Siman 250 — Lamdan Level: preparing the Shabbat meal with one’s own hands
In-depth pilpul
The sugya of Shabbat 119a, the reading of the Amoraim’s acts,
the shitot of the Rishonim and the Acharonim
Subject: שולחן ערוך אורח חיים סימן ר״נ · 2 seifim
With the commentaries: Beit Yosef, Taz, Magen Avraham, Mishnah Berurah, Biur Halakha
Talmudic basis: שבת קי״ט. · שבת קי״ח. · קידושין מ״א.
Edited by: Rav Yossef Haim Samama · DAAT
📑 Table of contents
- Opening of the sugya — Shabbat 119a and the source of the acts reported
- Reading the Amoraim’s acts — the figures and the actions
- The underlying chakira — is kavod Shabbat active or passive
- Rashi’s shita on the Amoraim’s acts
- The Rambam’s shita in kavod Shabbat — chiyuv or middah tovah
- Chakira: in person or through a shaliach — מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו
- The knife — the Rama’s shita and its sources
- Seif ב — ירבה בבשר ויין — the measure of the increase
- The sugya of « כפי יכלתו » — the case of the poor man
- Practical nafka minot
📜 The text of the Shulchan Arukh — 2 seifim
The siman consists of two seifim. The first requires rising early on Friday and putting one’s own hand to the work; the second, in a single clause, calls for increasing the table. The Rama adds only one gloss, about the knife.
« יַשְׁכִּים בַּבּוֹקֶר בְּיוֹם הַשִּׁשִּׁי לְהָכִין צָרְכֵי שַׁבָּת, וַאֲפִי׳ יֵשׁ לוֹ כַּמָּה עֲבָדִים לְשַׁמְּשׁוֹ — יִשְׁתַּדֵּל לְהָכִין בְּעַצְמוֹ שׁוּם דָּבָר לְצָרְכֵי שַׁבָּת כְּדֵי לְכַבְּדוֹ… וּמֵהֶם יִלְמוֹד כָּל אָדָם, וְלֹא יֹאמַר לֹא אֶפְגּוֹם כְּבוֹדִי, כִּי זֶה הוּא כְּבוֹדוֹ שֶׁמְּכַבֵּד הַשַּׁבָּת. » (שולחן ערוך אורח חיים ר״נ:א)
The Rama’s gloss, in the same seif — « וְיֵשׁ לְהַשְׁחִיז הַסַּכִּין בְּעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, כִּי זֶהוּ מִכְּבוֹד הַשַּׁבָּת שֶׁמֵּכִין עַצְמוֹ לַאֲכִילָה » (רמ״א שם ר״נ:א) — in the source the gloss closes on a parenthesis in which the Rama names his warrants: the Kol Bo, and the Beit Yosef in the name of Sefer Chayei Olam; it is taken up in § 7.
« יַרְבֶּה בְּבָשָׂר וְיַיִן וּמַגְדָּנוֹת כְּפִי יְכָלְתּוֹ » (שולחן ערוך אורח חיים ר״נ:ב)
A note on reading — the gloss about the knife is rendered by Sefaria inside a <small> tag within seif א: it is the Rama, not the Mechaber. The Mechaber’s seif א ends at כי זה הוא כבודו שמכבד השבת.
1. Opening of the sugya — Shabbat 119a
The text of the Gemara
These four are not the first on the list: the Gemara names others before them, and the Shulchan Arukh kept only the end of the series.
« רַב סָפְרָא מְחָרֵיךְ רֵישָׁא. רָבָא מָלַח שִׁיבּוּטָא. רַב הוּנָא מַדְלֵיק שְׁרָגֵי. רַב פָּפָּא גָּדֵיל פְּתִילָתָא. » (שבת קי״ט.)
