Siman 323

It is a known matter that buying and selling is forbidden on Shabbat and Yom Tov, whether he sells explicitly with his mouth or gives him an object by way of sale, meaning that he performs meshikhah on the object on Shabbat. And it appears that even if they conducted the sale on the eve of Shabbat and he gave money, but performs meshikhah on the object on Shabbat—it is also forbidden, since the primary acquisition is the meshikhah, even if they spoke nothing at all. And there is no distinction in matters of buying and selling between objects and food or drink; only by way of a loan may one ask of his fellow for food or drink that he lacks on Shabbat. Even from a shopkeeper, he may request plainly: "Give me this food or this drink," even though both of them know that after Shabbat he will pay him for this, nevertheless, now this is not within the category of buying and selling. And it is permitted to say to his fellow: "Fill this vessel for me with wine or another drink," and even if it is a vessel designated for measurement with which he sells throughout the week, nevertheless, since he does not mention any matter to him—it is not measuring, and this is not buying and selling. (And I saw that the Ha-Gaon Rav Zalman in his Shulchan Aruch wrote: "It is permitted... fill for me... and I will pay you," see there; and I do not know from where he has this, for certainly to mention payment is forbidden, as is implied from the Rambam chapter 4 of Yom Tov and from all the poskim.)

When we permitted him to say, "Fill this vessel for me," and it is designated for measurement, it is only when he takes this vessel and carries it to his home. However, he may not bring a vessel from his home and have his fellow pour for him from his measuring vessel into his own vessel, because this is the manner of buying and selling; rather, he should say to him, "Fill this vessel for me that I brought from my home," or he should fill for him in a vessel that is not for measurement and pour it into his vessel, for when it is not for measurement, it does not appear like buying and selling. Our teacher, the Rema, wrote: There are those who are lenient to say that as long as he does not intend for the measurement exactly, such that he reduces or adds a little—it is permitted. Thus far his words. That is to say, that he reduces a little from the measurement. And there is no concern of theft in this, for it is known that such is the practice on Shabbat and Yom Tov. And there are those who place a ring or another object that is not muktzeh into the measure and fill the measure, and this is a sign that the intention is not for the actual measurement, since the space of the ring is missing, and through this he may also pour from it into the vessel of the buyer. And he wrote further that such is the simple custom, to measure in a vessel designated for measurement and to pour into the vessels of the buyer. Thus far his words. And the great Acharonim raised an outcry over this (see Turei Zahav subsection 1). And in truth, the custom is not so among us, and they do not give at all in a measuring vessel; rather, the buyer takes in his own vessel and after Shabbat they measure it, and so it is proper to do and not to change.

And it is permitted for one to say to his fellow: 'Fill this vessel for me and tomorrow we will measure it,' and even though in this he hints that he will measure and pay him according to the price, nevertheless, since he does not say so explicitly, the intention could also be by way of a loan: 'tomorrow we will measure it to see how much to return to you.' However, it is certainly the case that the buyer is forbidden to say to him: 'Give me such-and-such a measure,' for although he could say regarding it: 'Give me this vessel,' he must not mention the name of the measure, for by his mentioning the name of the measure it becomes explicitly like buying and selling and is forbidden; rather, he should say: 'Fill this vessel for me,' for this phrasing is also customary regarding a loan.

A person may go to a shopkeeper with whom he is accustomed and say to him: "Give me eggs and nuts by number," meaning give me ten eggs, twenty nuts, for this is not an indication of buying and selling, as it is the way of a householder to count even within his own home in order to know how much he requires. And when they permitted saying this to a shopkeeper "give me such and such" as has been written, he must be careful not to mention a name of value to him, for example he should not say: "Give me eggs for one ma'ah" or the like, for a name of value is only for buying and selling, and also not a name of a measure, for example: "Give me a log of nuts," and certainly not a sum of measures, meaning that he would make a calculation with him regarding previous measures and what he is taking now—it is obvious that this is forbidden. And also not a sum of a number, meaning that even though they permitted him to say: "Give me eggs in such and such a number," nevertheless a sum of a number, meaning that he would say to him: "Behold, you have fifty nuts with me, give me another fifty and you will have one hundred with me"—this is the way of actual buying and selling.

