burns well, but one doesn’t place it for the fire, and one only places a little bit, to hold back a bit, therefore it’s permitted. That’s seemingly the reason. Yes.

All Wicks That May Not Be Lit – Bonfire

The Rambam says further, all wicks that may not be lit, one may make from them a bonfire, one may indeed use to make with them a bonfire, whether to warm oneself by it or to use for its light, either to warm oneself or for illumination, whether in a lamp or on the ground, as we learned earlier. For a bonfire one may, and they only prohibited making them into a wick for a candle alone, the prohibition is only that it shouldn’t be with what one lights the Shabbat candle. But a bonfire which is a torch light, a flaming torch, such a thing one may. Why? It’s simple, why one may not, or why one may, it’s simple, because they already burn well, it’s a larger fire, so they’re not a concern.

Halacha 8: Oils That May Be Lit on Shabbat

Oils that may be lit on Shabbat, now we’re going to talk about the oils. We’ve already talked about the wick. The oils that one lights on Shabbat must also be such oils that are not drawn after the wick, that work well together with the wick.

But oils that are not drawn after the wick, oils that don’t go easily into the wick, like pitch and wax and castor oil and tallow and fat. Pitch, I’m not going to translate every word, pitch, wax, castor oil, tallow and fat, yes? Sorts of oil where wax is greasier, but one uses it for oil. It’s simple that it is drawn after the wick. I mean, why would they make it? Because it’s cheaper, the poorer people used it.

That are not drawn so well. One may not light with them. The Rambam says why? What’s the reason? One may not light with oils that are not drawn after the wick. He’s going to say the reason for both laws that we’ve learned, both how the wick must be, and how the oil must be. A decree lest he tilt the candle light toward him. We’re afraid that the candle light won’t be so strong, it will become a bit dim, and he will tilt it in order to use its light, he will tilt it. Normally we have this concern, we’re only afraid that one shouldn’t examine, because then lest he tilt. But if the light becomes difficult, and one must even for ordinary use tilt the light, there’s indeed a concern lest he tilt.

Halacha 9: Fat That Was Melted and Fish Innards That Were Dissolved

Okay. We’ve learned, we’re in the middle of learning, which oils one may not use. Now there’s a question, what if one makes a mixture? One mixes in one oil that one may not use with an oil that one may indeed use.

Fat that was melted and fish innards that were dissolved, that became dissolved, one can already indeed use. If one puts in any amount of oil, a bit of another oil, and lights, and it burns.

Discussion: What Are Fish Innards?

Fat that was melted is from the things we learned earlier that one may not? Oils that may not be lit? Pitch, wax, fat was one thing. And fish innards is what? It was stated? Yes, yes, fat, one may not light with them. Yes, but fish innards is also a sort of fat so to speak? What are fish innards? How was it stated that this is also fish innards? I don’t know.

Fat that’s a Gemara, but I don’t see where it says earlier about fish innards. What does it say? Perhaps tallow? Tallow is fat. It seems that tallow is fat, basically. It means to say that when you take a piece from the animal or from a bird, whatever, as it is, a whole piece, then it’s forbidden. It’s called tallow or fat. Now he calls it something else, but it’s the same idea. That the point is, that when it’s still a hard piece, even if it can burn, but it doesn’t burn well, it makes a conflict with the wick. But if one has indeed managed to make it dissolved, but it doesn’t help. One must still also add any amount of oil.

Novelty: Why Does One Need Any Amount of Oil?

What is the concept of shemen kol shehu (any amount of oil)? If the point is the hituch (melting), why is it still important to add a bit of oil? If the point is that the bit of oil makes it kosher, then it should work even if it’s not nemucha or hituch. It seems that the main thing is the hituch, but there is a heker (distinguishing sign). The Gemara says, this is how the Gemara explicitly explains, I see that the Gemara in the sugya of Chanukah, I remember, the Gemara basically explains it this way. There is that chelev (forbidden fat) is generally not a problem, but the Gemara doesn’t allow any give and take, they forbade all chelev. They made such a lo plug (blanket prohibition). And oros (hides), yes, are permitted.

Interesting. One must see if by other gezeiros (rabbinic decrees) there is also such a thing, that some small thing is enough. It means that basically, the Chachamim are not so comfortable with the issur, because basically there is no reason to forbid it, but it’s some kind of lo plug. If you say to forbid, once it’s hituch, basically the Chachamim held that it’s no longer a problem, but what then? As such a lo plug, they don’t want to confuse the people, so they said it’s forbidden. But if you add in another piece of oil, you can already tell people that it’s not just chelev.

Yes, makes sense. Interesting. The main thing is that one shouldn’t be able to argue about the chelev itself, to say that chelev that isn’t melted is permitted. A rabbinic decree, very good, but it looks similar, it’s also chelev, people will become confused, as you say. But when you make a heker, such a stringency goes so much beyond the essence of Torah, it only works after it’s not a real problem, then it already helps a bit of oil in the mixture.

But shemanim she’ein madlikin (oils with which one may not light) that one may actually not light with, that means what is not suitable or one may actually not.

Halacha 11: Oils Kosher and Invalid for Lighting Shabbos Candles

Kosher Oils – All Oils Except Those the Sages Forbade

Speaker 1:

Yes, makes sense. I can understand this, I can be part of the chelev itself, to say a chelev that isn’t melted… a rabbinic decree. Very good. And it looks similar. It’s also chelev, people will become confused, as you say.

But when you make a heker, such a stringency going so high, the essence of Torah, it only works after it’s not a real problem, then it already helps a bit of oil in the mixture.

What about shemanim she’ein madlikin that one may not… light with… light with, it means what is not suitable, or… what one may actually not, because they are problematic oils themselves, because of lo plug. Then it doesn’t help. Even if one has mixed it with shemanim shemedlikin, it will still light, not one takes the other. Because it won’t help. In the first moment, let’s say, on top will be the good oils that will burn for a moment. But afterwards it will continue with the conflict.

Digression: Chassidic Torah – Their Invalidation Hints at Souls

I’m reminded to say a Chassidic vort, that it says in all the Chassidic sefarim on Chanukah, that pesultan (their invalidation) is not simple, and pesultan hints at the soul, from oil to the soul. I know what it is. We mean that there are Jews that one cannot ignite them, even though it says in the morning prayers, one lights them on Chanukah, yes, one can ignite the Torah in them.

So here too one sees the concept that even a Jew, if a Jew is completely not proper, it doesn’t help that he goes to a tzaddik, that he adds a bit of oil to his. If he is basically a good Jew, but he’s missing something that doesn’t look good, so a small thing, then a bit of oil from the tzaddik helps, it becomes permissible and helps.

Do you understand my interpretation? My yesher (straightness), if we’re already in the mode of making such a Chassidic Torah, we learned that it’s no good when there is conflict. Yes. So, when a person entirely has bad middos, or has bad desires, it’s understood that there will be a conflict between his bad and his good. But one pours on a bit of oil. Shemen kol shehu. What is the difference if there are no bad ones making this. In short, they. Already. It now.

Next Halacha – Things One May Not Light With

Speaker 1:

Now we have seen things… one may not with oil, because it’s not such a good flame, and it will cause that the person can stumble and be nichshal (caused to sin) on Shabbos. Now we’ll see other things that the Chachamim said that one doesn’t fulfill with them the mitzvah of hadlakas haneiros b’hiddur (lighting candles beautifully), because it’s not good, it’s not kavod (honor) for Shabbos.

Itran – Richo Ra (Bad Smell)

The Gemara says, ein madlikin b’itran. One may not light with itran, because it’s some kind of gas, some kind of flammable material, but with a riach ra (bad smell), it smells bad. I think it’s a type of naphtha, such a thing.

And what’s the problem? Shema yanicho v’yetzei. He will leave it and go out. V’chovah alav lasheves l’or haner. Here stands an interesting thing, here stands a new obligation that we didn’t know. The obligation is that one should sit by the light of the candle. That means, the concept of ner (candle) is that it’s a kavod of Shabbos, that the person shouldn’t sit in a dark room. So if he’s going to light with something that is richo ra, what will you have from that?

