Daf 50

1) It's Halachically forbidden to do work on Erev Pesach after noon. [Tosfos quotes the Yerushalmi: since they brought the Korban Pesach at that time, and one's not allowed to do work every day that he brings a Korban. (Although by other Korbanos, he's forbidden the whole day that's because there he could bring the Korban anytime during the day, but he can only bring the Pesach from after noon.) Although the Jews brought jointly the Korban Tamid every day, but the Torah reveals to us that work is not forbidden every day since the Pasuk says "you gather your grain." (This implies that the prohibition of working on the day you bring a Korban is from the Torah.) Although we don't bring a Korban Pesach nowadays, but once it was forbidden, they made it to be continuously forbidden.]

2) This is different than Erev Shabbos and other Erev Yomim Tovim, even though we see that you can't work then either. On Erev Shabbos and other Erev Yomim Tovim, you may do Melacha pass noon until the time of Mincha. Also, if you work pass then, you just don't see a blessing from your work, but you don't excommunicate the worker. However, if someone does work on Erev Pesach, we excommunicate him.

3) Anytime someone does work and it's somewhat wrong, (although it's not an outright sin), like doing work on Moitzie Shabbos, Motzie Yom Tov, Moitzie Yom Kippur and on a public fast, he never sees any blessing from it. [Tosfos quotes the Yerushalmi that it's not a good custom for women never to do any work on Moitzie Shabbos, but only to wait until after Tefila; so, Tosfos concludes, this too is what our Gemara means by not doing work Moitzie Shabbos, that you shouldn't do work until after Tefila.]

4) If someone doesn't do work all week because he's lazy, still, he gets reward for not working on Erev Shabbos. After all, someone should do Mitzvos for an alternative motive, for that will lead him to eventually do the Mitzvah for the sake of the Mitzvah. [Tosfos adds: this is only when he doesn't have a particular bad intent of doing the Mitzvah, like here when it's done because he's lazy. However, when someone learns Torah in order to be haughty and belittle others by disproving them, and not in order to know the Torah so that he can keep it, then it's better for him not to have been born.]

5) The people of Beishin accustomed themselves not to travel from Tzur to Tzidon on Erev Shabbos, (although it's permitted since they could reach the destination before Shabbos). Their children came before R' Yochanan and said that their fathers made this custom since they were rich and could afford not working one day, but we can't. Can we change the custom? R' Yochanan answered: your fathers already accepted this custom for you, and you can't change.

Daf 51

6) The people of Chuza accustomed themselves to separate Challah from rice dough. R' Ashi concluded: if most people in that town ate rice bread, a non-Kohein can't eat that Challah in front of them so that they shouldn't forget the concept of Challah. However, if most of the people don't eat rice bread, then a non-Kohein should eat it in front of them (to show that they're doing wrong). Although we usually say that you can't do permitted actions in front of people who are accustomed to be strict and forbid it if they're Kusim or from across the seas (who has the same status of Kusim since it's not common to have Talmidei Chachumim there); but we're afraid here that they'll make a leniency and separate the Torah-exempt rice as Trumah on the Torah-obligated grain. [Tosfos explains: it refers to a case where they mixed rice flour and wheat flour to make a dough and you might come to separate Trumah from an area that contains mostly rice. However, you don't need to worry that he'll separate Challah from a rice dough on a wheat dough, since you never separate Challah from one specie of grain dough on another one.]

6a) [Tosfos explains: we're only not lenient before people who accustomed to be stringent is if they know that it's really permitted, but yet they feel that they want to be strict on themselves. However, if they're under the impression that it's Halachically forbidden, you can inform them that it's really permitted. Although you may ask, if they know that rice is really exempt, how can they mistake taking off from the rice on the wheat; we must say that only most of the people were aware of this fact, but not all of them.]

7) [Tosfos says: we said that we can't be lenient in front of them if they're Kusim, but you may do it before a Talmid Chachim. Although we say that a person heading into another city, he must take it upon himself to keep the more stringent customs between the city that he left and the city that he came to; that's only for strong customs that were instituted by the Talmidei Chachumim, but here, we refer to customs that regular people accustomed themselves. Alternatively, the Rashba answers: here, we refer to the instances where he doesn't need to keep the customs in the place he went to, as we'll say later, according to R' Elazar, if he plans to return to his original city, and according to Abaya, if he goes from Eretz Yisrael to Bavel.]

8) [The Ri was in doubt, in the case where the custom was instituted by regular people, if the Talmid Chachum can also be lenient and join you in doing it, or, it's only you can do it before him since he understands it's not really forbidden, but he can't be lenient.]

9) Therefore, even though two brothers are allowed to bathe together in a bathhouse, and we don't forbid it for you might be lenient to bathe with your sister's husband; in a place where they're stringent, you can't be lenient before them. (As, you can't bathe together with your father, father-in-law, sister's husband and stepfather since it might lead to bad thoughts. R' Yehuda permits for a father and stepfather since you're obligated to honor them and attend them.)

Even though it's permitted to wear wide clothing on Shabbos, and we're not worried that you'll come to slip it off and come to carry it four Amos in a Reshus Harabim, and they didn't decree for someone to not sit on a non-Jew's bench that selling wares, and we're not worried that it looks like you're selling on Shabbos; in places where they're stringent, you can't do those things in front of them.

10) (A Talmid Chachum can't bathe with his Rebbi, but if his Rebbi needs him to attend him, it's permitted.)

