ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafBeitzah 17
BEITZAH 17 (28 Sivan), has been dedicated to the memory of Harav Hagaon Rav
Yisroel Zev Gustman ZT'L by his Talmidim, on his Yahrzeit.
(a) According to Beis Shamai, when Yom-Tov falls on Shabbos, the Amidah
comprises eight Berachos - the opening three, the closing three (that one
recites by every Tefilah), and two in the middle, one for Shabbos and one
(b) According to Beis Hillel, one recites only *seven* Berachos. In their
opinion, the middle Berachah is the regular one for Shabbos, only one
mentions Yom-Tov in the middle of it. Rebbi says - that one also concludes
'Mekadesh Yisrael ve'ha'Zemanim'.
(c) When that Beraisa-expert cited the end of the Berachah as 'Mekadesh
Yisrael, ve'ha'Shabbos ve'ha'Zemanim' - Ravina pointed out that this implied
that it was *Yisrael* who sanctified the Shabbos. But that is incorrect,
since Shabbos has been automatically sanctified since the creation.
Consequently, he must amend the text to the wording of Rebbi (in b.).
(a) When Rosh Chodesh and Chol ha'Mo'ed fall on Shabbos, one acknowledges
them in the Amidah, according to the Tana Kama of the Beraisa, by inserting
them in the Avodah ('Retzei'), like Ya'aleh ve'Yavo. According to Rebbi
Eliezer - one inserts them in 'Modim', like 'Al ha'Nisim'.
(b) Someone who forgot to insert them - needs to repeat the Amidah.
(c) At Musaf, according to the Tana Kama, the middle Berachah is that of
Shabbos, only one adds Yom-Tov in the middle. This opinion however, is not
Halachah - because we also insert Yom-Tov into the conclusion, like the
opinion of Rebbi in 1b.
(d) Nor is the Halachah like Raban Shimon ben Gamliel and Rebbi Yishmael
Be'no shel Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah - who say that we insert Yom-Tov into
the middle of the middle Berachah by *all* Tefilos (rather than 'Ya'aleh
ve'Yavo' in 'Retzei').
(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Ashi Amar Rav permits placing an Eiruv *Techumin* with a
condition (that it is not Yom-Tov), on the first day of Yom-Tov (when there
are *two* days); Rava permits only the preparing of an Eiruv *Tavshilin*
then. The practical difference with regard to preparing these two Eiruvin
on the first day of Yom-Tov) is, that - whereas one must place the Eiruv
Techumin again on the *second* day of Yom-Tov (since one needs to prepare
the Eiruv in order to be able to leave the Techum on Shabbos, whether it is
Yom-Tov or whether it is week-day), it is not necessary to prepare the Eiruv
Tavshilin again (because should the second day be a weekday, no Eiruv is
necessary; and if the second day is Yom-Tov, then the Eiruv that they
prepared on the first day was valid anyway).
(b) Rava does not agree with Rav. In his opinion, Chazal did not permit
being 'Koneh Shevisah' (acquiring one's place) on Shabbos. Making an Eiruv
Tavshilin on the other hand, is permitted, because it does not entail any
Isur, and it is only because of Kavod Shabbos (as Rava said above on 15b),
that Chazal required an Eiruv Tavshilin.
(c) The Tana Kama permits filling a pot-full of meat (to cook) or (to carry)
a barrel-full of water, even if it is more than one's needs, but forbids
placing more loaves in the oven to bake than are needed - because, whereas
the first two cases are all achieved with the same one act, each loaf that
one places in the oven is a separate act.
(d) But Rava rules like Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar - who permits filling the
oven with loaves, even if one does not require them all, because, he
maintains, the loaves bake better when the oven is full.
(a) The Gemara asks whether, if someone forgot to prepare an Eiruv
Tavshilin, his flour is forbidden - because, if it is, then before anyone
else will be permitted to cook or to bake for him, he will have to give them
his food or his flour (with a proper Kinyan) - See Tosfos DH 'I Amrat', who
learns the opposite.
(b) The Halachah is that his flour is indeed forbidden (as we learn from a
(c) If someone forgot to prepare an Eiruv Tavshilin ...
- ... the Beraisa forbids him to cook, bake - and wrap the food to preserve its heat (Hatmanah).
- ... he may not cook etc. for others?
- ... others may not cook for him unless he gives them his flour (as we just explained).
(a) The Gemara also asks whether if someone who forgot to prepare an Eiruv,
*did* cook, he is permitted to eat the food that he cooked. We try to bring
a proof that he is not, from the Beraisa, which presents the concession of
giving one's flour to someone else to bake for him, but not the case of
someone who went ahead and baked despite the prohibition. We conclude
however, that there is no proof from there - since the Tana may well only be
speaking about Takanos that are permitted, and not those that are forbidden.
The Beraisa explicitly permits eating the Eiruv before having used it.