Apparently he means to say that the mitzvah is not just that you should have a light in case it’s needed. The itran burns well enough that if a person has some great need, he needs to see something, he can see. He can come into the room, he needs to look at something, he can come into the room, but he won’t want to be there because there’s a bad smell. But that’s not the concept of Shabbos, just that there should be a light for safety or whatever. The concept is that one should have pleasure, one should sit in the lit room, one should make a seudah (meal) there and the like. So if one is going to go out because of the bad smell, one hasn’t fulfilled it.

Tzori – Richo Tov (Good Smell), But Shema Yichbeh and Shema Ya’uf

And then someone thought, okay, I’ll do exactly the opposite, I’ll use something that has a good smell, tzori. This is the resin from trees, tzori. Tzori is one of the ingredients of the ketores (incense), something that smells good.

What’s the problem with it? True, it’s richo tov, it smells good, but we’re afraid shema yichbeh min haner. He’ll take out a bit, I don’t know, to smear with it or the like. And then there will be an issur of mechabeh (extinguishing). There will be an issur of mechabeh, as we’ll see later, to take out a bit of the oil from the candle, from the oil of the candle, means to cause extinguishing. One may not.

And another reason why one shouldn’t do it, shema ya’uf. Because the tzori has a nature that it flies, it’s not such an orderly light, the light jumps around. One sees this, so obviously there is also the concern, it’s a danger, or obviously there is the concern shema yateh (lest he tilt it).

Speaker 2:

Ah, it says not. Shema ya’uf. What does shema ya’uf mean?

Speaker 1:

Yes, it says that it can be dangerous. Later we’ll see naphtha above which is even more dangerous, shema ya’uf. Here it says about this too, that it can give a spark on the roof, and completely ignite the roof, and the like. So one is afraid of danger, or one is afraid that he’ll be mechalel Shabbos (desecrate Shabbos) because of danger?

Speaker 2:

Not danger, not danger. Look at the next piece before this.

Neft Lavan (White Naphtha) – Forbidden Even on Weekdays Because of Danger

Speaker 1:

“And so with neft lavan (white naphtha), even on weekdays”. Not white naphtha. I think white naphtha is probably such a gas that one can’t see. Regular naphtha is partly black, and part of it one distills, it comes out pure, without stains. Because earlier he already mentioned naphtha that one may not.

Speaker 2:

Right, but neft lavan is… what is that in English?

Speaker 1:

He doesn’t say. It’s not clear what that is. Mishum d’iseira lei sakana, afilu b’chol (Because there is danger in it, even on weekdays).

Speaker 2:

Yes.

Speaker 1:

The Gemara brings a story that there was a mother-in-law who hated her daughter-in-law. She told her to adorn herself, to smear herself with perfumed oil, one of those things it seems. And she said, “Go light the candles.” She lit the candles, and she was burned from the… what is such a jumpy thing, just from lighting the candles, because on her the oil burned.

Speaker 2:

Ah, what a mother-in-law!

Speaker 1:

Yes, this is one of the sources in the Gemara about the concept of a mother-in-law. There are other sources too.

In short, there is a concern of danger. Lavan doesn’t mean white, it means transparent. Refined naphtha.

Speaker 2:

Naphtha, but naphtha is what we call naphtha, petroleum, oil?

Speaker 1:

Could be.

Speaker 2:

Did you ask?

Speaker 1:

Yes, such a thing he says here. Naphtha is petroleum, that’s oil that comes up from under the earth. The naphtha that one finds from under the earth, one makes from it a bunch of six, seven, eight types… the black part a bit for asphalt, for the roads, and the white, the completely transparent, is the best part of the oil. But that’s a danger.

But there were once other things that were made. Whatever it is, the thing is, it’s too flammable, basically, that’s the point. It’s too flammable, it’s not made to light candles. It’s made to put in the car. In short, one should light with gasoline, nu? Do you understand such a thing? Gasoline is a type of naphtha, I think.

Chiddush: When There’s Danger One Doesn’t Fulfill the Mitzvah

But it’s interesting, one sees from here apparently that when one lights, when there’s a danger, it’s not just that one transgressed “v’nishmartem” (and you shall guard yourselves), but one didn’t fulfill the mitzvah. If someone knows that… I know, every house has its own, it’s already happened a fire. Apparently the simple meaning is that it’s not a good way to light candles this way. Even on weekdays.

Speaker 2:

People are very drawn in the hospital, which doesn’t allow lighting candles.

Speaker 1:

Ah, one sees that… okay, that means one should find something that is good, but…

Speaker 2:

In the hospital it’s certain that one fulfills the mitzvah of oneg Shabbos (Shabbos delight) with what one follows, and at most one lights the electric lights, which is not certain that it’s not valid.

Discussion: Electric Lights for Shabbos Candles

Speaker 1:

I saw in the store that there is such an electric thing that can be. I saw some new patent in the store, I saw someone selling with a hechsher (kosher certification) from some rabbi, I don’t remember who, some such electric thing, but he says that there is some real spark, not today’s LEDs which are just something false made from something else. He once learned that one made something electric, he says that there is a real fire, and therefore he says that one can make a bracha (blessing) on it. Some heimishe (traditional) rabbi says that it counts. So, I don’t know if it’s correct, but there is such a reasoning.

Speaker 2:

It’s not clear why one shouldn’t be able to light with electric. There is no law that it must be a candle.

Speaker 1:

True. Apparently, not only that, but apparently when a person lights a tiny candle that doesn’t really make a change in his house, and instead he lights a gorgeous chandelier, apparently the real mitzvah of ner Shabbos, that means the tzuras hamitzvah (form of the mitzvah) is that one should light as the Chachamim said, but the essence of the thing is that there should be oneg Shabbos.

Speaker 2:

It’s not clear, people talk about this, it’s very unclear. It seems that… we haven’t learned yet… let’s talk about this, we’ll talk. We haven’t finished basically the halachos of the candles, which types of candles one may use. It doesn’t say here that there is an obligation that it should be a candle, right? Any sorts, the thing that one uses. Yes, the Rambam goes… ah, we haven’t finished. Yes, finished. Look what the Rambam says. Let’s do one more halacha, then we’ll see. Eleven, yes.

The Rambam’s Ruling: Permitted to Light with Other Oils

Speaker 1:

“Mutar l’hadlik lechatchila b’she’ar shemanim, kegon shemen shumshumin, shemen tzenonos v’lafes, u’she’ar minei yerakos, v’shemen zer’onim, v’chol kayotza bahem. Ein asur ela elu shemanu chachamim bilvad.” (It is permitted to light lechatchila with other oils, such as sesame oil, radish and turnip oil, and other types of vegetable oils, and seed oils, and all similar to them. Only those that the Sages specified are forbidden.)

The only thing that is forbidden to light with is what the Chachamim enumerated, but all others one may. So you say that electric is something that the Chachamim didn’t enumerate?

Rabbi Tarfon vs. Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri – Only Olive Oil?

Look into the Gemara. Rabbi Tarfon said, this is even Rabbi Tarfon. Rabbi Tarfon, the holy Tanna Rabbi Tarfon, argued “ein madlikin ela b’shemen zayis bilvad” (one may only light with olive oil). He learned that there is, besides the issur of “bameh ein madlikin” (with what may one not light), there is also a mitzvah that one must light, one must preferably use olive oil.

Perhaps altogether, amar Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri al raglav v’amar (Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri stood on his feet and said), Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri stood up and he says, “u’mah ya’asu anshei Bavel she’ein lahem ela shemen shumshumin? U’mah ya’asu anshei Madai she’ein lahem ela shemen egozim? U’mah ya’asu anshei Alexandria she’ein lahem ela shemen tzenonos? U’mah ya’asu anshei Cappadocia she’ein lahem lo kach v’lo kach ela neft?” (And what should the people of Babylonia do who have only sesame oil? And what should the people of Media do who have only nut oil? And what should the people of Alexandria do who have only radish oil? And what should the people of Cappadocia do who have neither this nor that but only naphtha?)