11) (The cow's fourth stomach is shaped like a bow, and the fat on the outside of the curve is forbidden from the Torah, but not the one in the inside, which is in the position of the string of the bow. They were accustomed to eat it in Eretz Yisrael, but not in Bavel since you might also eat the fat from the other side.) Rabbah b. b. Chana ate the fat of the "string" of the cow's fourth stomach in Bavel, and he wasn't stringent like the place that he came to. Abaya explains: you only need to be strict when the people from Bavel go to Eretz Yisrael, or people travel within Bavel, or within Eretz Yisrael, but not if he travels from Eretz Yisrael to Bavel, since the rabbis of Bavel are subservient to the rabbis of Eretz Yisrael. [Tosfos qualifies: only regarding Issur V'heter, since the rabbis there learned together with multitudes of students, and the air of Eretz Yisrael makes people smarter. However, regarding money matters and to have the power to remove money from people, the people of Bavel were greater since they had the Reish Galusa who was considered the king, and outranked the Nassi in Eretz Yisrael.]

12) R' Ashi answers: you only need to keep the custom of the place you went to if you don't plan on returning, and Rabbah b. b. Chana planned to return to Eretz Yisrael. [Tosfos brings the Gemara in Chulin that, when R' Zeira went to Eretz Yisrael, he was lenient to eat meat there that Rav and Shmuel held that it was Shechted too high in the neck and is not Kosher, since the Rabanan in Eretz Yisrael allowed it; since he didn't plan on returning to Bavel. However, Tosfos concludes: this causes a little difficulty in reading the Mishna, as you never keep together both customs. Rather, the Mishna needs to be read chopped up; you do the custom of the place you came from if you plan to go back, and you keep the custom of the place you're going to if you're planning on staying.]

13) Rabbah b. b. Channa told his sons: although I eat these fats, they shouldn't eat it. After all, since I personally saw R' Yochanan eat these fats, it's enough to rely on him to eat it, not only before him, but also when he's not there. However, since you didn't see him eat, you shouldn't eat it at all.

14) However, this seems to argue with another thing he said. As Rabah b. b. Chana says: R' Yochanan b. Elazar told me that he once followed R' Shimon. b. R' Yossi b. Lekunya into a garden and he ate cabbage growths of Shvious after the time of Biur (i.e., after it was time to get rid of Shvious fruit), and he handed me to eat and he explained: it's enough to rely on R' Shimon (later) that I saw him eat to allow me to eat, not only before him, but also not with him. However, since you never saw him eat, you can only eat it when you're with me. [Tosfos says that this was only by Talmidiei Chachumim, but R' Shimon didn't allow others to rely on him while the Halacha wasn't established like him, as the Yerushalmi brings a story where he got angry at a person who relied on him.]

15) As we see that R' Shimon holds in the opinion of R' Akiva who holds that growths of vegetation is forbidden on Shvious, it doesn't include cabbage and they didn't even decreed to forbid cabbage for you might eat other vegetables. (However, the Rabanan argue with R' Shimon and decreed to forbid cabbage since you might permit other vegetables.)

16) [Rashi explains: R' Akiva forbids the growths after the time of Biur comes, as the Torah forbids eating produce of Shvious after it's no longer found growing in the fields that the wild animals can get to. However, cabbage never really stops from being available in the field, since there are always roots that remain in the field which the animals can get to. Tosfos asks: if so, why does R' Akiva need a new Pasuk "you don't gather" to forbid growths? Why not learn it from the Pasuk that we learn that produce is forbidden after the Biur. Another question: if R' Shimon's Rabanan decree to forbid cabbage although they're still in the field, why does the Mishnayos allow many produce that doesn't have Biur and not make the same decree? Also, there are many places that imply that growths of Shvious is forbidden even before Biur. Like, the story before refers to them picking the cabbage from a garden where many grew. Also, the very fact that the Rabanan argue with R' Akiva, and yet they agree to the Halacha of Biur, shows that they argue if it's before the time of Biur.

Rather, R' Tam explains: the growths are forbidden before Biur. However, the Torah only forbids annuals growing from seeds, since the words of "don't gather" is written next to "don't plant seeds." However, cabbage is more similar to a tree, (as the Gemara in Kesuvos says). However, even R' Shimon's Rabanan agree that cabbage is permitted according to the Rabanan who argue with R' Akiva. After all, since they hold that the whole prohibition of these growths is rabbinic, there is no reason to decree to forbid cabbage because you might permit other vegetables.

R' Nissan Goan explains: we refer to harvesting the vegetables after Shvious. SInce the status of vegetables follow when they're picked, it has the status of eighth year fruit (that's not Shvious). However, the rabbis enacted that they're forbidden until there is enough time to grow after Shvious, or to Chanuka, since people may assume that it was picked on Shvious. However, you don't need to worry about the growths of cabbage since they grow fast. So, they argue whether you need to decree this even by cabbage so that you don't come to permit it right away by other vegetables. Although the Gemara in Rosh Hashana says that R' Shimon allows an Esrog that started growing in the sixth year, and finished growing on the seventh year, after Biur and didn't seem to forbid it since you might also allow one that completely grew on the seventh year; it could be that he's saying it's permitted from the Torah, but it may be rabbinically forbidden. Alternatively, we refer to one picked at the beginning of Shvious when you can't mistake it for one that grew exclusively on Shvious.]