Rashi’s commentary
« מחריך רישא - אם היה שם ראש בהמה לחרוך מחרכו הוא בעצמו » (רש״י שבת קי״ט. ד״ה מחריך רישא)
« פרים - לשון פרומים מחתך » (רש״י שבת קי״ט. ד״ה פרים)
« מצתת צתותי - מצית האור בעצים דקים » (רש״י שבת קי״ט. ד״ה מצתת צתותי)
« מכתף ועייל מכתף ונפיק - בע״ש יוצא ונכנס להביא תמיד משואות כלי תשמיש ובגדי חופש ומגדים כאדם שמקבל את רבו בביתו ומראה לו שהוא חשוב עליו וחרד לכבודו לטרוח ולהרבות בשבילו » (רש״י שבת קי״ט. ד״ה מכתף ועייל)
Three observations. First, Rashi does not gloss מצלחי ציבי: the sense “splitting wood” is plain enough, and the page must not put under his name an explanation he does not give. Second, the common rendering of פרים סילקא as “chopping the beet very fine” does not come from Rashi, who says only לשון פרומים מחתך — “a term of tearing, he cuts”; the phrase מחתך הירק דק דק is the Shulchan Arukh’s own, in seif א. Third, and this is what matters for what follows: Rashi’s last gloss, on Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, does not explain a word but gives the reason for the act — one behaves as a man receiving his teacher in his house, showing him that he matters and that one takes trouble for him.
Understanding the sugya: the Gemara lines up examples of Amoraim who performed physical work with their own hands on Friday. The purpose of this presentation is not to require one particular action — none of them is taken up as a norm — but to make palpable an overall disposition: the greatest of men does not set himself above the deed. That is exactly what the Shulchan Arukh draws from it: ומהם ילמוד כל אדם.
2. Reading the Amoraim’s acts — figures and actions
The Shulchan Arukh does not take up the whole series from the Gemara: it keeps four entries, in the order in which they appear there. Here they are, with what each act brings into play.
| Amora | Act | What the act brings into play |
|---|---|---|
| רב חסדא | cutting the vegetable דק דק | care for detail, fine work |
| רבה ורב יוסף | splitting wood | heavy physical labour |
| רבי זירא | kindling the fire under the thin sticks | kindling, getting the cooking under way |
| רב נחמן | setting the house in order, bringing in the vessels | material organisation, marking off Shabbat from the week |
Chakira: why does the Talmud present several figures rather than one?
First ofen: to show that each Amora took the task that suited him — one is not bound to any particular action. Rav Chisda preferred fine work; Rabbah and Rav Yosef, physical effort; Rabbi Zeira, the fire; Rav Nachman, the tidying.
Second ofen: to offer a typology of actions. Each act stands for a category: preparing the food, preparing the materials, kindling, setting in order.
The two readings do not contradict each other, and the sugya does not decide between them.
3. The underlying chakira — is kavod Shabbat active or passive
The underlying question: what exactly is kavod Shabbat?
- First ofen — active: kavod Shabbat is an action. One must perform material acts oneself. Without an act, no kavod.
- Second ofen — passive: kavod Shabbat is a result. What matters is that the house be ready and fine. How that was achieved does not enter into it: if an agent did the work, all is in order.
- Third ofen — mixed: an obligation to do a set share oneself, and no more; beyond that, one may delegate.
The yesod: the Mechaber’s wording points to the third ofen. Kavod Shabbat is first of all an action — but it does not demand that one do everything oneself: it demands that one do something, and the rest may go through an agent.
« יִשְׁתַּדֵּל לְהָכִין בְּעַצְמוֹ שׁוּם דָּבָר לְצָרְכֵי שַׁבָּת כְּדֵי לְכַבְּדוֹ » (שולחן ערוך אורח חיים ר״נ:א)
The Mishnah Berurah does not leave that share to goodwill alone. On the words ומהם ילמד כל אדם she writes that it holds for the most eminent of men, and she names it.
