Yesterday we saw the sugya (discussion). What was the sugya we saw? We have a menorah, and you want to move it. Why do you want to move the menorah, the candelabra that you lit? You want to move it because of the goyim (non-Jews), the chavrei. The Gemara said sakanah (danger), and Rashi said sakanah. How could you move it? It’s a basis (supporting base). Coming into Shabbat, it was a basis for the shalhevet (flame). A basis for the shalhevet remains muktzeh (set aside from use) the whole Shabbat. Even if you want to call the menorah a kli shemelachto le’isur (utensil used for prohibited work), it loses that status once it becomes a basis. Once it becomes a basis, it is muktzeh lechol haShabbat (set aside for all Shabbat).
So the Gemara said, “Kedei hu Rebbi Shimon lismoch alav bish’at hadchak” (It is sufficient to rely on Rabbi Shimon in pressing circumstances). You could rely on Rebbi Shimon, because Rebbi Shimon holds that this case is not a basis, since it is atid (destined) to go out. Since it is atid to go out, it is not a basis, so therefore, kedei hu. Mah zeh kedei hu (What does this mean)? If it’s not a basis, then it goes back to whatever we thought it was. What did we think it was? A kli shemelachto le’isur. So therefore, it’s a kli shemelachto le’isur, and lich’orah (seemingly) it should go back to being letzorech gufo (for its own use), mekomo (its place). So we explained why it’s considered letzorech mekomo, because you need the place. You need the place to be vacant. Why do I need the place to be vacant? So the goyim don’t see it and beat me up. Otherwise, the goyim are going to beat me up if they see that I lit a menorah.
Our question yesterday was: We have a Mishnah Berurah. The Mishnah Berurah said you are allowed to move the menorah either because of sakanah, because they’re going to hit you, or because of hefsed mamon (monetary loss). We said, “Hefsed mamon? Mah zeh hefsed mamon (What is this monetary loss)?” Hefsed mamon—that’s not letzorech mekomo. That’s considered mechamah letzal (from sun to shade), because they’re going to steal the menorah. You have no heiter (permission) on a kli shemelachto le’isur to move it mechamah letzal.
So we saw the Bnei Tzion. He came along and said, “No, it must be that”—and we have a stirah (contradiction), because later on, clearly Maran holds that because of hefsed, we don’t matir (permit) moving it mechamah letzal. Sechorah (merchandise) that was in the rain—that was a hefsed—we weren’t matir moving it. So the Bnei Tzion came along and said a chiddush (novel insight): what it says here, hefsed mamon, in the Mishnah Berurah must mean a loss where the goyim are going to be mafsid (cause loss to) you financially. They’re going to give you a knas (fine).
So what’s the difference if they hit you, what’s the difference if they beat you up, or if they’re going to come to your house and repossess your piano? The point is, anytime you’re going to have an interaction with the goyim, it’s a dangerous thing, whether it’s going to be a monetary interaction, a physical interaction, or something like that. So that’s what the Mishnah Berurah meant. That was his chiddush about how to learn the Mishnah Berurah, so as not to make it contradictory with the din (law) that we learned later on.
Okay, so that was basically what we talked about yesterday. Then we said a chiddush about a basis that becomes mixed up with other things: Do we call it a davar sheyesh lo matirin (something that will become permitted) or not? That was yesterday’s talk in a nutshell. Chazak uvaruch. That’s the Noda BiYehudah, the Tzlach, Rebbi Yechezkel Landau.
