Discussion on the Daf - Shabbat

Aylat

Thu, Apr 23 2020, 3:05 pm

Shabbat 47

משנה
דבמה טומנין ובמה אין טומנין אין טומנין לא בגפת ולא בזבל לא במלח ולא בסיד ולא בחול בין לחין בין יבשין ולא בתבן ולא בזגין ולא במוכין ולא בעשבין בזמן שהן לחין אבל טומנין בהן כשהן יבשין:

I was wondering what the difference is between wet and dry and then I remembered my (discontinued) attempt at composting. Rotting organic matter is warm! Hence דבר המוסיף הבל. Dry stuff doesn't rot like that.

I wonder why not salt, lime and sand. They're not מוסיף הבל so is there another reason? Hasn't been discussed so far (up to end of דף מח).

Aylat

Thu, Apr 23 2020, 3:08 pm

Shabbat 48

2 observations of Gemara patterns that I've been noticing that are also on this daf.

A proof is brought from what someone saw a Rav do.

מאי שנא a case is compared to a similar situation that has a different ruling and the Gemara analyses the reason for the difference.

malki2

Thu, Apr 23 2020, 3:53 pm

Aylat wrote:

The explanation for those is that they are מוסיף הבל as well.

Aylat

Fri, Apr 24 2020, 4:19 am

malki2 wrote:

The explanation for those is that they are מוסיף הבל as well.

1)Have I missed something? Where does it say that?
2) They aren't heat producing.

Aylat

Fri, Apr 24 2020, 4:21 am

Aylat wrote:

1)Have I missed something? Where does it say that?
ETA sorry, I see Rashi on the Mishna says that.

But
2) They aren't heat producing.

malki2

Fri, Apr 24 2020, 6:22 am

Aylat wrote:

2) They aren't heat producing.

1. Lime: The reaction of lime with water is highly exothermic. So if there was any moisture in the lime it definitely would have been heat producing.
2. Sand; Ever walk barefoot at the beach? I assume that they were referring to burying it in sand heated by the sun, which is hot enough to cook, as mentioned in the Mishna in the previous Perek.
3. Salt: Probably a similar explanation to sand.

Aylat

Sat, Apr 25 2020, 1:54 pm

malki2 wrote:

1) True, but בין שהם לחים בין שהם יבשים.

2) Could be. Do you have anything to support that assumption? I was hoping the Gemara would address this.

3) You mean they heated the salt in order to use it for insulation? I've never tried putting salt in the sun to heat, I wonder if it has the same property as sand.

malki2

Sun, Apr 26 2020, 12:38 am

Aylat wrote:

So let’s just assume that the sand, lime, and salt have similar properties with regards to heat absorption and radiation. And they are referring to using these materials after they had spent a day absorbing the heat from the sun. I don’t see any issue with that.

Aylat

Mon, Apr 27 2020, 7:35 am

malki2 wrote:

Plausible. Anyway we've moved onto animals carrying so the Gemara doesn't see it as needing discussion.

imorethanamother

Fri, May 01 2020, 4:03 am

Today's daf scares me. I don't have hebrew on this computer, so sorry for the translation. "He who closes his ears to the outcry of the poor, he too will call and not be answered!"

It's such a huge responsibility, I can't say that I've helped everyone who's cried out to me. It's so sad. Sometimes some people seem beyond what I can do to help, and I give up.

imorethanamother

Tue, May 05 2020, 3:25 am

Based on the daf, I have a serious hankering for a tiara. I think this is a trend that should come back.

Aylat

Tue, May 05 2020, 7:07 am

imorethanamother wrote:

Based on the daf, I have a serious hankering for a tiara. I think this is a trend that should come back.

Didn't it say they were banned in the wake of the churban? Or am I mixing that up with something else?

amother

Pumpkin

Wed, May 06 2020, 11:39 pm

Aylat wrote:

amother [ Pumpkin ] wrote:

Women are included in the mitzvos aseh of Shabbos (but not of Yom Tov) because of “shamor v’zachor b’dibbur echad.” Whoever is included in the shamor (I.e. mitzvos lo sa’aseh)is included in the zachor (I.e. mitzvos aseh).