And know that our teacher, the Rema, in section 4 wrote: "And so too regarding a sum of money, it is only forbidden in such a manner where he says: 'Give me for such and such money, and you will have in my hand such and such,' but otherwise—it is permitted. And so too regarding a sum of measure, specifically in such a manner it is forbidden, but otherwise—it is permitted. And even though it is forbidden to mention money at all, that is regarding a matter whose price is not known, but regarding a matter that is known where he only says to him how much he needs—it is permitted, unless he mentions a sum to him, for there are those who are stringent in this matter, the custom has already spread in these provinces to be lenient according to the aforementioned opinion." Thus far his words. For this opinion holds that the mention of money and the mention of measure is not like buying and selling, but rather like saying how much he needs, meaning: "I need eggs for a ma'ah, I need a log of nuts." But the great Acharonim have already disagreed with this, and it is a complete prohibition for the buyer to mention a term of money or a term of measure, and the custom is not so among us, and Heaven forbid to do so. (Also what the Magen Avraham wrote in subsection 5 to make notes or holes as a sign for how much he takes, this too is questionable, and perhaps it is so. And according to my humble opinion it would seem that since the source of the law is in Beitzah regarding Yom Tov, and also the Rambam did not mention these laws regarding Shabbat, from where do we have the authority to permit at all on Shabbat? For perhaps on Yom Tov, where one cooks on Yom Tov itself, it may be that he did not know precisely on the eve of Yom Tov how much he needs, and therefore they permitted with the explained permissions, but on Shabbat everything is prepared from the eve of Shabbat. However, since the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch wrote this also regarding Shabbat, we do not have the power to disagree with them, but Heaven forbid to add further leniencies in this, and suffice for you with what they explicitly permitted.)

One who brings jugs of wine from place to place—he should not bring them in a basket or a crate in the manner of a weekday, but rather he should bring them before him or on his shoulder and the like, so that he changes from the manner of a weekday. Even if there is no lightness in the burden through the change, nevertheless he must make a change, and even though he brings them for the purpose of drinking what he needs to drink today—for if not so, any exertion is completely forbidden—nevertheless he must carry with a change for a distinction. And if it is impossible for him to change, such as if he invited many guests and needs to hurry to bring them before them—it is permitted even without a change. And this is the opinion of the Tur, that what they said in the Gemara (beginning of the fourth chapter of Beitzah): "He should not bring them in a basket or a crate" refers also to Shabbat. However, the opinion of the Tosafot is that this is only on Yom Tov when he carries them in a public domain, therefore it is good that he should not appear with a burden in the manner of a weekday, but on Shabbat when the carrying is only in a courtyard—it is better to minimize the walking, and it is better to bring them in a basket or a crate at one time than to bring each and every one by itself. (And the Magen Avraham in subsection 7 wrote that the Tur also holds this way, and he is dealing with when one carries through a mavoi that is incorporated with an eruv where there are many onlookers, see there, and it is a wonder, and the Ran also wrote like the Tur, see there and examine carefully.)

It is a self-evident matter that it is forbidden to exert any exertion on Shabbat for the sake of a weekday. Therefore, regarding the vessels in which one ate, if he knows clearly that he will no longer need them today—it is forbidden to wash them on Shabbat, for why should he exert for the sake of a weekday? He should wash them at night, and such is the custom. However, if it is possible that he will need them again today, such as if he needs to eat another meal or the like, or drinking cups for which there is no fixed time for drinking—he may wash them the entire day. And even though he will only need one or two, nevertheless he may wash as many as he desires so that he may drink from whichever one he desires. Nevertheless, if he has an ample supply of vessels or cups, it is not proper to wash them at all on Shabbat. And the general rule is that after the third meal they will not eat or drink anymore. And it is simple that it is permitted to wash from the night of Shabbat for the day of Shabbat.

Rinsing vessels on Shabbat when they are needed for Shabbat is permitted, even when rinsing away a prohibited substance, such as wine used for idolatry remaining within it or from other prohibitions. This is not like one who repairs a vessel, as it is prohibited to immerse a vessel as will be explained, for there is no repair here, as the body of the vessel is permitted, and when one rinses the prohibition from it, it is like rinsing any vessel that is not clean. And even if there is a crumb of bread there, it is permitted to handle it like a chamber pot. The vessel does not become a base for the remnants of the prohibition and the crumbs, even if they were in the vessel during twilight, because they are not significant enough for the vessel to be subordinate to them, and they are nullified relative to the vessel (Magen Avraham, subsection 14). It is prohibited to nullify a prohibition on Shabbat, for you have no greater repair than this. And even though even without this it is prohibited to nullify a prohibition, as written in Yoreh Deah siman 99, nevertheless there are cases where it is permitted to add and nullify as written there, or dry within dry as written there in siman 109, but on Shabbat it is prohibited due to the reason of repairing. However, dry within dry, one within two, where one must discard one as written there, is permitted on Shabbat, since according to the law it is permitted anyway as explained there, and similarly to estimate sixty is permitted (ibid.).