17) [Tosfos says: although we find places that you can buy vegetables of Shvious, although it has the Kedusha of Shvious on it that you can't eat them after the Biur and you can't do business with it, and we don't say they're completely forbidden since they're growths; we must say that the Torah only forbids growths that completely grow during Shvious, but not those that started growing on the sixth year, although they have the Kedusha of Shvious since their status follows the year they were harvested.]

18) [Tosfos quotes R' Nissan Goan who asks: that this is the opposite of a Mishna in Shvious that says that all growths are permitted besides cabbage growths. He answers: it refers there to growths that grew during the sixth year and stayed around in his house in the seventh year after the Biur. Therefore, all other vegetables are obviously from the sixth year since they're so much bigger than the ones growing on the seventh year. However, since cabbage grows fast, it's easy to mistake the sixth year ones with the seventh year ones.]

19) It doesn't matter if someone goes from a place that does work on Erev Pesach before noon to a place that doesn't, or viceversa, you put upon him the stringencys of both places and you don't work in either scenario. The Mishna ends off that you shouldn't change from what people do so that you don't argue. Abaya explains the last part only regarding going from a place that does work to a place that doesn't. However, in a case where you go from a place that doesn't do work to one that does work, we say you change from what people do to keep your original custom. Rava explains that it even comes to define where he went from a place that doesn't work to a place that works. What the Mishna is saying that we're not worried here about the rule of not changing so not to lead to arguments since it doesn't apply here. After all, people will assume that he's not working because there are plenty of unemployed people in the marketplace not working.

20) If someone knows when they established the month [Tosfos quotes R' Tam: when he comes from a place where the messengers came before Yom Tov and only keep one day, but not from people in Bavel that know nowadays when the month will start] may not do Melacha on the Yom Tov Sheini in a place where they keep two days. However, this is only if he's in the city, but not in the outskirts in the wilderness. [Tosfos says: but, in the city, it's forbidden even if he plans on returning, even when working in private; since it's very difficult to do any Melacha privately. However, they allow ignoring other customs that can practically be done privately.]

Daf 52

21) In the first version: R' Yosef put R' Nosson b. Asya in excommunication for transgressing Yom Tov Sheini. The reason he didn't just give him Malkos since excommunication is a worse punishment. In the second version: he gave him Malkos despite that excommunication is a worse punishment, and we excommunicate for transgressing Yom Tov Sheini; but we only give it to a layman. However, for a budding Talmid Chachum, we give the lighter punishment. As we see that, in Eretz Yisrael, the rabbis only came together to give Malkos to a student that strayed in his ways and not excommunication so that we extend him honor for his Torah.

22) If someone brings Shvious fruit from a place where it stopped being in the fields for the animals to eat to a place where it hadn't stopped yet, and viceversa, you need to do Biur. [Tosfos says: even though your changing the custom from the place your bringing it there if they don't have Biur, and we don't change from the custom of the place even if it's a leniency unless it's not obvious that you changed, as we said earlier that you're only allowed to not work Erev Pesach in a place where they work since people would just assume that you're unemployed; since you're obligated to do Biur from the Torah, we don't care at all that it may lead to an argument. Alternatively, the Ri answers: it will only lead to arguments if it's something that has to do with him personally, but not with fruits, since people know that it may come from a place where the fruit already stopped being in the fields.]

23) R' Yehuda argues and says: they could say "go take it from the same place." R' Elazar has a tradition that R' Yehuda is coming to be stringent. The unnamed Gemara explains him as follows: the Tanna Kama only forbids the fruit that was brought from the place that the fruit was no longer in the field if it wasn't there at the time he left. However, if it was there, and by the time he arrived in the new place, he was informed that it stopped being there in the old place, he may still eat them. R' Yehuda argues that you still need to do Biur since it's making light of his old place since they could say, "if you would come back and take again, you'll see that it's already not in the fields."

24) Abaya wants to explain the argument: if you bring from a place that didn't stop being in the field to a place where it stopped, and then you bring it back to the place where it didn't stop, the Tanna Kama says it's permitted. R' Yehuda says it's forbidden since if you would bring it from where it was, and there is no longer vegetables there in the fields. However, R' Ashi disagrees and holds that nobody would forbid in this case. We don't say that the fruits became forbidden as it was on the donkey's back while it was in the airspace of the city where it stopped being in the field.

25) R' Ashi explains the argument between the Tanna Kama and R' Yehuda that they argue the same argument of the following Tannaim. If you pickled three vegetables of Shvious in one barrel; R' Eliezer forbids all of them when the first one reaches its time of Biur (and we consider them pickled together as like one type of vegetable, and it's as if all of them reached the time of Biur). R' Yehoshua says that all of them are permitted until it reaches the time of Biur for the last one. R' Gamliel says that each fruit only becomes prohibited when it reaches the time for their individual Biur. We Paskin like R' Gamliel. (Therefore, our Tanna Kama holds like R' Yehoshua that they're all permitted until the end, and R' Yehuda holds like R' Gamliel, and "if you would try to take that type of vegetable that had Biur, you'll see that it stopped being in the field.")

26) [Tosfos explains: the reason R' Yehoshua doesn't forbid the vegetable that already stopped being in the field; since he Darshens "from the field", that it's permitted as long as part of the taste that's in the fruit is still in the field. R' Gamliel permits the individual vegetables, although they absorbed taste from what's forbidden because of Biur, however, he understands that the absorption itself is considered as if it's Biur, (i.e., destroyed). After all, Biur is not like all other prohibitions where absorptions forbid since it's a weaker prohibition, since it's permitted for the poor to eat it.]