Today we have another question. We have to go through the sugya now of moving the menorah by putting something on it before Shabbat. So now I want to make it a basis ledavar heiter veledavar isur (a base for permitted and prohibited items). It doesn’t have to be normal—who said it has to be normal? We learned that a basis is a problem. However, I can make a basis ledavar heiter veledavar isur—or it’s a basis ledavar heiter veledavar isur—obviously, not when it’s lit. Once it goes out, now I have the menorah that’s the problem, but I have whatever permitted item is there. May I now move it? I’m talking about the menorah itself; I haven’t gotten to the tray. People light the menorah outside, or they have candelabras that they put on the table. After it goes out, they don’t want it to be on the table. They want to pick it up and move it inside. They want to set the table for Shabbat after that. They don’t want it sitting on the table. But we said it’s muktzeh; it’s a basis. So now we want to know: Is there a way to make the menorah a basis ledavar heiter ve’isur? By doing that, we’ll have a heiter to carry it.
Open up Shulchan Aruch, rabotai (my gentlemen). Open up resh ayin tet (letter tzadi, section three), right where we were. Resh ayin tet in the Mishnah Berurah, huh? Resh ayin tet. Halachah (Jewish law)… Oh, so halachah gimmel (section three). Gimmel, a very important halachah. Resh ayin tet gimmel: “Letaltel ner al yedei shenotnim alav lechem beShabbat, asur” (Moving a lamp by placing bread on it on Shabbat is forbidden). “Ve’im natan alav halechem mebe’od yom, yesh mi shematir letaltelo beShabbat al yedei lechem zeh, ve’ein lismoch alav” (If he placed bread on it before day, some permit moving it on Shabbat by means of this bread, but one should not rely on him).
So he comes along and says there was a rabbi who wanted to be matir moving the menorah al yedei lechem. Remember we said met al yedei kikar o tinok (a corpse by means of bread or a child)? So, not only a met: this shitah (approach) wants to say this about any muktzeh—this is a basis. Some wanted to say, take lechem, stick it on the menorah before Shabbat, and now it will be a basis ledavar heiter. The Mishnah Berurah comes along and says that obviously, if you put it on on Shabbat, it’s not going to help, because going into bein hashemashot (twilight), it was muktzeh. Once it goes into bein hashemashot muktzeh, you can’t fix that on Shabbat. But on erev Shabbat (Friday), if I put the bread on it, it could be okay.
So the Mishnah Berurah says, “Al lechem, hainu im halechem hu chashuv (important) etzlo yoter mehashemen (oil). Vehu hadin im heniach she’ar davar chashuv, de’az amrinan keivan dene’esah basis le’issur dehu shemen, shemen or shalhevet, uleheter, veheter chashuv tafel, velachen sharei, kmo shekatav siman shin-yud, umikol makom siyeim hamechaber she’ein lismoch al zeh.”
Maran said, “Don’t rely on this.” Maran doesn’t go with this: “Ein lismoch al zeh” (one should not rely on this). I mean, why “ein lismoch al zeh,” the Mishnah Berurah says? “Vehata’am, dekeivan dehamenorah ikar asiyatah bishvil hashalhevet.” The menorah—the main thing is the shalhevet. Look at what you put on it. “Lachen ne’eset tamid tafel uvasis lashalhevet velo lelechem, af im devarim acherim chashuvim yoter.”
Did you understand what the Mishnah Berurah is saying? Bein hashemashot, you cannot tell me that the shalhevet and the lechem are equal. You need the shalhevet for the mitzvah (commandment). You need the shalhevet to be lit. Understand? So therefore, you’re going to put a chashuv piece of bread, but the chashuv piece of bread is not going to help you. The Magen Avraham writes that the shalhevet is always more chashuv. So that’s how he’s explaining Maran. That’s why he is not going to help you—ein lismoch alav—because it’s metzi’ut (reality); you’re not going to have a reality of a case like this.
Is that what he’s saying? Right, he’s saying that the shalhevet is more chashuv? Or is he saying that, no, that’s what the menorah was made for, so it’s like a sketch? If you put a piece of bread on the menorah, even if it’s more chashuv, this item was made for the—what are you saying that’s different? Because, let’s say, then it’s not a question of chashuv; it’s a question of what it was made for. To go the other way: If I have a sock drawer and I put money in the sock drawer, we always said the sock drawer becomes chashuv because the money is more chashuv. But if you understand it as, no, the sock drawer is made for socks, then if I put something else in, I don’t hear a difference. I don’t hear a difference.