So, a very beautiful piece of Gemara, because what does Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri say? He says, you fine Jew, you live in Eretz Yisrael, you have olive oil, so what is perhaps nicer, but you must remember, he remembered, he knew four other places where there is no olive oil, there olives don’t grow. There in Europe, most Jews that we had, almost didn’t have any olive oil, except with chelev (animal fat), with chelev they used to light Shabbos candles, they used to light with chelev, it says in the Ramban even on Chanukah, because it was almost impossible to get olive oil, it was very hard to get. Olives don’t grow in Hungary and in Poland.

So he said, what should they do in Alexandria? They only have radishes. What, you’ll say they shouldn’t light Shabbos candles? Can such a thing be? What, you’ll say they need to import olive oil from Eretz Yisrael? That also can’t be. Rather what, he said, one separately, one separately, one separately, once you light, that is not a taste that isn’t good, but anything else is kosher.

So one must say that… amar Rabbi Yitzchak al raglav, “u’mah ya’asu anshei ha’hospital she’ein lahem ela electric bilvad?” (Rabbi Yitzchak said on his feet, “And what should the people of the hospital do who have only electric?”) No, one must know, because oil and wicks, that’s the question, that the Chachamim did use the words oil and wicks, because that is dibur hakasuv b’hoveh (the text speaks in the present), but every type of electric can be the same, one just needs to know which. Ah, that’s the simple meaning.

The Main Concept of Shabbos Candles – Shalom Bayis and Oneg Shabbos

Speaker 2:

The reason for the lights is shalom bayis (domestic peace), and one must say that the seudah is such that he can’t have pleasure without it. Certainly the main law is to make night like day.

For example, when a person has a question, he wants to light candles at home, and then he goes out to the seudah, and he’ll only be back late at night at home. He won’t really have pleasure from his candles. There are those who say such a thing, one lights candles, but also it’s sense for the electric, that one leaves lit some light. As this is indeed the concept of oneg Shabbos, that when you come home the whole house shouldn’t be dark. One leaves over some candles, I mean some electric on, that you have pleasure from the luxury or the electric too.

There is such a thing, I don’t remember where I saw it, but there is such a thing, one uses it as a support. I’m not going to stop shining.

Laws of Shabbos Candles – Laws and Concerns

Lighting Shabbos Candles with Electric

Speaker 1: There is to say such a thing, light candles, but also have in mind for the electric, because you’re leaving lit some light, because that is indeed the concept of oneg Shabbos, that when you come it shouldn’t be the whole house dark. One leaves over some candles, I mean some electric on. They have in mind that the lighting of candles is on the electric too. I remember such a thing, I don’t remember where I saw it, but there is such a thing, one uses it as a support.

I’m not going to stop, look, I’m not going to stop lighting beautiful candles with olive oil and a candelabra. I’m not saying, certainly it’s beautiful, it’s kavod Shabbos. But from the main law, simply, I don’t see that it’s very difficult.

Chiddush: The Mishnah Berurah About Oils

Because from this piece in the Mishnah Berurah I want to learn it out, because if there had been an obligation for certain oils, he would have said, “Okay, I could even say, I knew about you from before, I would have said, ‘No problem.’” But he says, “Okay, it actually says one can light anything, it’s not olive oil, but there are exceptions.” We see even that they weren’t particular at all in Klal Yisrael about oil. There is a matter to also light a bit of olive oil, I don’t know what the matter is, because that is the mitzvah min hamuvchar (the most choice way). But they light fat, wax, things that are not necessarily so. Wax was actually calculated that one may not. Our wax candles are good candles.

Innovation: Wax Candles of Chazal Are Not Our Candles

Speaker 2: Yes, it doesn’t mean what it says in the poskim. It must mean something else, it doesn’t make any sense anymore. Yes, it must mean something that doesn’t flow after the wick. Fat, but here it also says fat explicitly.

Speaker 1: Our, that used to be called fat. In ancient times it was actually fat from an animal, and they said, “Treif like a candle,” they said. But even now, I don’t know what a candle means, it means oil. The candle means today, I mean that they didn’t have any concept of a candle, that’s what I think. The idea of a candle that one makes so hard, a lamp, one poured in the gas, whatever the combustible material, how do you say, the fire, whatever one poured into a cup, there was no such thing as a candle. The candle is a new invention. About this the poskim say, I remember it says in the sefarim about wax, that this, candles of wax is a different thing, these are our type of candles, not the candles of Chazal which is a vessel, this is not included in the prohibition.

We see all these candles that are with a vessel and a vessel. Not only, it actually says that olive oil is a mitzvah min hamuvchar after all. Here it says that one only uses olive oil, yes? As you say, one uses olive oil. That means why does one do so? We see, here in those times we see people who only do olive oil, all candles, and they did so, that means why. The candles wouldn’t have been, one wouldn’t have done this. That is the answer. In practice, I mean personally, I personally think that the candle is also only for the sake of olive oil. There are today candles that are made from olive oil. Yes, you know those, those, those little ones that one puts in the small cups. The big candles, the big pieces of candles, and the proof is, at weddings one doesn’t see lighting any olive oil in a small candleholder. One puts instead big candles on the table.

Transition to New Laws – Concerns When Using Shabbos Candles

So, he says, now, now we’re going to learn more laws. This doesn’t have so much to do with how the candle gives light, but rather more laws that have to do with the candles, that is concerns that can happen when lighting candles, or concerns from using the candles, and whether it’s a matter of extinguishing or other forms of muktzeh or such sorts of things.

Innovation: The Context of the Laws – Erev Shabbos and “Shema Yiteh”

So, one must explain, we spoke about this a bit before, a part of these things is actually, as you argued, decrees on the prohibition of kindling, because that can actually stand there. It’s actually relevant, it’s true, there are perhaps two laws, a few laws here that are directly relevant Friday to night, Shabbos itself, but most laws are still set up for erev Shabbos. And the Rambam said, the context of the whole two, three chapters already is about what one may not do erev Shabbos, with the public domain, everything one does erev Shabbos, and the Rabbanan said, here there are things that one may not do erev Shabbos, because of “shema yiteh” (lest he tilt), the whole “Bameh Madlikin” is still such a decree, just as “shema yechta” (lest he sin), there is “shema yiteh.” One may not even erev Shabbos light an oil that isn’t one that one uses for a meal, because it will become Shabbos. The same thing “placing a vessel under the candle,” it may be one may not do erev Shabbos also. Right, one may not erev Shabbos also, one may not also do by the radiator.

So I would perhaps say it a bit like this, a part of these things is relevant, because the chapter that the Rambam gave is “things that one does erev Shabbos and the melachah happens on Shabbos,” and we’ll now go in, very well in, everything has to do with lighting candles, that is the laws that we’re going to say about what one may not do things with the candles on Shabbos. But once we’ve mentioned “shema yiteh,” because the reason why not to use certain candles is “shema yiteh,” people are already all laws of “shema yiteh,” although that one is already yes a law that has to do with Shabbos, and it could have gone in under the category of a me’ir (one who kindles).

Innovation: “Shema Yiteh” Is Not in Every Melachah

But I think it’s more than that. I think for example that the “shema yiteh” is also not… the Chachamim didn’t make decrees in each of the avos melachos (primary categories of work). That is, if a person knows that something certain can bring him to “shema yiteh,” that is a part of shemiras Shabbos (guarding Shabbos), he must stay away. Here the Chachamim made some sort of… It does have to do with hadlakas neiros Shabbos (lighting Shabbos candles). Because it’s a mitzvah of hadlakas neiros Shabbos, it was more on the minds of the Chachamim, they made decrees there. That is, it could be that there is just as “shema yiteh” exists, I know, “shema yacharosh” (lest he plow), “shema” I know what, he will do another melachah. But it’s not necessarily that Chachamim wrote it out. Not every decree does one write out. I’m not sure.