27) [However, R' Nisson explains, according to the Yerushalmi: R' Eliezer only forbids if Biur comes to the first vegetables placed in the barrel, since he holds that only an earlier placed vegetable gives taste in a later vegetable, but the later placed vegetables don't give taste in the earlier placed ones. R' Yehoshua holds that it's forbidden even if the latest one reached Biur, since he even holds that the later placed ones give taste to the earlier ones, (and R' Yehuda would hold like him). R' Gamliel follows the individual vegetable, and he doesn't care if it absorbed taste from others, since absorptions are considered as Biur.]

28) Raveina explained the argument between the Tanna Kama and R' Yehuda like the following Tanaic argument. The Tanna Kama says that if there are dates that fell between the thorns below the palm trees, it's not considered as being no longer available to animals in the field and you may eat dates. R' Gamliel holds, since the animals can't get to it when it's within the thorns, it's not considered that there are fruits for the animals in the fields.

29) There are three lands regarding Biur; Yehuda, Galil and Transjordan. Each one of them have three types of habitats (mountains, valleys and flatlands). If the fruit stop being in the fields in one land, even if it's still in the field in another land, it's still forbidden in the land where it doesn't exist in the field. After all, the wild animals of one land don't venture into the other lands to find food. [Rashi says: however, in the same land, if the fruit stops existing in the fields of one habitat, it's still permitted there until that fruit doesn't exist anymore in that land. Tosfos disagrees. After all, if so, why mention those habitats at all. Also, in Mesechta Shvious, R' Shimon argues with this and says that there are only three habitats in Yehuda, (and not in Galil or Transjordan). Rather, once the fruit stops to exist in one habitat, the fruits there need Biur even if it exists in another habitat in that land, since the animals from one habitat won't venture into other habitats to find food. When we say that animals from one land won't venture into another land, that's even in the same habitat. So, the animals of the mountains in Yehuda won't venture to the mountains of Galil.]

30) If you take out fruit from Eretz Yisrael to Chutz L'aretz; the Tanna Kama says that you may do Biur in its place, and you don't need to return it to Eretz Yisrael. R' Shimon b. Elazar says that you need to return it to Eretz Yisrael. The Halacha is like the Tanna Kama.

[Rashi explains Biur; you place the fruit where it will be trampled by animals. Tosfos disagrees. After all, everyone agrees that it's permitted for poor people to eat. (R' Yehuda forbids it for the rich, and R' Yossi permits it for the rich too.) The Tosefta says that you give it to your neighbors and the rest you place on your doorstep and announce that anyone who wants to take it should take it. Rather, they're only forbidden to eat if you're holding on to them as if you're being their owner, but you may partake in them if you made them Hefker to people and animals to eat.]

31) [Tosfos explains how he can bring the Shvious fruit to Chutz L'aretz if usually we say that it's forbidden: because we only forbid it if you want to eat it there, but not if you want to sell it there (i.e., in a way that it's permitted to sell Shvious fruit). Alternatively, we refer here to a case where he forgetfully took it out with him to Chutz L'aretz.]

32) You can't ruin Shvious fruits even before it completely matures into a full fruit. Therefore, it's forbidden to pluck them off the tree before they're fit to eat since you're ruining them by doing so. After all, we still see that they're considered as fruit at that point. As we say that a casing of a fruit that falls off when the fruit is still small; if the fruit is Arlah, the casing is also forbidden since it's a protector of the fruit. So, we see it's considered a fruit when it's still small. Although we see that the Rabanan disagree with R' Yossi that it's not a fruit if it's too small, that's only by a grape (that R' Yossi holds it's a fruit when it takes the form of a grape, and the Rabanan say only after it grows to the size of a white bean. Also, the Rabanan say that carobs are only a fruit when they form bumps, and the olives are only fruit when their casings fall off). However, the Rabanan agree that other fruit gets their status of fruit when it starts to form. Although we see that R' Ilay cut down a tree on Shvious while the dates were small, it's because it didn't ruin the fruit. After all, they were dates from a male tree that its fruit are always not good until you harvest them and allow them to ripe afterwards.

Daf 53

33) The sign that an area is considered as part of the mountains if it has good gallnut trees, and the sign that it's part of a valley is having good date trees. Therefore, that which you take Bikkurim from the best trees, you don't take them from dates that grow in the mountains, and not from other fruits that grow in the valleys (that are too close to water tables, and the fruit withers away and rots).

34) The sign for a Nachal is that reeds grow there. The practical difference is if you can use it for the Eglah Arufa to be a virgin Nachal. The sign for flatlands is sycamore trees, and the practical difference if you sell someone flatlands, it needs to have sycamore growing there are it would be a mistaken sale. We can also say the practical difference by all these signs is regarding selling.

35) It's dependant on the custom whether you can sell smaller domestic animals to a non-Jew or not. However, everyone holds that larger ones (that are fit to work in the field) are forbidden to sell since you might come to rent or lend it to the non-Jew, and he'll end up working your animal on Shabbos, and the Torah says that your animals need to rest. Also, perhaps he wants to test it when he's buying it, and will do work with it on Shabbos if you start selling it on Friday late afternoon.

