(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Shabbos 98


1) A covered street has the Din of a Karmelis (since it is unlike the streets in the desert, when Yisrael traveled there), and one is not Chayav for carrying in a Karmelis.


1. 'u'Veineihen' means the five Amos space between the one wagon and the wagon next to it - to accommodate the extra two and a half Amos that each plank protruded from the wagon?
2. 've'Tzideihen' means the small space between the side of the wagon and the wheel plus the space taken up by the wheel.
(b) When Rav said that 'Tachteihen' was considered the Reshus ha'Rabim he was referring to the spaces *between* the planks - the space *underneath* the planks had the Din of a Karmelis.

(c) The width of ...

1. ... each wagon without the wheels was two and a half Amos.
2. ... each wheel was one a quarter Amos.
1. Each wagon was five Amos long.
2. Each plank was ten Amos long.
3. Each plank was one Amah thick.
(b) Assuming the planks were arranged in three rows (each of one and a half Amos) on the wagon, then, if we divide the remaining half Amah into (the) two - (spaces between three rows) - each space will consist of a quarter of an Amah i.e. one a half Tefachim. Consequently, the planks will have been considered joined due to the Din of 'Levud'. So why is that space considered the Reshus ha'Rabim?

(c) Even if the planks were arranged thickness-wise (of one Amah, rather than the one and a half Amos of their width), they would have been arranged in four rows, leaving a space of one Amah, to be divided into three spaces (i.e. two Tefachim for each space), so that 'Levud' will still apply. In that case, the question that we just asked in b., remains?

(d) If, as Rebbi Yehudah maintains, the planks were tapered, then there would have been more than three Tefachim space in those areas where the planks were thinner. But according to Rebbi Nechemyah, who holds that the planks were rectangular-shaped, the question still remains.

(a) 'be'Atba'i' means that it was not possible to learn that the four rows of planks were placed equidistant from each other, as we thought until now, because of the rings which protruded from each plank at the same point. These would have prevented the planks from being placed in this way. Consequently, they must have been placed in groups of two rows at either end of the wagon, with the rings on each of the planks facing outwards - leaving an Amah space in the middle.

(b) The purpose of the rings was to house the poles, which, in turn, held the walls firm, preventing them from swaying in the wind.

(c) According to Rashi's Rebbes, why should the rings present a problem? All they needed to do, points out Rashi, was to slightly stagger the two inner rows of planks to avoid the rings from interfering with each other.

(d) Rashi therefore explains 'be'Atbi' to mean two together (in the same way as his Rebbes explained - only *he* translates 'be'Atbi' in that way, whereas *they* did not. The word actually means a split piece of wood - like an old-fashioned wooden clothes-pin.

(a) Four wagons carried the planks.

(b) Each wagon carried twelve planks.

(c) 'Agalah Gufa Mekurah Hava'i'? means that the floor of the wagon was covered, so the contradiction that we had above in Rav (in 2b.) returns.

(d) The Gemara answered that the floors of the wagons were not completely covered; there were poles going across, but they were widely spaced.




(a) According to Rebbi Nechemyah, the planks were rectangular shaped, one Amah thick at the base and one Amah at the top. He learns from "Samim" that each plank was made of one whole piece of wood, and not from two pieces.

(b) "Yachdav" according to Rebbi Yehudah comes to tell us that all the planks were flush, that not one was out of line.

(c) Since the thickness of the planks was tapered and not the width, what would happen with the two corner planks of the west wall of the Kodesh Kodshim, whose width was *not* tapered? When they were placed against the corner planks of the north and the south sides, the tops would protrude from the upper half of the two north and south planks, which were tapered?

(d) The Gemara answers that, in fact, the two corner planks of the west side were tapered both in their thickness and in their width.

(a) The Beri'ach ha'Tichon was the middle bolt that ran through the middle of all the planks on the south, west and north sides of the Mishkan. The bolt can only have been placed through a miracle, because no human being can cause a wooden bolt to turn corners.

(b) Each of the curtains of the Mishkan was twenty-eight by four Amos. Once the two groups of five curtains each had been stitched together and joined by means of loops and clasps, they comprised twenty-eight by forty Amos.

(c) According to Rebbi Nechemyah, once the curtains covered the planks, one Amah of the planks were left uncovered, beside the Amah of the socket.

(d) They placed the curtains along the length of the Mishkan (thirty Amos), plus the planks of the west-wall (one Amah), leaving nine Amos to cover the Western planks completely - although the sockets remained uncovered.

(a) The Ohel was the second set of goats' hair coverings, that covered the 'Mishkan'.

(b) Each of the eleven curtains that comprised the 'Ohel' was thirty by four Amos. Consequently, once the two groups of five and six had been stitched together and then joined by means of loops and clasps, the Ohel was thirty by forty-four Amos.

(c) According to Rebbi Nechemyah ...

1. ... the 'Ohel' covered the one Amah of planks that were left uncovered by the 'Mishkan'.
2. ... the extra four Amos of length, were divided into two: two Amos hung down in front, like the veil of a modest bride, the other two Amos hung down at the back, to cover the Amah of the sockets and one Amah with trailed on the ground.
(d) Rebbi Yehudah explains "Chatzi ha'Yeri'ah ha'Odefes *Tisrach* Achorei ha'Mishkan" literally, to mean that half of the extra four Amos trailed behind the Mishkan. But according to Rebbi Nechemyah, it means that the two Amos hung down lower than the curtains of the 'Mishkan' - though only *one* Amah (a quarter of the extra curtain) actually trailed on the ground.
(a) Each plank was cut in two places at its base, to a depth of one Amah, to form two rectangular-shaped prongs which fitted into similar shaped holes in the silver sockets, and allowed each plank to sit flush on top of two sockets.

(b) The clasps and the loops (as we already described above in 7b. and 8a.) served to join the two groups of curtains that comprised the 'Mishkan' and the two groups of curtains that comprised the 'Ohel' - fifty sets of golden clasps and Techeles loops for the former, and fifty sets of copper clasps and (presumably Techeles) loops for the latter.

(c) The Mishkan was manufactured from 'Techeles, Argaman, Tola'as Shani and Shesh' - the first three, wool, the latter, linen.

(d) Superior wisdom was needed to manufacture the goat's-hair curtains, because it was washed and spun directly from the backs of the goats.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,