Speaker 2: The law that you’re saying is an innovation from other contemporary words.

Speaker 1: Let’s go to… Let’s learn though. Okay.

Law 12: One May Not Place a Perforated Vessel Full of Oil on Top of the Candle

The Rambam says thus: “One may not place a perforated vessel full of oil on top of the candle”. There is a way, you said that a candle in ancient times was always in a vessel with oil lying in it. So, one way of doing this is, one has a vessel in which oil lies, and the vessel has a hole from below, and it drips the whole time into the vessel where the fire is lit. So he has the whole time a supply of oil. That is, presumably it’s a practical thing, that if you have the vessel full of oil, all the oil can become one big fire. He wants it to burn bit by bit.

Eh, well, but there’s a problem about this. Look at the Gemara. He says, “One may not place” – a person should not place a perforated vessel, a vessel that has a hole, full of oil, on top of the candle, above the entrance to the candle, “so that it should drip”, so that it should drip oil the whole time into the vessel of the candle, the lantern, yes, what’s the word? The vessel. Not fill… no, lantern is the Yiddish word for a… for a lamp. But a vessel means plain like a cup, basically. The cup has on top such a place where one puts in the… You’ve seen the pictures of it. And it’s a candle of oil.

Speaker 2: One only makes on a vessel of fire. No, but it’s not. He’s already speaking of the oil candle. I’m talking to you here about the oil candle. No, but an oil candle is a… our candle, I don’t know, perhaps that’s the reason why our oil candle comes so weak. One struggles with the floating wicks, with things. One must buy. Ah, I actually need to buy. One must find such a candle from Chazal. It comes always, one sees the pictures, and you understand such pictures. It comes such a place where the wick comes in, something is set up for that.

Law 12 (Continued): And One May Not Fill a Bowl with Oil

Speaker 1: The same thing, and one may not fill a bowl with oil, which is another way how one can do this, to have the whole time a constant supply of oil for the candle, by placing next to the candle a plate full of oil. One should not do such a thing. One should not take a plate full of oil and place it next to the candle, and place the head of the wick in it, and the other end of the wick, not the end where it’s lit, the other end one dips into the plate, so it should transfer to the candle, which has from there to suck the whole time oil, so that it should draw.

Innovation: The Reason for the Decree – “Shema Yikach Min HaShemen”

Why? Both things are a decree, because lest he take from the oil that is in the vessel, because I have a decree that he will take out from the oil and use for his foods. Why don’t I have this concern about the vessel where there is the candle itself, where there is the candle itself? Because it is disgusting in the candle. There where the wick lies, it has already become a bit smoky, it has already, it’s already not so clean. But the other plate from which it drips, or from which the head of the wick draws, is pure oil. There is a concern that one will use it, and if one will use it there is a matter of causing extinguishing. He will cause the candle not to have any great supply of oil, to extinguish earlier.

Law 12 (Continued): And It Is Forbidden to Benefit from the Oil – Muktzeh Because of Prohibition

Here we turn further. What happens if the candle has already extinguished? And it is forbidden to benefit on Shabbos from the oil that was lit in it, even if the candle extinguished. One may not on Shabbos have benefit from the candle, even if it has already extinguished, from the candle that was in the wick. And even if it dripped from the candle, even if oil ran out, it’s already not in the vessel next to the candle, it ran out from the candle, it lies on the table for example, it is forbidden. Why? What is different, muktzeh because of prohibition? We haven’t yet learned muktzeh, but one of the muktzehs is, a thing has become, muktzeh means that a person has set it aside from his mind, he has removed it, it’s not looked at as something that he has potential to use on Shabbos, he has as it were placed it in a category of things that he doesn’t use on Shabbos. Also the plate with oil he has set aside from his mind, why? What is the prohibition? Because one may not take from it on Shabbos, because it’s made for the oil, for the candle, and there is a decree of extinguishing. Therefore even if it has extinguished, there is no longer the concern of extinguishing, but there is the prohibition of muktzeh.

Law 12 (Conclusion): But If He Made a Loop – It Is Permitted

But if he made for it like a loop that has in it the oil to the candle in earthenware, if he has however connected that the two plates one should see that the two plates have a relationship, that it’s connected with a loop, as he says here, in earthenware and in a reed, then the person will know on Shabbos that he may not take from this, because it’s connected, it’s obvious that also the plate of oil is a part of the whole candle, one doesn’t fear that he will use it on Shabbos, therefore it is permitted to light this way. Permitted means that one may use the oil. Permitted means that one may use the oil, one may light this way.

Discussion: Why Does the Loop Help?

Speaker 2: Perhaps it also becomes disgusting? Can’t it be? I don’t know what’s missing the disgusting. It’s seemingly the word because… because it’s obvious. Just as when one doesn’t fear he will take out… why doesn’t one fear that he will take out? But there it doesn’t become disgusting. The patent is the same that the head of the wick draws. I don’t believe that the connectedness makes it disgusting.

Speaker 1: It could be, again, it’s in the mind of the person if this is one thing. When it’s… presumably beforehand one places the plate initially. Why does a person place a plate initially? Why do you pour into the candle? Isn’t the candle big enough? It could also be actually because of this, so that he should be able to take a bit of oil in his salad later.

Innovation: Explanation of “Disgusting in the Candle”

According to “disgusting in the candle” seemingly doesn’t mean that there actually is that the oil isn’t the same pure oil, but rather he doesn’t look at it. A person says to someone, “I’m going to take… ah, how can I take a bit of oil?” “Ah, take from the candle.” Obviously it’s a candle, already nothing. It’s disgusting, it has become muktzeh from his mind because it’s a part of the candle. One doesn’t mean actually that it’s dirty, but rather one has a concern of extinguishing. This is a little candle, it’s not terrible, but it has become muktzeh with this because it’s a part of the candle. So if it’s connected it’s also a part of the candle, even if it’s not actually dirty. Should one say that the vessel is also, erev Shabbos, right? A vessel next to the candle, one may not, because the decree is on Shabbos.

Laws of Shabbos: Laws of Shabbos Candles – Vessel Under the Candle, Reading by Candlelight, and Children Before the Teacher

Law 13: One May Not Place a Vessel Under the Candle to Catch Oil in It

Speaker 1:

If you assume that there is such a disqualification, but if you assume that one doesn’t actually mean that it’s dirty. No, but here I wouldn’t have been the leniency by the second vessel. But let’s say that you think that it has become by him, he already doesn’t look at the oil as something he will use in food, but it’s a part of the candle. So if it’s connected it’s also a part of the candle, even if it’s not actually dirty.

But should one say that the rule is also erev Shabbos, right? A vessel next to the candle one may not. Why? Because the decree is on Shabbos that it will mean, there is no difference. So the decree comes in.

The next decree is different erev Shabbos. The innovation of all these things is that one may also not do something erev Shabbos that afterwards one will stumble. A person could have said, now I don’t have any mitzvah of Shabbos, Friday I don’t need to be careful about Shabbos. Shabbos itself I need then to be careful, I need to set up a guard for myself. No, there is an obligation on a person Friday to be careful about Shabbos. It makes a lot of sense, because these are the melachos that one does Friday so that it should be lit and burning on Shabbos. But actually there are many times in the Torah, one must take care of the chametz before Pesach because of Pesach, or there are still such. But rabbinically certainly, this is a rabbinic decree. Yes, it’s a rabbinic decree.