Tanna Kama forbids selling broken down animals (that can't work) since you'll might come to sell even healthy ones. R' Yehuda permits broken down ones since they're slaughtered for their meat right away, and the non-Jew will never leave it around to do some work with it. Ben Beseira permits with a horse, since they're only used to ride on, and there is no prohibition for them to carry humans on Shabbos (since they "carry themselves" with their live weight).

36) Whether you can't eat roasted meat on Pesach night is dependant on the place's custom.

37) It's forbidden for a person to say that this meat should be for Pesach since it looks like he sanctified Kodshim and is eating it out of the Mikdash [Rashi: even if it was already Shechted.] However, you can designate wheat for Pesach. Since it's not similar to Kodshim, he seems to be only saying to watch it (from becoming Chametz) for Pesach.

38) Although we seem only worried about roasting whole goats like they roasted the Korban Pesach; that's even a problem without saying that it's for Pesach.

39) This, (that we forbid roasting whole goats like they roasted the Korban Pesach), seems not like R' Shimon. As we see, the Tanna Kama says; if someone says "I will bring a Mincha from barley," (which is not allowed), he brings one from wheat. As we accept mainly the first part of his statement, (which is that he'll bring a Mincha, and ignore the end). [Tosfos says: since it's like he's saying mainly he wants to bring a Mincha. if it's possible through barley, i'll bring one with barley. If not, I'll bring one from wheat.]

R' Shimon says that we accept the end of his statement too, and since he didn't promise this Korban in the normal way, it's not binding at all. [Rashi explains: therefore, roasting whole goats like they roasted the Korban Pesach is not a problem since you didn't say anything about it to be Hekdesh while the animal was alive, even if it's like he says it's for a Pesach after it's Shechted, it's not the normal way to make Hekdesh and is nothing.]

40) However, R Yossi agrees that we accept the end of his statement too [Tosfos: only when you can say that the end of his statement can explain the beginning like here. However, if it's obvious that it must be two statements, R' Yossi holds that both go into effect.] However, he holds that you bring a Mincha of wheat. (Even though he didn't promise it to Hekdesh in the normal way, he needs to bring a Mincha since a person doesn't say things for no reason, i.e., that it would have no ramifications.)

41) [Tosfos disagrees with Rashi. After all, if it's like that he made it Hekdesh now after the Shechita, it would be like he was Mekadesh it so that its proceeds should go to Hekdesh, but not to make it into a Korban, and the Gemara should have said that it's close to be Chayiv Meila. Also, why don't we say that the end that it looks like it's Kodesh shows that it was originally was Kodesh while it was alive. After all, there was no saying anything by the roasting of the whole goats, and yet it looks like it's been Mekadesh before that. So, why shouldn't we say that it looks like it was made Hekdesh while it was still alive?

Rather, Tosfos says: it looks as if it was already Kodesh when it was alive. The reason R' Shimon considers it not promised normally, that's because it looks like it was designated to be Shechted outside the Mikdash. This is like the Tosefta in Menachos; R' Shimon also says he doesn't bring if he's Mikadesh it to be brought in the temple of Chonyuv. (The only reason the Gemara brings R' Shimon's opinion from the case of promising a Mincha of barley, and not from that Tosefta, (which is more similar), since it says explicitly there R' Shimon's reason, that he didn't make it Kodesh normally.)]

42) Lighting candles for Yom Kippur is dependant on the custom. Both customs were designed to stop you from having relations with your wife. The ones who light do so since you can't have relations before a lit candle. The ones who don't light hold that you shouldn't look at your wife or else it will lead you to want relations.

43) R' Shimon b. Elazar holds that everyone agrees that, if Yom Kippur falls out on Shabbos, you light candles because of the honor of Shabbos. However, R' Yochanan says that, to those who don't light on Yom Kippur, it's still forbidden if it falls out on Shabbos.

Daf 54

44) Shmuel says that you only make a Bracha on fire on Moitzie Shabbos to commemorate it's creation/discovery that happened then. [Tosfos points out: this Bracha is not an obligation because "you can't have pleasure from this world without a Bracha." After all, we don't make a Bracha on it every time we use light, and that's because your body doesn't receive pleasure from it. Although we make a Bracha of Yoitzer Ohr everyday, it's not because we're having pleasure everyday from the sunlight, but because the sun renews every day, we make a Bracha on that renewal.] R' Yochanan says that you also make a Bracha over it on Moitzei Yom Kippur (since it's a new thing that you may use after Yom Kipur, since you can't use a flame on Yom Kippur) and that's the custom of everyone. However, you may only make a Bracha on it if it was lit before hand and rested over Yom Kippur, however, on Motzei Shabbos, you can make a Bracha on what you just lit from rubbing stones or sticks that night. After all, on Yom Kippur, you're showing that you can now use this light that you didn't use the whole day, but for Shabbos, your making it on any fire to commemorate its discovery.

45) Rebbi said the Bracha on the fire when he saw it in the marketplace and then repeated the Bracha when he made Havdala on a cup of wine to be Moitzie his family. However, R' Chisda said it only by the Havdala on a cup of wine.

46) Whether you can do work on Tisha B'av or not is dependant on the custom.