« היינו אפילו החשוב יותר ובפרט בימים הקצרים ומכ״ש כשרואה שכבר הוא סמוך לשבת שאז הוא מחוייב לעסוק בכל כחו… וזהו חיוב גמור על כל אדם » (משנה ברורה סימן ר״נ ס״ק ד)
4. Rashi’s shita on the Amoraim’s acts
From here comes the reversal the sugya works upon the notion of dignity. The question one asks before Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak is: how does a man of such rank carry loads on his shoulders? His answer is in the Gemara itself — had he done so before Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Assi, why not before Shabbat? The Shulchan Arukh draws from it the prohibition of saying לא אפגום כבודי, and the reason it gives is that this is his honour.
The Chavot Yair’s kashya, reported by the Biur Halakha: how did they treat their own dignity lightly, when human dignity is a weighty matter?
« איך הקילו בכבודם הא גדול כבוד הבריות שדוחה ל״ת שבתורה » (ביאור הלכה סימן ר״נ ד״ה כי זהו כבודו)
Terutz: precisely this is their honour, because it is visible that they are engaged in a mitzvah and that they do it for Heaven. The Biur Halakha thereby distinguishes this case from that of the sage who picks up a lost object, where it is not visible that he is performing a mitzvah.
« דזהו כבודם שעוסק בעצמו במצוה וניכר שעושה כן לכבוד הש״י » (ביאור הלכה סימן ר״נ ד״ה כי זהו כבודו)
On the image of Shabbat received as a queen. The motif is real and stands at both ends of the sugya, but its provenance must be stated. In the Gemara it is Rabbi Chanina, a few lines before our passage.
« בּוֹאוּ וְנֵצֵא לִקְרַאת שַׁבָּת הַמַּלְכָּה » (שבת קי״ט.)
And in the commentaries on our siman it is the Mishnah Berurah who takes it up, in the name of the sefarim, to say how one presents oneself before Shabbat.
« שבת מקרי כלה מלכתא וכאלו מקבל פני המלך ית״ש » (משנה ברורה סימן ר״נ ס״ק ג)
A warning for the reader: the Tosafot on שבת קי״ט. carries, in the text served by Sefaria, no ד״ה on this passage — the two entries found there address other lines of the daf. This motif therefore cannot be put to Tosafot’s account, and this page does not do so.
5. The Rambam’s shita in kavod Shabbat — chiyuv or middah tovah?
« אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהָיָה אָדָם חָשׁוּב בְּיוֹתֵר וְאֵין דַּרְכּוֹ לִקַּח דְּבָרִים מִן הַשּׁוּק וְלֹא לְהִתְעַסֵּק בִּמְלָאכוֹת שֶׁבַּבַּיִת — חַיָּב לַעֲשׂוֹת דְּבָרִים שֶׁהֵן לְצֹרֶךְ הַשַּׁבָּת בְּגוּפוֹ שֶׁזֶּה הוּא כְּבוֹדוֹ » (רמב״ם הלכות שבת פרק ל׳ הלכה ו׳)
The Biur Halakha’s chakira: is this חייב a full obligation, or a manner of speaking?
The Biur Halakha first notes the word itself.
« בהרמב״ם איתא על דין זה בלשון חייב » (ביאור הלכה סימן ר״נ ד״ה ישתדל וכו׳)
He then proposes to lighten it, and gives his reason: were it a full obligation, all those Amoraim would not have interrupted their Torah study for it.
« ואפשר דלהרמב״ם ג״כ לאו חוב גמור הוא אלא כעין חובה משום כבוד שבת, וסברת הרמב״ם דאל״ה לא היו מבטלים כל הני אמוראים תורתן עבור זה » (ביאור הלכה סימן ר״נ ד״ה ישתדל וכו׳)
He supports this with an argument from Talmudic vocabulary: the word חובה is found in the Gemara only regarding the kindling of the lamp and the three meals.