Women aren't מחוייבת in kiddush of YT?

The Gemara (Brachos 20b) teaches us that women are mechuyav in Kiddush on Shabbos, since whoever is included in the mitzvah of shamor is also responsible for zachor. Yet, Rav Akiva Eiger notes that women are not obligated to make Kiddush on Yom Tov (Hashmata 271). Similarly, the Pri Megadim in Tevas Goma (Parshas Nitzavim) says that since Kiddush on Yom Tov is only a chiyuv miderabbonon, noshim are exempt. There are certainly those who hold that women are mechuyavos in Kiddush in Yom Tov, but it is by no means a given.
For a more detailed discussion of this issue, you can see here: https://yated.com/are-women-ob.....-tov/

In addition, it is commonly accepted that if a woman forgets to say ya’aleh v’yavo in Birchas hamazon on Yom Tov, she does not repeat Birchas hamazon, because she is not mechuyav in Simcha on Yom Tov, and she does not have to eat a se’udah . .

amother [ Pumpkin ] wrote:

Regarding korban Pesach - there are shitos that women are not mechuyav

Never heard this, do you know which shita?

See discussion on Sanhedrin, Daf 12b

Chizkiyahu was deliberating whether or not women are obligated in the korban Pesach, and he decided (after the fact) that they are not. It seems that the RaMBaM does pasken that women are indeed obligated, but it is definitely not a given . . .

amother [ Pumpkin ] wrote:

Women are not included in the mitzvah of shofar, but this is an example of a mitzvah that women (apparently) have accepted upon themselves, and all women make an effort to fulfill this mitzvah.

I wonder if this mechanism could still come into effect nowadays if the majority of women do a certain mitzva so consistently as to become an obligation?

Despite women apparently having accepted the mitzvah of shofar upon themselves, women still do not have the same level obligation as for men, and a woman cannot blow for a man. (There are various opinions about a whether a woman can blow for other women.) It seems to me (although I may be wrong about this) that a woman/women who accept an obligation upon herself/themselves are obligated through a neder, but not through an inherent obligation and/or inclusion in the mitzvah itself . . .

amother [ Pumpkin ] wrote:

Torah study isn’t time-bound, but women’s exemption is derived from v’limadtem osam es b’neichem, which is very narrowly translated as “sons” rather than “children.” And then, since girls are not included in those who have to be taught - women are not included in those who have to teach, and all who don’t have to teach, similarly don’t have to learn. . .

I never understood this drash - where else do we interpret בניכם as only males? It normally applies to all descendants, no?

I have never understood this, either - and (despite much searching for a reasonable pattern) it appears to be arbitrary (and very exclusionary). . . Another example is everything relating to active participation in korbanos (e.g. semicha, tnufa, etc.) being applied to “Bnei Yisrael” and not “Bnos Yisrael.” There are many other examples . . . FWIW - I have heard more than once in shiurim by R’Hershel Schacter, that the Chachamim just had a feel for it . . .

amother [ Pumpkin ] wrote:

Interestingly, women’s exemption from z’man gramahs is derived from the Proximity of the mitzvah of tefillin to that of v’limadtem osam es b’neichem. Since women are exempt from the mitzvah of limud Torah, they are similarly exempt from the mitzvah of tefillin - and since the mitzvah of tefillin is a zman gramah, they are similarly exempt from all zman gramahs, and so-on-and-so-forth, with a cascading effect . . .

Wait, that's the origin of it? Was that in Masechet Brachot somewhere?

Kiddushin 34a

amother [ Pumpkin ] wrote:

(This is one of the things that makes me sad 😢.)