One may not place a vessel under the candle to catch oil in it on Shabbos. A candle that drips down from it the whole time, as we have already seen before that it’s already not in the vessel, it drips out, he wants to place underneath a plate to catch the… under the candle, to catch the oil that runs out, an under-plate. One may not do on Shabbos, one may not on Shabbos put in the vessel. One speaks presumably even in a manner he doesn’t need to move it. Let’s say the lamp, he can place underneath it, there is nothing underneath it. To lift the candle and place underneath one certainly may not as moving. Even in a manner that he touches nothing. Why? Because there is a prohibition called “shema yevatel hakli mehechano” (lest he nullify the vessel from its readiness), he will nullify the vessel from what it’s ready for. That is, the vessel is now a kosher vessel that one can use for anything, and one will place it under the oil to catch the oil, which the oil is already muktzeh because of prohibition, the plate will become nullified, one won’t be able to use it on Shabbos. The plate will become a basis ledavar ha’asur (a base for a forbidden thing). He is nullifying a vessel from the thing for which it’s ready.

Discussion: What Is the Prohibition of Nullifying a Vessel from Its Readiness?

Speaker 2:

What is the prohibition of nullifying a vessel from its readiness? What is that? Is that something from muktzeh? From demolishing? From muktzeh? One may not make muktzeh? Ah, demolishing? Making muktzeh? Like the opposite of fixing?

Speaker 1:

I think already, you’re asking a good question. What is the prohibition of nullifying? I thought that it’s like, if one may not use muktzeh, it could be that one may not make muktzeh, but that’s a bit weird.

And I’m further vessel from its readiness, what do the… let’s see in… ah, he says that it’s similar to demolishing, as the Rambam says later. The Rambam in chapter 25 says that nullifying a vessel from its readiness is similar to demolishing. Something that one makes that one should not be able to use it anymore on Shabbos is similar to demolishing. Like demolishing he said it. It’s a rabbinic prohibition, it’s not a complete prohibition, it’s a concern. Yes. But won’t one use it? In truth, because there isn’t something a concern that one will use it or anything. It’s only a matter of nullifying a vessel from its readiness which one may not do on Shabbos.

Placing a Vessel Under the Candle to Catch Sparks

Speaker 1:

And the Rambam, what happens if someone wants to place a plate not to catch the oil that drips out, but rather small sparks, nitzutzos from the candle, come out, and he doesn’t want it to catch on the tablecloth or whatever, so he wants to place a vessel there. That is permitted. “V’nosen kli tachas haner b’Shabbos lekabel bo nitzutzos”, because unlike receiving oil which would make the plate now a basis l’davar ha’assur, but nitzutzos, the moment it touches the plate it becomes extinguished and it’s batel, it’s a small drop, ah, it’s nothing, eino mamash. Batel hu u’metaltelto. He can afterwards, once it’s finished that one is no longer in the nitzutzos, he can take the plate, because there’s nothing at all, no davar mamashi in the plate, so therefore he’s not mevatel kli mehechano.

But here there’s a new prohibition, what is one not allowed to do? If he wants to place the plate under the nitzutzos, he also wants to put in a little water there, so that it should extinguish the nitzutzos even more easily when it drips out. That one may not do. “Assur litein l’socha mayim afilu b’erev Shabbos, mipnei shemekarev kibui hanitzutzos.”

Discussion: Why is it forbidden to put water even on erev Shabbos?

Speaker 2:

A whole coal is going to be extinguished a minute later, and he’s mekarev. On Shabbos I can understand, mekarev kibui hanitzutzos. But what’s the problem on erev Shabbos?

Speaker 1:

He says it’s like a person standing and extinguishing something with his hands. It looks like someone who’s extinguishing it. Yes, it’s actually from erev Shabbos. But what’s the problem at all? Mipnei shemekarev kibui hanitzutzos. One may place a large bottle of water next to a candle, if that’s actually a halacha in… There’s a question if one may. One may not just like that.

Shema ya’aseh kein b’Shabbos. Ah, he says that because it’s forbidden on Shabbos, they also forbade it on erev Shabbos. Even on Shabbos it could be that it’s not actually mechabeh, one needs to know. So says Rashi, erev Shabbos shema ya’aseh b’Shabbos. Yes. Okay.

Digression: Chassidic concept of nitzutzos

Speaker 1:

Here there’s also a Chassidic concept. It says nitzutzos hakedosha in everything, but it’s eino ben mamash. Not about that will it… I don’t know. Anyway… It’s a Chassidic interpretation of nitzutzos eino ben mamash. Certainly yes, here. Yes, one needs real ma’asim, like ad shetitapes. Just having a nitzutz, a great hisorerus is a beautiful thing, but it’s not a real ma’aseh. One needs to light a candle that will burn. If one extinguishes a nitzutz it’s also nothing.

Do you mean to say the strange thing I told you? It’s almost Shabbos. One pilpul, one doesn’t say Polish Torahs. One learns inside b’iyun, so says the next halacha.

Halacha 14: Ein polin l’or haner v’ein korin l’or haner

Speaker 1:

Now, now we come to the halacha of things that one may not do l’or haner. This is nimshach, because we spoke about various halachos that relate to the mitzvah of hadlakas neiros, chashashim and things, so one also says things that one may not do, use with the candles, even though it doesn’t relate… This is not specifically the ner shel Shabbos, this is every din of what one may do with a candle on Shabbos, because of the concern shema yateh, that perhaps he’ll want to see something better with the candle, so the Rambam says like this, “Ein polin”, polin means removing dirt from a… removing dirt from a garment or what? He says checking if there are lice, if there are small insects in a garment.

It means something where one needs to have strong light, there’s the concern. The same thing, korei, reading, l’or haner. Afilu gavoha shtei komos, even if the… the light is very high. Afilu asara… afilu asara batim zeh al gabei zeh v’ner ba’elyona, even if the candle is very high, it’s a… a night lamp, but the language… how does this happen? If it’s ten houses, you see he doesn’t come down from there, no light at all below.

Speaker 2:

Understand… It’s an example from the Gemara, but there was once some incident. Not what was, you can say that it… he may never… he may never.

Speaker 1:

Lo yikra v’lo yifleh yifli l’oro batachtona, even if he stands below, but if the candle gives light, he may not use that to read or such a thing, shema yateh, he’ll forget that it’s Shabbos today, and he’ll be mateh.

Statch, what the halacha says, that if this being mateh will be a great tircha, that he needs to go up a bunch of steps, that doesn’t help. There’s one way how it helps.

Shnayim korin b’inyan echad

Speaker 1:

That if there’s a shomer, as also ‘shnayim korin b’inyan echad’… if two people read the same thing, (I don’t know the word ‘shomer’ clear, right?) Mila they read one thing, that’s called ‘b’inyan echad’, meaning they read something together, they may indeed read together l’or haner, why? Shekol echad mazkir es chaveiro if he forgets.

But if ‘bishney inyanim’, if they learn different things, one learns nigleh and one learns nistar, they’re in a different world, not ‘kol echad mazkir es chaveiro’, each one does his thing, and he won’t even notice that the other one lights a candle or does something.

A logical thing, when two people learn b’chavrusa and they learn the same thing, one carries a piece of concern… another Chassidic Torah for the other, he feels some connection, if he sees him nichshal with being mateh he’ll quickly stop him. But if they’re… even at the same table, because they’re osek in different things, there isn’t the shemira. It needs to be… here the halacha doesn’t say, one places a shomer, one has them read together. It’s like a chevra, when one chevra is reading, like you argued, more so than that. People together, two people together don’t do an aveira.

Even in halacha there’s such a halacha, except anashim prutzim, two people don’t do an aveira together. Yes, I understand, it’s similar.

Discussion: Does just a shomer help?

Speaker 2:

No, my question is here, when one doesn’t read b’inyan haner, does it help at all to place a shomer. We don’t see here the thing of just placing a shomer. One can say that my sevara is that it does help, it’s even stronger than just a friend whom you haven’t warned at all.

Speaker 1:

I don’t know if it’s stronger, I’ll tell you. In the earlier poskim it says that one can do so. It doesn’t lie out before me, because two people do something together, the simple meaning is they do… what they do will they do together? Being mateh will they do together? One will give a push to extinguish the candle, and the other will say “hello, it’s Shabbos”? But just, one can hear that it’s even stronger, because there you only have that because one does something together, but when you tell him clearly to say, it’s much stronger. One can hear that it’s stronger, yes.