47) Shmuel says that there is no public fasts in Bavel (which was damp and wasn't too affected by lack of rain) besides Tisha B'av. [Rashi explains: there was no public fasts that they forbade working on it. Tosfos adds: therefore, when it says "besides Tisha B'av," it means that it's forbidden to work on Tisha B'av. Therefore we musts say that it refers to places that were accustomed not to do work on Tisha B'av, since there is no real prohibition to work on Tisha B'av.] Although Shmuel says that Tisha B'av is not forbidden Bein Hashmashes, we must say that he also holds that all public fasts are not forbidden Bein Hashmashes. Although the Mishna says that you may eat before a public fast while it's still day; it's only in contrast to eating at night, and not to forbid eating Bein Hashmashes.

48) Rava holds that it's forbidden to eat during Bein Hashmashes on Tisha B'av. (Also, that even the pregnant and nursing women must complete the fast.) R' Yochanan also says that Bein Hashmashes is forbidden. Although R' Yochanan made a statement that Tisha B'av is not like a public fast, you don't need to say that it's regarding allowing eating Bein Hashmashes, but that you don't Daven Neila. Although we know that R' Yochanan's position is: "it would be great if people Davened the whole day" [Tosfos: when he's not sure if he Davened, or if he originally Davened by himself, and now he found a Minyan and he can add something to his Davening, (but not just Daven again for no reason); so here too, since Tisha B'av is similar to a public fast in many aspects, it would be appropriate to Daven Neila too]; that's only that it's optional, [Tosfos: i.e., there is a Mitzva to do so], but it's not obligated.

49) Alternatively, when R' Yochanan said that Tisha B'av is not like a public fast, that means you don't say the twenty-four Brachos in Tefila. R' Pappa explains R' Yochanan that Tisha B'av is not like a public fast, that they're not like the first sets of fasts that Bein Hashmashes is permitted, but like the later ones where they are forbidden.

50) Although we have a Mishna that there is no difference between Tisha B'av and Yom Kippur except for a Safeik (that's permitted on Tisha B'av); we don't need to say that it permits the Safeik of Bein Hashmashes of Tisha B'av, but the Safeik if you're not sure when Rosh Chodesh was established. [Tosfos explains: we're not referring to the Safeik in Bavel (or other parts of the Diaspora), as we see that they didn't fast two days on Yom Kippur. Rather, it refers to someone who's traveling in the wilderness, even in Eretz Yisrael, and he doesn't know which day the Beis Din established the month.

Although the Mishna could have said another difference between Tisha B'av and Yom Kippur, that you need to add onto Yom Kippur from the weekday before and afterwards, but you don't need to do that for Tisha B'av; however, we can say that they were only explaining the differences of the actual day, and not what you need to add onto it from other days.]

51) However, that Mishna is a proof to R' Elazar who forbids even sticking your finger in water on Tisha B'av. After all, the Mishna compares it to Yom Kippur. However, it's only forbidden on other public fasts to wash your whole body but not just washing your face, hands and feet. [Tosfos adds: and even the whole body is only forbidden if washed in hot water, and not with cold water.]

Daf 55

52) The Tanna Kama says that only Talmidei Chachumim should avoid work on Tisha B'av, but R' Shimon b. Gamliel says that someone should accustom himself to act like a Talmid Chachum (and not work). This seems to contradict their argument by Shma. As the Tanna Kama permits a Chosson to read Shma if he wants, even though he's exempt, and R' Shimon b. Gamliel says that not everyone has the right to take on this stringency (unless they're known to be on such a level). R' Yochanan says that you need to switch their opinions (in one place to parallel the opinion in the other place). R' Sisha b, R' Idi says not to switch the opinion. Rather, the Tanna Kama cares how he contrasts to other people. Therefore, on Tisha B'av, where everyone is working, and he's not, it looks like he's being haughty. However, by Shma, where everyone else is reading, it's not haughty for the Chosson to join them. However, R' Shimon b. Gamliel cares for how obvious is that he's doing a stringency. After all, by Shma, everyone knows that he can't concentrate, so when he reads that Shma, and trying to portray himself as if he could concentrate, is haughty. However, by not doing work on Tisha B'av, it's not very obvious that he's doing a stringency, since there are many unemployed people in the marketplace.

53) R' Meir holds that not doing work Erev Pesach before noon is only a custom [Tosfos: and it's not applicable to have an argument when it's forbidden, since it depends on the custom, so see how they're accustomed.] However, R' Yehuda says it's forbidden by law, so Galil held that it was forbidden before noon, and Yehuda held it to be permitted. Beis Shammai holds that it's forbidden on the night of the fourteenth too, but Beis Hillel allows until sunrise.

54) We see R' Yehuda says that, if someone pulls out a planted wheat kernal on the thirteenth of Nissan, in order for it to be replanted and be permitted by the day of the Omar to eat that year, he needs to replant it in wet soil that day. However, since we see that R' Yehuda also holds that if a seed doesn't take root in three days, it won't take root, and if you plant it on the fourteenth, we should say that it would take root before the Omar (or it wouldn't take root at all) since you have the rest of the fourteenth, the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth. We must say this was said according to Beis Shammai who forbids any work on the fourteenth even at night. Alternatively, even according to Beis Hillel, since it's not usual to do the work at night. Raveina answers: it even fits according to Yehuda (that allows all work in the morning) but it wouldn't necessarily take root before the Omer. After all, the calculation that we said to make it three days relies on having two partial days (the fourteenth and sixteenth) counted as full days, and we can only rely on one partial day to be considered as a full day and not by two partial days.