Mustard/Pumkin, are you the OP of a thread (quite a while ago) about women and Torah? Or maybe a prominent poster on it? I remember someone very sincere and learned there and you remind me of her. (You don't need to answer if you prefer not.)

One of the reasons I like to post anonymously, is because I want my comments to be judged independently on their own merit, rather than on the basis of other things I have said/written . . .

Apologies for taking so long to respond, but what with working full-time (remotely) + making Pesach under lock-down + dealing with sick parents + losing several close friends, acquaintances, and extended family members 😢, it has been challenging just to keep up with the Daf, let alone find time to answer comments.

Now that things have calmed down a bit - I have inserted my answers in bold.

amother

Pumpkin

Wed, May 06 2020, 11:40 pm

Aylat wrote:

Didn't it say they were banned in the wake of the churban? Or am I mixing that up with something else?

I think the ban was just for kallahs- not for all women.

imorethanamother

Fri, May 08 2020, 2:41 am

Okay. So all of a sudden tefillin is NOT a מצוה שהזמן גרמה.

So I’m not sure I heard this right, but NOW the given reason why women don’t wear tefillin is because we need to have a גוף נקי. So is there suddenly going to be a huge discussion In another masechta of טומאה וטהרה whether a man can wear tefillin if he is טמא? Or do we now always assume that only women can’t have pure thoughts?

Similarly, listening to the shiur on the daf, it’s brought up that tzitzis CAN be worn by women if appropriate, but only if they’re not doing it for feminist reasons. So my question is, why don’t we have a חשש on the motives of any man wearing tzitzis? My three year old wears it, he has no idea what he’s doing. Why is it only a woman that we have to ask if she is pure and has pure motives?

chicco

Fri, May 08 2020, 8:29 am

imorethanamother wrote:

I don’t think it has to do with טמא as much as it has to do with with an active excretion, which would be a problem with a woman who has her period.

In terms of the ציצית:
1. No one has to wear ציצית, unless they are wearing a 4 cornered בגד.
2. I'm not aware of needed to have pure thoughts in regard to this.
3. But with any mitzvah that requires you to have pure thoughts and the right motivation, if you are not obligated in it, you're taking on a big risk, if you are not doing it properly. It's not that women aren't capable, as much as, it is super hard, why take the risk if you don't have to?

imorethanamother

Fri, May 08 2020, 12:29 pm

chicco wrote:

Regarding number 3 - what’s super hard about putting on tefillin? These days I sit alongside my sons as they put it on and it literally takes five seconds. The hardest part about it is buying it in the first place. I love my sons but I don’t know if they’re especially concentrating on holy thoughts at the ages of bar mitzvah.

As for having pure thoughts - if the reward for a mitzvah you are commanded to do is far greater than one you take on voluntarily, why is the “punishment” (whatever it may be) for doing it improperly more than one who is obligated? The reward would be less for volunteering and the punishment would be less because you were never directly commanded to do so.

I also found this daf difficult. Women are considered a separate nation from men - the premise of that I think is more far reaching than we understand by the example given by rings and such.

naturalmom5

Fri, May 08 2020, 12:29 pm

I keep saying Iim going to pick up where I left off and it never happens

So let me start with the current daf and after the siyum on Shabbos I will iyn fill in the gap

imorethanamother

Sun, May 10 2020, 12:57 am

Hellloooo. Anyone? I was wondering what people thought of the very graphic punishments given for a woman’s behavior. I thought it was interesting that it mentioned bald spots where they would adorn their hair. Hello, shaitels! They totally create bald spots.

farm

Sun, May 10 2020, 1:46 am

imorethanamother wrote:

I didn’t find it any more graphic than other places where terrible punishments are described for various sins (check out the tochacha in Parshas Bechukosai this coming Shabbos- oy!)
I actually found it interesting that when describing the women’s behavior, it is pointed out (Rashi?) that this was married women, because single women are expected to flirt and dress and behave somewhat provocatively to draw male attention and get married (I guess like the Tu B’av descriptions?).