The Rambam wrote in chapter 23, law 8: "It is forbidden to immerse impure vessels on Shabbat, because it is like one who repairs a vessel. However, an impure person is permitted to immerse, because he appears as one who is cooling himself, but one may not sprinkle upon him on Shabbat. One who immerses vessels on Shabbat: if done inadvertently, he may use them; if done intentionally, he may not use them until the conclusion of Shabbat. And it is permitted to immerse impure water on Shabbat. How should one act? He places it in a vessel that does not contract impurity, such as stone vessels, and immerses the vessel in a mikveh until the waters of the mikveh rise over them and they become pure." Thus far his words. And behold, he wrote the reason is because it is like one who repairs a vessel, yet in chapter 4 of Yom Tov, law 17, he wrote the reason: lest he leave the vessel in its impurity until Yom Tov; see there. And in Beitzah (18a) there was a dispute of Amoraim regarding this: for Rav Bibi said "lest he leave it," and Rava said "because it appears like one who repairs a vessel"; see there. And why did he rule on Shabbat like Rava and on Yom Tov like Rav Bibi? Furthermore, on Yom Tov he distinguishes between that which became impure through a primary source of impurity and a secondary source of impurity, for with a secondary source of impurity one may immerse on Yom Tov as is brought in the Baraita there, so why did he not distinguish as such on Shabbat? And perhaps he holds that "repairing" applies even to a secondary source of impurity, while "lest he leave it" does not apply to a secondary source of impurity, for we do not decree in that case, as even if he leaves it, it is pure according to the Torah. And as for his deciding on Yom Tov according to the reason of Rav Bibi, it is because the Baraita supports him, and the Baraita is explicitly stated regarding Yom Tov; see there. And regarding Shabbat he wrote the reason of repairing a vessel, because regarding many things on Shabbat they prohibited due to repairing, and nevertheless it requires further study. And I am surprised at the commentators who did not sense this (and the Sha'agat Aryeh, siman 56, raised this difficulty).

The Tur wrote that it is forbidden to immerse a new vessel. And certainly it is so, for you have no greater "completer of a vessel" than this, and similarly the concern "lest he delay" applies just as it does regarding immersion from their impurity. The words of our teacher, the Beit Yosef, in his great work are very astonishing, as he wrote that according to the opinion of the Rambam, the immersion of new vessels is permitted, and based on this he wrote in section 7: "It is permitted to immerse a new vessel that requires immersion, and there are those who forbid it, and a God-fearing person fulfills all opinions and gives the vessel to a gentile as a gift and then borrows it back from him, and it does not require immersion." Thus far his words. And his intention in the first opinion is to the Rif and the Rambam, as is explained in his great work. And I am very astonished, for granted that regarding the Rif, who wrote only the reason "lest he delay," it is possible to say so, as the Rosh wrote, that according to this reason it is permitted regarding the immersion of new vessels (and even this requires great study, as the Sha'agat Aryeh wrote in siman 56). But the Rambam, in the laws of Shabbat, wrote the reason of "completing a vessel," and he [the Beit Yosef] only cited his words regarding Yom Tov and not what he wrote regarding Shabbat, and it requires great study (and also the Maggid Mishneh wrote there in the laws of Yom Tov that the immersion of vessels is forbidden, see there, and so wrote the Sha'agat Aryeh, and such is the primary ruling).

And that which he wrote to give it to a non-Jew as a gift and return and borrow it from him, even though there are those who are concerned regarding giving gifts on Shabbat as is written in siman 307, nevertheless for the need of Shabbat it is certainly permitted. And if he transgressed and immersed it on Shabbat, it appears that he should not use it on Shabbat, and it is possible to be lenient post facto since there are those who permit it even initially (Magen Avraham subsection 11). And our teacher, the Rema, wrote that if it is a vessel fit to fill with water—he should fill it with water from the mikveh and the immersion is effective for it. Thus far his words. And specifically when the water is fit for drinking, for then it appears like one drawing water for drinking, but if it is not fit for drinking, it is apparent to all that he is immersing it. And when he fills it in this manner—he does not need a berakhah (ibid. subsection 13). And it is simple that when he gives it to a non-Jew as a gift and borrows it from him, that after Shabbat he must immerse it and not with a berakhah, since he gave it to a non-Jew, and in Yoreh Deah siman 120 this was explained, see there (and see Taz subsection 6).

When one cleans vessels on Shabbat when they are needed for use on Shabbat, as has been explained, it is permitted to clean them with anything, even with sand prepared while it was still day, and even silver vessels and copper vessels. And we are not concerned that sand scrapes and smooths, because this is a matter of unintended consequence and it is not a pesik reisha, except for silver vessels with nartakan, which are wine dregs that have dried and hardened, because this certainly smooths the silver vessel which is soft. And similarly, one may not scrub them with salt, because the salt is crushed when one scrubs with force and dissolves into water and becomes nolad, and all the more so with types of soap it is forbidden. And similarly with dirt and ash it is forbidden because of kneading. And they should be careful not to bring their garments into the water, so that it does not come to squeezing, and similarly the towel with which one wipes the vessels after their rinsing, that it should not come into the rinsing water. And among us, the caution of the women when they clean vessels on Shabbat is that they only clean with their hands alone and not with that which they clean with on weekdays, from the fiber called "wiechetz," and every master of the house should warn the members of his household in this, for it is easy to come to the desecration of Shabbat, Heaven forbid.