He brings here actually in Peirush HaMishnayos it says that one can just place another. It’s even shnayim korin bo, but as you say, that without that is also good. And so it also says in the Tur, that it’s only when the other is korei b’inyan haner, then it’s a problem.

But more about shomer one speaks in the next piece, about tinokos, here one also sees about shomer, let’s see. But once there’s a thing, the rebbe is mishamer aleihem not from the… he’s mishamer aleihem that they should learn well, but he’s mishamer on that itself.

Halacha 15: Tinokos korin lifnei raban l’or haner

Speaker 1:

Tinokos korin lifnei raban l’or haner. Shabbos, nowadays one doesn’t go to cheder on Shabbos, but k’rishonim k’tikunim one used to. So tinokos… yes, one used to go to cheder on Shabbos. The Rambam says that one goes to learn. Yes, one learns on Shabbos still. One with a plate of alilus on erev Shabbos. But Friday night, the Rambam said that it’s a mitzvah min haTorah that one must learn ukrasem bo yomam valayla, so every Friday night one goes to cheder. Winter, in any case, yes. You say practically.

So then, that which tinokos shekorin lifnei raban l’or haner, they may indeed read when their rebbe, the melamed, is with them l’or haner, why? Mishum sheharav mishmaran. The rebbe is there and he watches them, he’ll make sure that one doesn’t touch the candle. The children have fear of the rebbe, but the rebbe, in olden times at least, doesn’t have fear of the children. “Hu lo yikra l’or haner pen yateh”, he may not read l’or haner, “pen yateh”, he doesn’t have a rebbe who will watch him.

It’s another thing, one sees here that as if what shame a rebbe should forget in front of the children is a great shame, so perhaps it’s pressure, but that’s not called din shomer. But what may one do, a way

Laws of Reading by Candlelight, Similar Vessels, and Opening a Door Opposite a Candle – Tekios Erev Shabbos

Halacha: The melamed may not read l’or haner

But, the children have fear of the rebbe, but the rebbe, once it was different, but nowadays, he doesn’t have fear of the children. Hu lo yikra, he may not read l’or haner, because he doesn’t have a rebbe who will watch him.

Interesting thing, one sees here that as if what shame a rebbe should forget in front of the children, it’s a great shame, it’s perhaps pressure, but that’s not called the shomer.

But what may one do? Korei means actually inside reading, reading off the page. But looking a bit one may. V’yesh lo liros basefer l’or haner, kedei liros roshei parshiyosav, simply to open, find where one needs to read. This speaks of the melamed, that the melamed himself, he himself may not, he may open, because he doesn’t have a sefer, v’yehei hu korei lifneihem. But that’s not iyun, like we learned earlier, devarim shetzerichim iyun, right?

The seder halimud of old

It comes out that Friday night was the time when the melamed didn’t teach a new shiur, but the children reviewed and the melamed tested them. Yes, I mean that the normal way of learning used to be essentially such… perhaps the first time he needs to teach them what it means, but afterwards it’s already shinun, it’s mainly the chazara until one knows all the pesukim. In general in the past, when the Rambam for example taught his talmidim, and he gives shiurim, he doesn’t speak to anything, the seder halimud was, like I learn with some chavrusa that I have, the talmid would read the text, and the rebbe would explain. That was the normal seder halimud in the past.

Halacha: Keilim hadomim zeh lazeh

Now we’ll learn what kinds of things mean that one needs iyun, that one may not do l’or haner, yes? Keilim hadomim zeh lazeh, two plates or vessels that look the same as each other, v’eino makiram ela b’iyun harbeh, one needs to look well to know which vessel is what, assur lehakrivan l’or haner ulehavchin beineihem, one may also not do that. It’s not only korei a sefer, but also any thing where one needs to have strong light, one may not do for the same reason, ulehavchin beineihem shema yishkach v’yateh.

Halacha: Shamash she’eino kavua / shamash kavua

Lefikach, it comes out, how the halacha came out, that the one who takes care of the prepared food, the one who takes care of the dishes, may not check l’or haner which plate to take. Lefikach, shamash she’eino kavua, a shamash who isn’t fixed, doesn’t always do the job, assur lo livdok kosos uk’aros l’or haner. Mila, if someone is particular, he can’t [know] all the plates inside out, just from touching them or what. Mila he’ll be nichshal with shema yateh. He says, the halacha is by him between bein hashmashos, between mincha to the next hour or or rav, most likely the wine goes up on all halachos until now. Because you don’t already have the chiluk, right? Okay. A shamash kavua there’s a chiluk. But a shamash kavua, but a shamash who always does his job, and he can already recognize the difference between the vessels easily, mutar lo livdok l’or haner kosos uk’aros, mila if someone needs a lot, he doesn’t need to look much, because he catches it quickly.

But that’s with a strong candle. But between bein hashmashos, it’s for another reason. Ein morin l’or haner, even a shamash is permitted. On the shamash one doesn’t let him use even to look at plates, even if he already knows a bit l’or hashmashos, why? Another concern, because if he’ll become too familiar with the candles and use them to look at things on them, then gezru shema yateh, when he’ll also take from there a bit of oil. And then it’s an issur of kibui.

Why specifically the shamash has more concern

Yes, but it’s interesting, because specifically the shamash one can make the chumra, because he’s the shamash kavua, not necessarily kavua, because he’s the shamash who needs to serve, and sometimes one needs to add a bit of oil to a food and the like, I need to have more fear by the shamash. Yes. Perhaps the baal habayis doesn’t have but the concern only the shamash? Right.

It’s the Raavad there’s a dispute if someone wants to know practically the halacha, he wants to look not a Raavad who just needs to say a chiluk. I don’t know, it’s a nice Gemara. The Gemara says, Rabbi Yehuda ben Shmuel said, even lehavchin bein bigdo levged ishto, also means l’or haner. Rava said, eh, you’re talking about bnei Mechoza. In Mechoza the men and women used to wear the same clothes. They both had robes, it’s possible. But chaklai, regular people, they know. Even Mechoza only speaks of old women, young women also had the feminine clothes that one can easily see.

The shamash and the oil

No, the topic of the shamash there’s a dispute in the mefarshim about shamash she’eino kavua, I don’t remember. He says like this, earlier we learned that the oil of the candle is nimas, people won’t use it. The shamash is the poor shamash who eats like… like it was earlier the halacha, one puts oil on his head. He’s like the shamash. So from where does he take oil? He takes from the candle, he takes out a bit of oil. He doesn’t dare to take from the oil that one prepares. That’s the matter why the shamash is more than the baal habayis, because other people have oil, we said earlier “menei sheshimshu nimas”. The shamash doesn’t have such…

Further, another halacha about a concern of kibui on a candle.

Halacha: Ner shehaya achorei hadeles

He says the halacha like this: Ner shehaya achorei hadeles, assur liftoach hadeles k’negdo, shema yichbeh. A candle that lies next to the door, in back of the door, one may not use the door, open and close the door, because when one opens and closes the door, it extinguishes it. Ela im ken hu zahir bish’as pesicha uvish’as ne’ila. If the candle lies in a place next to the door, that when one opens or closes the door a wind comes, one needs to be careful. It was already seemingly a melacha she’eina miskavein, and he doesn’t need it, but lechatchila he should be careful. Perhaps the matter is forbidden because there’s a mitzvah of ner Shabbos?

Discussion: Psik reisha or davar she’eino miskavein

No, I mean that one will see the next halacha… No, the next halacha speaks of an actual issur. I mean that if it’s a strong opening it’s called a psik reisha, it will always close the candle, and therefore one may not. That’s what I think. But if it’s not so, it’s pure and simple, even if it’s extinguished it’s a davar she’eino miskavein. But I thought perhaps there’s a din in ner Shabbos, one must have ner Shabbos, but that doesn’t help here that it’s an eino miskavein. That’s another din, that one should have kavod Shabbos. But here one already speaks of hilchos kibui.