The point is, the shalhevet is the ikar. The shalhevet is the ikar, and therefore, the bread is not going to make it more chashuv than the shalhevet. Especially the shalhevet—that’s the purpose. I need it bein hashemashot. Do I need the bread bein hashemashot? The shalhevet is the ner, I need the ner to be lit bein hashemashot; that’s when I lit it.
Where does this all come from, this business of lechem? Who is the author of this opinion? We have a sheet here from one of the chachamim called the Rivash. Google the Rivash, and you’ll see who the Rivash was, one of the early Sefaradi (Sephardic) commentators. Unbelievable. You see in tzadi gimmel (letter tzadi, section three)? No, no, no, no—Sefaradi commentators, “Rashi’s mentsh?” Look at tzadi gimmel. You see od katavta (You further wrote)? There are three pages there: the Rivash, Chacham Ben Tzion, and then the Tashbetz. The Rivash doesn’t have any title on top of it. Third line, bidyuk. You see it, Michael, od katavta? Okay. So I’m reading it through, rabotai. Od katavta. Help me out, boys, this is hard writing. That’s part of our mechiyat Amalek (eradicating Amalek); we should be amel (toil).
“Od katavta she’amru lecha mishemi”—he’s talking to his student or whoever is writing him a letter. He says, “Hey, you said in my name”—“od katavta she’amru lecha mishemi otam”—what does that say? “Uman whatever she’ani hitarti lahen letaltel ner shedilko bo be’ota Shabbat le’achar shekava.” He says, “How could you? You said in my name that I allowed people to move a candelabra on Shabbat after it went out? Veniflet al zeh deha bemuktzeh machmat issur kayma lan keRabbi Yehuda de’asar velo keRabbi Shimon deshari, vener shedilko bo be’ota Shabbat muktzeh machmat issuro, demigo de’itkasai lebein hashemashot be’od shehu dolek, itkasai lechulei yoma.” He says, “I don’t know what you’re talking about; it’s muktzeh! It was muktzeh bein hashemashot, it remains muktzeh the whole Shabbat.”
“Vehe’erachta lehavi re’aya min hahalachot shel haRif ulder haRambam, ve’od.” Then you said here, “Sheketzat nashim metaltelelin menorah le’achar shekavta al yedei me’at lechem shenotnin betoch haner. Umin hanireh lecha ki mi shehitir lahem nitla bemah she’amru beperek Bameh Madlikin gabei David HaMelech shemet beShabbat vehayah mutal bachamah vesam Shlomo kikar o tinok (a loaf or a child) lachachamim, ve-sha’al Shlomo lachachamim ve’amru lo, ‘Avicha, tal alav kikar o tinok vetaltelenu.’”
So he says, “Unbelievable!” He says, “First of all, you said in my name that you could move the menorah. Then you brought this thing from the ladies—that the ladies are lenient about putting a little bread on the menorah—and they’re relying on David HaMelech’s case, that when he died on Shabbat, Shlomo asked the chachamim. What did the chachamim say? ‘Kikar o tinok,’ to make it a basis ledavar issur veheter (a base for prohibited and permitted items).” This is the question they’re asking the Rivash: What are the facts here in this subject?
So he says, “Mah she’amru lecha hanashim hahem”—those ladies who told you “shehitarti lahem letaltel ner shedilko bo be’ota Shabbat, bemuhlat lo hayu devarim me’olam.” The good news is, this has been going on since the time of the Rivash. They quoted the rabbi and said that the Rivash was matir, and he says, “I don’t know what you’re talking about. I never told any lady that they could take bread and put it on the menorah on Shabbat to be matir. Aval hitarti lahem letaltel al yedei tenai.” What I did matir was to make a condition: “Sheyitnu me’erev Shabbat sheyuchlu letaltelo ule’achar shekava, vezeh mutar.” If you lit the menorah before Shabbat and, when you lit it, made a condition that after it goes out you’re going to move it, that much I gave you.