55) However, you can't plant it in dry soil since it doesn't take root that fast.[Tosfos explains: even R' Yehuda would agree that it could take more than three days to take root, or, even if it can't take root there, he might come to plant it afterwards in a wetter soil and take root after the Omar. However, you can't say that it would become forbidden by being planted by the Omar without taking root, and it will be forbidden after you removed it; since we would consider it as a wheat kernal in a jug that's permitted after the Omar.]

56) R' Meir says: all work that was started before the fourteenth can be finished on the fourteenth as long as it's needed for the Moed. However, even so, you can't start it on the fourteenth.

57) The Chachumim say that three craftsman may do work on Erev Pesach until noon in all places since we find they have some Heter even during the Moed. These are; a taylor (since a layman may sew regularly on the Moed), the barber and laundrer (since they may do their work for those who arrive from overseas, or leave prison). R Yossi b. Yehuda says: even shoemakers since they can fix the shoes of those traveling to Yerushalayim. [Tosfos explains: however, it's forbidden for others to have their shoes fixed, and we don't consider it to be a loss that it might rip more, since they can buy new ones to use during the Moed until you have your old ones fixed after the Moed.] However, the Rabanan say that you can't extrapolate from allowing the end of the work (i.e., fixing), to starting work from scratch, and R' Yossi b. Yehuda says that you can extrapolate from it.

58) You may place a chicken on eggs to hatch them on the fourteenth of Nisson, and, if it was sitting on it beforehand, and it escaped, you may even return it even on Chol Hamoed not to lose the eggs. Also, if the chicken dies, you can replace it with another chicken even on Chol Hamoed.

59) R' Huna held that you return it if it's within three days of it escaping, but after that, since the chicken lost its heat, it's very hard to get it to sit on it (and it's too big of a bother to permit on Chol Hamoed). Also, the Heter is only if it's after three days of the hen sitting on them that the eggs are no longer fit for food. However, if it's within three days, since you can sell them cheap to someone who's not so particular, and we don't need to worry that he'll have a small loss. However, R' Ami permits even within three days since he's even worried for a small loss.

60) You may shovel out the dung from below the animals' feet on the fourteenth, but you may only push it to the side on Chol Hamoed.

61) There's a Braisa that its first part only allows pushing the dung to the side, and the last part even allows carrying out. Abaya answers: the first part refers to Chol Hamoed and the second part refers to the fourteenth. Rava answers: both refer to Chol Hamoed. The second part refers to a case where there is so much dung that the courtyard that it's like a barn (i.e., no place to push the dung to the side).

62) You may bring utensils to, and take them back from, the craftsman on the fourteenth (even if it's not needed for the Moed), but not on Chol Hamoed. This is unless you don't trust him to leave it by him, so you may deposit it next door. If you're also worried that it may get stolen from there, you may bring it to your house inconspicuously [Tosfos: and they didn't bother him to bring it to the third house.]

Daf 56

63) R' Meir says that there were three things that the people of Yereicho did with the rabbis' consent; they grafted date trees all day on the fourteenth, they 'wrapped Shma' (explained later), and they harvested the grain before the Omar. (Although the Omar should be the first grain harvested, that's only from what you could bring the Omer from L'chatchila, and since Yericho is in the valley, and you don't bring the Omar L'chatchila from grains in the valley. Therefore, the only reason to forbid is because you might come to eat it before the Omar, and because it might lead to a loss if you don't harvest it then, they didn't make such a decree since they're also used to not eating this grain this year.

The explanation if 'wrapping Shma'; R' Yehuda says that they didn't pause [Rashi: between Shma and Ahavta. Tosfos: between Yisrael and Hashem, so it shouldn't sound like it means that Hashem should listen to the Jews.] Rava explains that they did pause at that juncture, but not between 'Hayom' and "Al Livavecha" and the problem would be that it shouldn't sound like only today it should be on your heart, and not tomorrow. R' Yehuda in a Braisa says that it means that they didn't say Baruch Sheim Malchuso L'olam Va'ed, (which we should say in a whisper since Yaakov said it by Shma, but Moshe didn't. However, if you're in the place of heretics, you need to say it aloud to make sure that people are not saying heretical stuff at that juncture.)

64) However, they did three things that the rabbis disagreed with; they made piles of grain with what they harvested before the Omar. (Since there is no loss to wait, the rabbis forbid it since they might come to eat it.) They also opened up their gardens and orchards so that the poor can come to pick the fallen fruit on Shabbos and Yom Tov. They also allowed taking pleasure of what grew from Hekdesh's trees since there is no Meila from what grows after something was made Hekdesh. However, the Chachumim say that, though there is no Meila, but it's anyhow prohibited.

65) Ulla says in the name of Reish Lakish, [according to Rashi], that the argument between the rabbis and the people of Yericho is only if the dates were detached in the sacks that they grow in and you need to climb the tree to retrieve them. However, if they were on the ground between the thorns, everyone allows. Granted that they were attached Bein Hashmashes; still, they're not Muktza since they were designated for their pet ravens (who can access them on Shabbos). Although we say that something that's designated for people are not designated for animals, (and that's why, according to R' Yehuda who holds of Muktza, an animal that dies on Shabbos can't be chopped up to feed the dogs {since it was never designated for dogs Bein Hashmashes}), but whatever is designated for animals are also designated for people (if they can eventually use it) since someone doesn't remove from his mind from personally using any of his possessions if they become fit for him.