Back to the matter of ner shel shemen zayis

But on the previous thing, the ner shel shemen zayis, the shamash stands specifically by ner shel shemen zayis. It means on neft, he won’t even the shamash take from there, because it’s actually bitter. But ner shel shemen zayis, even though it’s a bit bitter because it’s meshubah for the candle, but it’s not enough nimas that the poor person, the weaker category, will refrain from it.

Halacha: Pesicha deles k’neged hamedura

Yes, v’assur… another thing that one may not do in the house. Assur liftoach hadeles k’neged hamedura b’Shabbos, opposite the flame that one lights to warm the house, kedei shetehei ruach nosheves ba. Means specifically, if a person wants it to flare up better through the wind, then one may not. Even if it’s only a ruach metzuya, he says that it’s anyway there, I just want to make a drop more. No, ruach metzuya means as opposed to she’eina metzuya, which is a strong wind, which then one may not, because it can extinguish it, or do something. But even if he doesn’t want, but he wants to know that one may open, he also shouldn’t open in a way that it can actually extinguish.

Halacha: Ner shel Shabbos al gabei ilan

Rambam Hilchos Shabbos Perek 5 — The Order of Blasts Before and After Shabbos

And one more thing that one may do: placing the Shabbos candle on a tree that is attached to the ground. One may place the Shabbos candle on a tree that is attached to the ground, if someone is concerned. A Gemara says that later it states in the halachos that one should not derive benefit from something attached [to the ground] on Shabbos, because perhaps he will tear off a piece from the… But since such a candle is in any case muktzeh, one doesn’t touch it in any case on Shabbos. On Yom Tov one sees that it’s not permitted, because on Yom Tov there is the same prohibition of not saying [to do something] with something attached, but a candle one may still use, so one goes and uses it. On Shabbos, when one doesn’t touch the candle, one may.

—

Tekios Erev Shabbos

Until here are the laws of lighting Shabbos candles, with several decrees that have to do with candles. Now we’re going to learn another thing that one does on erev Shabbos, which is not a matter of melacha, but rather a warning for the people to actually stop doing melachos.

We’ve already learned, the Rambam says that whenever one blows a shofar it’s to awaken, to arouse people. Whether the shofar of Rosh Hashanah, or we learned earlier, messengers, when a trouble happens, so that the people should come running to help. There is another type of tekias shofar that they would blow shofar, it says in the Mishnayos, to announce that it’s Shabbos, to arouse the people.

Halacha: Tekios Erev Shabbos

So, we’re going to learn the halachos about this. In all the provinces and towns of Israel – he means to say, not necessarily Eretz Yisrael apparently, everywhere where Jews live – they blow six blasts on erev Shabbos. One blows six times tekios shofar on erev Shabbos. And where did they do it? From a high place they would blow in order to make all the people of the province and all the people of its outskirts hear. They did it on a high place, so that all the people from the city and from the surrounding area should hear the tekiah. “Medina” means the city, yes. And “migrash” means the small towns around, the villages. Or one works in the fields. Near the city there’s always a migrash, an empty area of the city. The typical city has an “industrial backyard,” where the garbage lies, where there are the large heavy factories. Migrash, yes.

Discussion: “Hayu Tokin” – Mitzvah or Description?

Is this a mitzvah to blow. Actually Hagahos HaRambam says “hayu tokin.” Very interesting, he doesn’t say “tokin,” he says “hayu tokin.” He only says this about “in a high place,” but it’s not a language of “one should blow in a high place,” “litkoa.” It’s “tokin.” Yes. So, that means, the Rambam says it this way, with two opinions. Essentially the halacha is to blow everywhere, it’s not a law in Eretz Yisrael or something like that. But in practice, for example, in the Rambam’s place one doesn’t see that they conducted themselves this way. Presumably because it’s a gentile city, one couldn’t blow with ease and tranquility. He says “towns of Israel,” even in chutz la’aretz, it’s only when it’s actually a square shtetl, Kiryas Yoel. And so too today actually in Howell and in Toms River there’s no question. Our cities aren’t, but also there they don’t make a tekias shofar. Apparently, I think that in Eretz Yisrael there are people who are careful to come blow shofar. For example, when you go in to make a yahrzeit for the Rambam in the store, he’ll also twist your head with trumpets and such things.

Discussion: Shofar or Trumpets? Shabbos Siren?

The question is actually, whether we don’t have, we for example today, whether everyone has an eruv, this isn’t a reminder. Perhaps this is actually with trumpets, not with blowing plain shofar. It’s not clearly written what one blows. “Tokin u’meri’in” both can mean either shofar or trumpets, no? It’s certain that if one makes a machine bell, like they do in large cities, one is certainly yotzei, because it’s simply higher. It’s besides “in a high place,” he makes it on a building, a high… Ah, here everyone agrees. By the lights you don’t agree that one is yotzei with electric lights. It’s the same thing. And lights have halachos, this is a practical thing, there isn’t for this any mitzvos, not any mitzvah she’eina tzricha legufa, no mitzvah she’tzricha legufa, no mitzvah she’tzricha legufa, no mitzvah she’tzricha legufa.

Discussion: Tekios in New Jewish Communities

It’s interesting, I was thinking about this that actually in typical large Jewish cities there is actually a Shabbos bell, but in all these new, as they call them the periphery small towns, around Lakewood for example, and there isn’t any… The question is

Rambam Hilchos Shabbos Perek 5 — The Order of Blasts Before and After Shabbos

Discussion: Whether One is Yotzei with Modern Shabbos Bell

Speaker 1:

Here you’re announcing to everyone by the lights. You don’t agree that one is yotzei with electric lights?

Speaker 2:

It’s the same thing. The lights have halachos. This is a practical thing. It’s not a mitzvah at all, it’s not a governmental mitzvah. It’s not a mitzvah that requires learning and teaching.

Speaker 1:

Okay. It’s interesting. I was thinking about this, that actually in typical large Jewish cities there is actually a Shabbos bell. But in all these new, as they call them in Eretz Yisrael, periphery small towns, around Lakewood for example, there isn’t any…

The question is whether one is yotzei. Today for example, many companies put out their weekly ads with and write the times. It could be that this is also a type of way, because this way one announces to all the people of the province. It’s certainly like part of the same matter.

Apparently it looks here, apparently in practice, that a father should in his house call out, shout, that it shouldn’t be easy to mistakenly enter a few minutes into Shabbos. It could be that with what we’ve made that Shabbos becomes eighteen minutes earlier, or an hour earlier, that itself is enough of a fence to announce.

The Order of Blasts — The Six Tekios Erev Shabbos

Speaker 1:

So, you said six tekios, let’s learn the whole order.

First Tekiah — Those Standing in the Fields Ceased

Speaker 2:

So, the first tekiah, is they ceased… The Rambam says it actually in past tense, this is how the order was. He says, one does it also by the people of the migrash, that the people who are still working in the fields…

Of course, today no one works until this time, today one comes from the fields by the time. But this is how it was. Those standing in the fields ceased from the work of the field and the labor of working the field. The people who are on the fields stopped working on the fields.

Why They Enter Together

And from then, from that time of the first tekiah, those standing near and far from the city, then the order is that all the people who come from the fields into the city should come together. The one who lives closer to the city shouldn’t quickly go in alone, he lives closer to the city, he can give a walk. He should also wait and enter together.

Speaker 1:

What is the matter of this, so that no one should leave him behind?

Speaker 2:

No, just, it’s a danger. Simply a danger to leave and remain alone in a field. Or like the halacha, that when one goes to pray in a ruin one shouldn’t leave the friend alone, one should wait until he finishes praying and go home with him. It’s a matter of danger. Not people from outside. Danger.

It could be that one wants to make sure that all Jews know that Shabbos is coming. I’m not sure that every forsaken Jew from the distant field hears the tekiah, but the closer ones must wait, one makes sure that when Shabbos comes even the one from the distant field has heard that it’s Shabbos. Could be. Others say it’s a Shabbos mistake, I don’t know. Okay.