“Ve’afilu bener gadol vechen katav haRamban zal. Vehevi re’aya min haYerushalmi degarsinan hatam: Im hitna alav, mutar. Mah anan kayma lan? I keRabbi Meir afilu hitna assur, dikasvar hatam de-rabbi makhli meyuchad le’issur assur, i keRabbi Yehuda, ner ma’us hu, k’lomar ve’ein adam yachol lehatot hadavar ma’us, ve’akhshav i keRabbi Shimon afilu lo hitnah yehe mutar, vetirtzu deRabbi Shimon hu, umai dibikot vekara va’ashashit assur Rabbi Shimon ve’afilu le’achar shekavu?” He brings all the re’aya (proof) from the Ramban. Basically, he says, “Listen, what I was matir, I was matir one thing: a tenai (condition).”
That’s the whole thing. Now go to the end of the teshuvah. You see where it says “ve-chen nami amrinan hatam” in the second column? There’s a little pause space. “Ve-chen nami amrinan hatam.” Yes, second column. “Ve-chen nami amrinan hatam” over there in the Gemara, “de-metaltelin kinuna agav kitma” (the fire-pan by means of its ashes). Remember we said “kinuna agav kitma”? Kinuna was this shovel that had ashes and wood in it. The wood, we said, was muktzeh. The ashes, however, had a purpose: to cover up stuff. So that’s kinuna agav kitma. “Ve’ein al zeh basis af al pi”—sorry—“af al pi she-yehe,” very good, “she-yehe bo shivrei etzim” (pieces of wood), right? Shivrei etzim is muktzeh; I guess that’s the parentheses. “Ve-zeh mipnei she-ha’efer” (ashes) “muchan,” right? “Ve-na’asah kinuna basis ho’il ve-ha’efer ha-mutar, af al pi she-shivrei etzim asur. Ve’al zeh samchu otam ha-manichim me’at lechem ba-ner me’erev Shabbat.”
All right, this is where they got it from. Those people who were leaning toward putting a little bread on the ner before Shabbat were relying on this Gemara about the kinuna. “U-le-divrehem gam be’od she-ha-ner dolek, hayah mutar letaltelo.” Right, according to that, even if it was lit, it should be permissible to move it, if you’re not going to worry about flickering and all that. “She’im lo chen afilu le’achar she-kavah yehe asur migu de-itkatzai le-vein ha-shemashot.” Exactly. Which means, once you put the bread on, it has to permit moving it even when it’s lit, because if it’s forbidden when it’s lit, then it goes back to being migu de-itkatzai le-vein ha-shemashot. So it has to be permitted bein hashemashot, even when it’s lit.
“U-mi-kol makom hayah tzarich she-yehe ha-lechem yoter chashuv min ha-shemen.” One thing, however, he says: the bread has to be more important than the oil. “Ve-lo yaspik me’at lechem, ki be-chol davar she-na’asah basis le-davar ha-mutar u-le-davar ha-asur, ein mutar letaltelo ela im ken ha-davar ha-mutar chashuv yoter min ha-davar ha-asur, ke-d’amrinan hatam gabe machta be-afrah she’im ein ha-efer muchan asur letaltelo, ve-af al pi she-yesh sham koret levonah, ve’af im chashuvim li-she’ar anashim asur kol she-einam chashuvim le-va’al ha-bayit, ve-chen mitba’er kol otah sugya.” Fine. “U-le-zeh me’at lechem eino maspik le-zeh.”
He says, fine, if they want to rely on that sugya, a little bread is not going to help. They have to put enough bread that it’s going to be chashuv. So far, so good? He says, “All right, I found a heiter for these ladies. They’re relying on that sugya of the ashes with the wood.” But, he says, a little bread that they put is not going to be enough, because the laws of basis require something that is considered chashuv.