[Tosfos explains why the dying animal which is Muktza through a prohibition of Shechting is a proof for something that's designated for humans in general without a need to transgress a prohibition to make it fit for a human is still Muktza; they learn it from extra words in the Mishna that says "it's not prepared." This tells us that as long as it wasn't designated for the animal, even if it's designated for the person, it's Muktza for the animals. Ri explains: this Mishna even refer to a small bird that you can feed it while it's alive to a dog and doesn't need a Melacha, still, the animal is Muktza since it wasn't designated to give it to the animal.]

However, Ravin quotes Reish Lakish; that the argument was about the fruits that fell on the ground between the thorns, and they argue whether what's designated for ravens are designated to humans. However, if the dates are in the sacks, everyone forbids since we need to worry that he might climb the tree and then detach something.

66) [Tosfos disagrees with Rashi's explanation. After all, according to Ullah, could you say that the people of Yericho don't hold of the prohibition of climbing a tree since you might come to detach something? Also, it shouldn't be better than a laid egg on Shabbos which they forbid it since it's too close to being like fruits that fall off the tree. Also, why is it permitted if it's between the thorns since they're also attached to the ground? You can't say it refers to the case where the thorns are within three Tefachim from the ground, which doesn't have the prohibition of using a tree on Shabbos, since the Gemara doesn't differentiate whether it's within three Tefachim or not.

Rather, we must say that all these fruits were detached from before Shabbos. However, they argue with fruits that were being held up by their sacks Bein Hashmashes, and, therefore, inaccessible, but fell down during Shabbos. The Rabanan still decreed to forbid them after they fell since there are still some in the sacks that were attached, we worry that you might climb up and detach fruit. However, if they're within the thorns, since there are no attached ones there, it's permitted. Although, after they all fell to the ground, it's impossible to tell the ones that were attached and the ones that were detached Bein Hashmashes; still, as the Yerushalmi said, we don't forbid because of the Safeik. Although that's only a reason to allow for the rabbinical prohibition that you might climb up the tree and pick something off, but not for the prohibition of Muktza, therefore, we needed the logic that; since it was fit for ravens, it's not Muktza for humans too.]

67) [Tosfos explains: even if you say that you can't have the Heter of it not being Muktza because it's fit for ravens is only if you own ravens; still the Gemara in Beitza needs to say that the decree to forbid a laid egg on Yom Tov is because of fallen fruit that you might climb up and detach, and not because of Muktza. After all, you wouldn't decree Muktza if the egg came from a chicken that's designated to be eaten, like the Gemara says over there. Therefore, the only reason to forbid is because it's like the decree that you might climb a tree to detach.]

68) However, R' Yehuda argues with R' Meir and held that they were all not sanctioned by the Chachumim, but some they protested, and others they didn't protest. However, they agreed it was permitted for them to harvest the wheat before the Omar, and although it wasn't permitted to make a pile of grain, they didn't protest it. He adds to the list: the people of Yericho took off Pe'ah from vegetables, and the poor thought that it was real Pe'ah and was exempt from taking off Trumah and Maasaros, but it wasn't and they ate Tevel. Although we should assume that they should realize that it wasn't true Pe'ah since it's known that anything that can't be kept for a long time is exempt from Pe'ah; they argued about the heads (i.e., leaves) of turnips that last if they're stored with their bulbs. The people of Yericho considered them as items that can keep and was real Pe'ah, and the Rabanan held that it needs to keep by itself to be considered as able to be kept.

69) As we say; different herbs used for dying are exempt from Pe'ah since they're not food. Hefker is exempt from Pe'ah since it's not guarded. Mushrooms are exempt since they don't grow from the ground. Dates are exempt since they're not harvested at one time. Vegetables are exempt from Pe'ah since they're not kept for a long time. [Tosfos quotes R' Tam: since all Pe'ah is rabbinic besides from the olives, grapes and grain; so they didn't enact it for items that are not kept long since it's not so Chashuv, Also, they didn't enact it for items that is not harvested at one time since it will lead to the poor wasting their time waiting for the finish, and their waste is more than their gain. They didn't enact on items that don't grow from the ground, since they're not even similar to the types of food that you're obligated in Pe'ah. Although there is a Drasha for these in Toras Kohanim; we must say that it's an Asmachta and not a real Drasha.]

Daf 57

70) [Tosfos explains: we don't say that the vegetables that were left for Pe'ah are exempt anyhow from Maasros since they're Hefker; however, we Paskin like Beis Hillel that it's only Hefker if you make it Hefker to both the rich and poor. Even according to Beis Shammai (who allows making it only Hefker for the poor), we can say that here they mistakenly made it Hefker, and it wasn't legally Hefker.]

71) It's forbidden for a Kohein to wrap his hand in a handkerchief in order to do the Avoda in the Mikdash. After all, the Pasuk says "the Kohein takes" i.e., by himself. [Tosfos explains: only if the handkerchief doesn't help him to hold the item. However, if it does help him hold onto the item, it's a valid Avodah since we Paskin like Rava that "a taking through another item is a valid 'taking.'" Therefore, if you wrap a handkerchief around a Luluv like a tong and you pick up the handkerchief, you're Yoitza. However, Rava agrees that, if it doesn't help the grabbing, it would be a Chatzitza. After all, the only reason he allows to take the Lulav when you stuff the Hadasim and Aruvos in the bind, although the leaves may fall off, since there is no Chatzitza if it's the same type as the four species, implying that it would be a Chatzitza if it would be a different specie.]

72) When having a choice to bring a sheep or a goat for a Korban, there is no better one to bring.