Second Tekiah — The Shutters Were Removed and the Stores Were Locked

But at this time it’s not yet so late that one must already make Shabbos, because “the stores are still open and the shutters are placed”. It’s still a time when the stores are open, and the tris — tris is always the gate, how do you call it, the ratchets, the thing with which one locks a store, that one pulls down in Brooklyn. That is a tris.

I didn’t know. The stores that have such a locked… That’s not the tris of the Mishnah, that’s the tris of Brooklyn. A tris means approximately that. The stores in ancient times weren’t buildings, probably, it was more like a stand. It was a market, such a little box, a stand, and on this one placed to lock up. Approximately. The stores are still open with the trissim, the things with which one locks the store, munachin, still lying to the side, the store is still open.

“They began to blow the second tekiah” — one blows the second shofar. This is a signal for the stores, “and the shutters were removed”, one should close the shutters of the stores, “and the stores were locked”, the stores lock up. But by people at home one is still preparing for Shabbos. “And the hot foods are still placed in pots on the stove”, one hasn’t yet made a hatmanah and taken down from the stove so it should be in a permitted manner that we learned earlier, rather it’s still cooking properly on the fire, because it’s not yet Shabbos.

Third Tekiah — The Remover Removes

“They began to blow the third tekiah” — when one blows the third time shofar, then “the remover removes”, the person takes down the pot from the stove, removes the pot from the stove.

Speaker 1:

When did one… How did one do hatmanah?

Speaker 2:

The person who now takes a pot and he does hatmanah with something that doesn’t involve prohibition, or whatever things that one may, does his work. Therefore it seems to them that then is the time when one lights candles. That means, then one does the last minute melachos.

Time Measure — Enough to Roast a Small Fish

And one waits, but there’s still a bit of time to do the last minute preparations. One reckons here with the finicky ones, with the last minute Jews who aren’t yet ready. They still need to quickly roast a small fish, one gives more time to fry a small fish that doesn’t take much time to fry.

Speaker 1:

Also, what we learned last night that roasting one may do close to Shabbos. Did we learn that one may roast?

Speaker 2:

No, it says roasting.

Speaker 1:

Now it’s talking about what it blows over into Shabbos. It takes a short time, yes, okay. A small fish takes a measure of time. What does it say here about a measure of time?

Speaker 2:

Enough to stick a loaf in the oven. How long it takes to put in another small loaf… It doesn’t say the word small. A loaf in the oven, and afterwards and take it out. Right? To stick a loaf in the oven, and leave it there, and afterwards will be the advice of rodef or shogeg.

Speaker 1:

Okay, yes. That’s not the halacha. I’m saying, this says a measure.

Speaker 2:

Yes, it’s not at all taking down from the flame. And putting a loaf in the oven, and being able to take it down. Right?

Speaker 1:

Right.

Tekiah Teruah Tekiah — And One Rests

Speaker 2:

After the third tekiah. And here come the last three tekios, that it’s already becoming Shabbos. And one blows and sounds a teruah and blows, here one already does tekiah teruah tekiah, as a sign that Shabbos is actually beginning, and one rests as a sign. It’s actually three extra tekios, and then three quick tekios, one after the other.

By the three tekios in between one waits a bit of time, the measure that’s called enough to roast a small fish. It’s a measure of time. There are people who do this then, but this he says, it’s a measure of time. The time is also incorporated in things that one does actually approximately then. This could be, yes.

The third tekiah one puts away… Then one lights the candles, and one waits a bit more, and one makes tekios, three tekios, and one rests.

The Times of the Tekios — When Does One Do the Tekios

Speaker 2:

Well good. Already, says the Rambam, when does one do these things? The first tekiah one blows at mincha, and one means what is mincha? Mincha ketanah, when it’s already close to Shabbos, which is two and a half hours there after midday.

And the third, the third set of three, no, not the set of three, the third when one makes the last, the rest, the positive action for Shabbos, one does close to sunset, as the Rambam actually said that after sunset, during bein hashmashos, one does it then. Close, but not before the sunset, but a bit before.

Tekios Motzaei Shabbos

Speaker 2:

And also, there is also a motzaei Shabbos bell. Actually motzaei Shabbos, on motzaei Shabbos one blows after the stars come out to permit the people for their activities, to free the people. This is a sort of kiddush and havdalah, a sort of public announcement.

Discussion: Why One Doesn’t Make a Motzaei Shabbos Bell

It’s not the custom, true? One doesn’t do it. It seems that the people aren’t serious, one has much more fear of doing melacha on Shabbos than of not doing melacha on motzaei Shabbos. No one works anyway.

Our order of havdalah is that one prays motzaei Shabbos in shul, I mean, at least the men, let it be. Perhaps the whole community is together, members of a group don’t need any proof. Once there isn’t any non-community, I was at maariv once counted.

Speaker 1:

No, I think it’s missing. One should speak with the people who make the Shabbos bell, they should make a motzaei Shabbos bell also.

Speaker 2:

Can’t be, one is only… What they say the rabbis only prohibit, one only makes bells when one may not, when one may yes one doesn’t make. I don’t know a person who remained with his shtreimel and bekishe because no one had yet announced to him that it’s motzaei, one becomes aware that it’s motzaei. This I say, but here it says that one should yes make.

Yom Tov That Falls on Erev Shabbos / After Shabbos

Yom Kippur That Falls on Erev Shabbos

Speaker 1:

Okay. Now, what is if Yom Kippur falls on erev Shabbos?

Speaker 2:

One can’t blow, because one doesn’t blow on Yom Tov. Everything that… But the rabbis aren’t… But it’s shofar day, it’s not relevant.

Speaker 1:

Ah, that’s true.

Yom Kippur That Falls on Motzaei Shabbos

Speaker 2:

If it falls on motzaei Shabbos. Yom Kippur is motzaei Shabbos, then one doesn’t blow, one doesn’t make the tekiah of announcing that it’s motzaei Shabbos, and one doesn’t make havdalah, one also doesn’t make havdalah.

That means, if it’s Yom Tov, one sees that one does yes blow, the people should know that from now one may begin to do tzorech ochel nefesh. But by the Shabbosos…

By the Shabbosos it’s not missing. Ah, he says it clearly.

Yom Tov That Falls on Erev Shabbos / After Shabbos

If Yom Tov falls on erev Shabbos, one blows, one makes a tekiah on motzaei Yom Tov when it becomes Shabbos, but one doesn’t make havdalah, one doesn’t make havdalah from motzaei Yom Tov, one only makes havdalah at the end of motzaei Shabbos one makes havdalah on both.

If it falls after Shabbos, if Yom Tov is after Shabbos, one makes havdalah, one makes havdalah, but one doesn’t blow, one doesn’t make any tekiah.

Speaker 1:

Why?

Speaker 2:

Because it’s Shabbos, on Shabbos one doesn’t blow. On Yom Tov one doesn’t blow, on Yom Kippur one doesn’t blow, because he says it’s not missing. And… yes, on Shabbos one makes havdalah, but one doesn’t make any tekios.

Innovation: Tekios Motzaei Shabbos is an Aspect of Havdalah

One sees clearly actually that the tekios of motzaei Shabbos is an aspect of havdalah also. There is such a mitzvah, it could be that it’s actually a mitzvah, just as there is a mitzvah, a branch of the mitzvah of remembering at its entrance and exit, so too is the matter of the tekios, of connecting such a beginning and end.

Conclusion — One Should Make a Motzaei Shabbos Bell

Speaker 1:

One should speak with the person who goes around announcing with his trumpeter, he should actually go around also on motzaei Shabbos.

Speaker 2:

He can’t go around motzaei Shabbos? Haven’t you already opened your store on motzaei Shabbos? What else are you waiting for? Everyone shalom.

Okay, good. Until here Perek 5.