(b) Another Beraisa specifically forbids someone who cheats and cooks, to
eat what he cooked - meaning that, after he has eaten, he decides that he
needs more food for guests (although he does not really expect any) So he
cooks again on their behalf.
(c) We have no proof from here either that someone who transgressed and
cooked, is forbidden to eat the food - since Chazal may have been more
stringent by someone who cheats, than someone who transgresses openly,
because nobody will learn from the latter (as they will from the former),
and, in addition, he too, will realize that he has done wrong and *will* do
Teshuvah (whereas the person who cheats will *not*).
(d) The difference between this case of cheating and the case that we
learned earlier on 11b, where Rav Ada bar Ahavah cheated and salted the
pieces of meat of an animal that had been Shechted on Yom-Tov - is that here
there is an Isur of cooking on Yom-Tov involved), whereas with Rav Ada bar
Ahavah we have a principle 'Ein Ibud be'Ochlin' (the Isur of tanning the
meat does not apply to food). So what is the problem, Tircha? If that is the
only Isur involved, the fact that if he is not permitted to salt all the
pieces might cause him not to Shecht the animal in the first place, and
Simchas Yom-Tov overrides Tircha.
(a) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak establishes the Beraisa which forbids someone
who cheated and cooked, to eat what he cooked, like Beis Shamai according to
Chananyah - who says that one may only bake on Yom-Tov for Shabbos if one
prepared bread for one's Eiruv, cook if one prepared a cooked dish and wrap
if one prepared something wrapped, making him a likely candidate for the
stringent ruling of the Beraisa of cheating.
(b) The Beraisa which permits fruit that was Ma'asered on Shabbos be'Shogeg,
but forbids it if it was Ma'asered be'Meizid, is also no proof that if
someone cooked without an Eiruv, his food is forbidden - because that
Beraisa may be speaking when he had other fruit, so that the Ma'asered fruit
was not crucial to his Simchas Yom-Tov.
(c) We reject the proof from a similar Beraisa, which forbids vessels that
were Toveled on Shabbos on purpose, in two ways. One of them, in exactly the
same way as we dealt with the previous proof from someone who Ma'asered -
the other grounds for rejecting the proof is that even if he has no other
fruit, his Ma'asered fruit is forbidden, because he has the option of
borrowing, whereas someone who failed to prepare an Eiruv cannot.
(d) We reject the proof from the Beraisa which forbids food that one cooked
deliberately on Shabbos - because there he performed a Melachah which is
Asur d'Oraysa (cooking), whereas cooking on Yom-Tov for Shabbos (with which
we are concerned) is only an Isur de'Rabbanan, and may well be permitted if
one transgressed and did it.
(a) According to the Tana of our Mishnah, Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel argue
over whether *one* dish will suffice for Eiruv Tavshilin, or whether *two*
dishes are required. According to Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar - they both agree
that Eiruv Tavshilin requires *two* dishes; what they are disputing is
whether a fish with the egg with which it was smeared before cooking is
considered one dish or two dishes.
(b) Beis Shamai agree with Beis Hillel that if one cut up an egg and placed
it or minced leak inside a fish, they are considered *two* dishes.
(c) The Halachah is like our Tana in Beis Hillel - that one dish cooked will
suffice for Eiruv Tavshilin (see Tosfos DH 'Amar Rava' - that *that* is as
far as cooking is concerned, but that, for baking, one requires a loaf of
(d) Abaye says that if someone had already begun to knead his dough when his
Eiruv was eaten or lost - he is permitted to finish the dough that he begun.
(a) If Yom-Tov falls on a Sunday - one must Tovel one's Tamei utensils for
Yom-Tov the latest on Friday (because it is forbidden to Tovel vessels on
(b) We learn from the Pasuk "u've'Nivlasam Lo Siga'u" - that one is
obligated to be Tahor for Yom-Tov.
(c) If someone wishes to fulfill this obligation, if Yom-Tov falls on
Sunday, he must Tovel for Yom-Tov ...
1. ... on Friday, according to Beis Shamai - because a man too, may not
Tovel on Shabbos or Yom-Tov.
2. ... according to Beis Hillel - on Shabbos, because seeing as this is only
a Din in Mar'is ha'Ayin, it is only forbidden when it is obvious what he is
doing; which is not the case when a person Tovels, because as far as
onlookers are concerned, he may just be entering the water in order to cool
(a) 'Hashakah' comprises taking Tamei water that is inside a stone vessel
and dipping it in a Mikvah until the two waters touch - thereby rendering
the water Tahor. This works through the principle of sowing, as if one had
sowed the Tamei water in the Tahor water of the Mikvah (and not through
(b) Even Beis Shamai agree that Hashakah is permitted on Shabbos. Hashakah
must be performed in a *stone* vessel - because any other vessel would
become Tamei through the contact with the Tamei water, and we have learned
that Chazal did not permit Hashakah if the vessel is Tamei as well.