Shabbos 43 – שבת מג

Click here to view text of Daf (can be minimized to view alongside player)

Download Video (mp4)

Download Audio

Diagram 1   Diagram 2   Diagram 3

Today’s Daf Yomi Question:

The Chachamim allowed transferring a Meis out of the sun by placing a loaf or child on him, thus we consider the act of moving as being done for the permitted item.  Why can’t we consider the actual bed (which he is on) as the permitted item – in place of the loaf or child?

Click here to reply / view answers

 

5 thoughts on “Shabbos 43 – שבת מג

  1. שבת (מ”ג:) היכא דאיכא ככר או תינוק כו”ע לא פליגי כי פליגי היכא דלית ליה. קשה אטו עסקינן שלא היה להם שום דבר שאינו מוקצה? לא מנעל ולא כובע ולא כלום? ומשמע שצריך דוקא ככר או תינוק. גם משמע כן מהלשון “ככר או תינוק” ל”ל למינקט הני תרי, לימא ככר בלחוד ואנא ידענא דכל מילי המיטלטל בכלל. אבל לא ראיתי מי שיאמר למה דוקא ככר או תינוק.

    • קושייתכם מובאת בחידושי הר”ן, וביאר דאיירי שאין הוא רוצה להשתמש בכלי שלו לצורך זה (אולי משום טומאה וכו’) וזהו הפירוש “כי פליגי דלית ליה” היינו שאין ברצונו לשים הכלי על המת. ובאמת יש מהמפרשים שהוכיחו מגמ’ זו דככר ותינוק דוקא ולא שום כלי אחר.

  2. “amar lei tevel muchan hu eitzel shabbos she’im avar v’tiknu mitukan” why can’t we say that about anything, for exaple; if a kli was put to catch an egg it becomes muktza but we can be over & take off the egg & then use the kli?

    • Great point – which is actually raised by Tosfos who explains as follows: The Gemara is not saying that the ‘bitul kli’ can be undone through separating Maaser and permitting the Muktza (for in that case why is this different than being able to remove the egg, as you asked) but rather the point is that the Tevel is not deemed inherently Muktza to begin with, since the Muktza item itself has a potential heter on Shabbos. Thus it is not considered absolutely Muktza like other Muktza objects.

      Tosfos in Maseches Baitza (34b D”H Ha) says that this exception and leniency of Tevel is based on two factors: 1) Tevelin in itself is not a forbidden food, rather only on account of the Teruma which is mixed into it, which simply needs to be separated 2) Separating Teruma on Shabbos is only assur miderabanan ( – which is primarily a personal issur not related to the object). These factors combined determine that Tevel is not inherently Muktza, only a result of circumstances, which could theoretically change even during Shabbos.

  3. The bed is Batul to the Meis We find this with regards to carrying less than a Shiur of food with a plate, that he is Pattur, since the plate is there for the food — which is less than the Shiur.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>