מלאכה שאינה צריכה לגופה חלק ב׳ 04

One may draw up wine from a barrel with a siphon [diyofei], and one may drip water from a vessel that releases water in drops [miarak], for an ill person on Shabbat. Usually these things would be assur because of shoma'as kol -- doing things that make noise -- on Shabbos. However, it's only a derabanan, and we allow you to do an issur derabanan bemakom choleh (she'en bo sakana).

With regard to a matter in which there is no danger, but only potential illness, one says to the gentile to perform the act, and the gentile performs the act. Amira lenochri (or Amira le'akum) is an issur derabanan. However, we allow you to do an issur derabanan bemakom choleh (she'en bo sakana).

-Bimakom tzar you can milk an animal for it's milk with a shinuy (gemara -- by sucking directly from its udders).

Milking is a problem of dash. The rabanan hold dash only applies to gedulei karaka.

Tosfos asks: If it's already a derabanan bemakom tzar, why do you have to do it with a shinuy?

The Gemara relates: Mar bar Rav Ashi found Ravina rubbing his daughter with unripe olives [guharkei] of orla for medicinal purposes. Mar bar Rav Ashi said to him: Say that the Sages said that one may derive benefit from such a prohibited item at a time of danger; however, who says that one is permitted to do so when it is not a time of danger? Ravina said to him: A high fever is also deemed a time of danger, and one may derive benefit from a prohibited item it such a situation. Some say that Ravina said to him as follows: Am I deriving benefit in a usual manner? The usual way to derive benefit from these olives is to use them after they have become ripe, so that their oil can be drawn out. Since Ravina was not deriving benefit in the usual manner, he was permitted to do so, although his daughter’s life was not in danger.

-Ravina was allowed to rub his daughter with shemen shel orla, and since it's shelo b'derech hana'asan it is mutar for a choleh she'en bo sakana.

Tosfos derives from a gemara in sanhedrin:

The petur melacha she'eina tzricha legufa is not based on meleches machsheves, because it even applies to chovel umavir, which don't need a meleches machsheves (at least according to R"S).

Melacha she'eina tzricha legufa is therefore a melacha derabanan, so it's not mutar for a choleh.

Mapis Mursah is a toldah she'eina tzricha legufa, and therefore, as we discussed last time, is mutar.

The tanna taught a baraita before Rav Ḥisda: Both one who rounds the edges of his head and one for whom the edges of his head are rounded are flogged (it appears that that is a fancy word for "wipped) for violating the issur of cutting off your peyos. Rav Ḥisda said to him: Is one who eats dates that are in a sieve [arbeila] flogged? By analogy, if a person rounded the edges of another’s head, why should the person whose head was rounded receive lashes? He performed no action. Rav Ḥisda proceeded to explain to the tanna: In response to one who says to you: Who is the tanna of the baraita? Say that it is Rabbi Yehuda, who says: In the case of a prohibition that does not involve an action, one is flogged for its violation. Rava says: This baraita can be explained as referring to one who rounds the edges of his head for himself, and he is liable both for rounding the edges of his head and for having the edges of his head rounded; and everyone agrees that he is flogged because he performed an action. Rav Ashi says: This baraita can be explained as referring to a case where the one for whom the edges of his head are being rounded assists the person rounding his head, by repositioning his head to facilitate that rounding, and everyone agrees that he is flogged.

(3) Rem"a: However, if someone has problems with his teeth and it pains him, he can ask a non-Jew to remove the tooth (Beit Yosef in the name of Orhot Hayim and Issur v'Heter Haaroch).

The taz over here argues, however, and says that it is assur to have a goy pull out his tooth because of mesayei'ah

Q: The gemara in beitza says mesayei'ah ein bo mamesh?

A#1: There are different levels of mesayei'ah. Sometimes a person would move less than in other cases.

[RAL: Makes two points a) it would be very hard to distinguish whether it's mesayei'ah enough. b) this is not such a lamdusha terutz.]

A#2: Lo sakifu is plural, which teaches there is a second issur of nikif.

(1) We may not shave the corners of our heads as the idolaters and their priests do, as [Leviticus 19:27] states: "Do not cut off the corners of your heads."
One is liable for each corner. Therefore, a person who shaves both his temples - even if he were to do so simultaneously and had received only a single warning – is [liable for] two measures of lashes.
[This prohibition applies equally to] one who shaves off only the corners of his head and leaves the remainder of his hair, and to one who shaves his entire head at once. Since he has shaved the corners, he is [liable for] lashes.
To whom does the above apply? To the person who shaves. The person [whose head] is shaven is not lashed unless he assists the one who is shaving him. One who shaves [the corners of] a child's [head] should be [liable for] lashes.

-Makif and nikif hamesayei'ah both get malkus

S: Gemara: If you prune but you are also going to use the wood you are chayav twice--kotzer and zorea.

Q: According to R' Yehuda, why do you have to be planning on using the wood, isn't it a melacha sheina tzricha legufa which you are anyways going to be chayav according to R' Yehuda?

A: Ein hacha nami. This gemara is leshitas R' Shimon.

(7) Anyone who performs a [forbidden] labor - even if he has no need for the actual labor he performed - is liable for his deed.

-Rambam is paskining like r yehuda.

(4) Similarly, a person who prunes [a tree] and desires to use [the branches he prunes] is liable for reaping and planting.