« ותדע דלא אשכחן בגמרא בשם חובה כ״א על הדלקת נר בשבת בדף כ״ה ע״ב ולענין ג׳ סעודות בדף קי״ז ע״ב » (ביאור הלכה סימן ר״נ ד״ה ישתדל וכו׳)
And he does not decide. He closes with a צריך עיון — the question stays open, and it stays open here.
« ומ״מ לא הוי זה חובה גמורה… ומ״מ צ״ע » (ביאור הלכה סימן ר״נ ד״ה ישתדל וכו׳)
Where the question stands, source by source:
- The Rambam — the word of his halakhah is חייב, and he speaks expressly of the eminent man (הלכות שבת פ״ל ה״ו).
- The Mechaber — writes ישתדל, “let him strive”, and limits the matter to שום דבר (ר״נ:א).
- The Biur Halakha — asks whether the Rambam’s חייב is a full obligation, inclines to כעין חובה, and ends with צ״ע.
- The Mishnah Berurah — on ומהם ילמד כל אדם, writes וזהו חיוב גמור על כל אדם (ס״ק ד).
- The Admur HaZaken — takes up the word חייב in his own Shulchan Arukh (see level 4).
The Biur Halakha and the Mishnah Berurah are therefore to be read together, not against one another: the first weighs the standing of the obligation, the second presses on its reach. What the commentaries do not say, this page does not say either.
6. Chakira: in person or through a shaliach — מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו
The general rule
The rule is laid down in Kiddushin, on the mishnah that allows a man to betroth a woman through an agent: since he can do it through an agent, why state that he can do it himself? Rav Yosef answers that the mitzvah is better performed by the person himself.
« אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: מִצְוָה בּוֹ יוֹתֵר מִבִּשְׁלוּחוֹ. כִּי הָא דְּרַב סָפְרָא מְחָרֵיךְ רֵישָׁא, רָבָא מָלַח שִׁיבּוּטָא » (קידושין מ״א.)
The point not to be missed: the proof the Gemara in Kiddushin brings for this rule is our erev Shabbat acts — the same Amoraim, in the same words. The rule and our sugya are therefore not brought together by comparison: in the Talmud itself they are one and the same thing.
Applying the rule to kavod Shabbat
Chakira: does the rule מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו apply to kavod Shabbat as elsewhere, or in a way peculiar to it?
The commentaries on the siman answer by stating it and generalising it. The Magen Avraham, on the words להכין בעצמו, extends it to every mitzvah.
« וה״ה בכל מצוה מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו » (מגן אברהם סימן ר״נ ס״ק ב)
The Mishnah Berurah does the same, first anchoring the mitzvah in the verse of Isaiah on which kavod Shabbat rests.
« דמצות כבוד שבת מוטל על כל אדם וכדכתיב וקראת לשבת עונג לקדוש ה׳ מכובד ומצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו » (משנה ברורה סימן ר״נ ס״ק ג)
And the Admur HaZaken, in his own Shulchan Arukh, makes it the very reason of the seif: it is because this holds for all the mitzvot that one strives here to prepare in person.
« שֶׁכֵּן הוּא בְּכָל הַמִּצְווֹת: מִצְוָה בּוֹ יוֹתֵר מִבִּשְׁלוּחוֹ » (שו״ע הרב ר״נ:ד)
Terutz: the rule applies, and with nothing peculiar about it — all three write and the same holds for every mitzvah. What is peculiar to kavod Shabbat is not the rule but its yield: since the object of the mitzvah is the regard one shows, the gap between what the agent does and what the person does is more visible here than elsewhere.
7. The knife — the Rama’s shita and its sources
The Rama’s text
« כתב בכלבו ומשחיזין הסכין בכל ע״ש דהכי תניא בספרי וידעת כי שלום אהלך זו השחזת סכין » (בית יוסף אורח חיים סימן ר״נ)
« ומצאתי כתוב בשם ספר חיי עולם דמוכח לה מדכתיב והכינו את והוא כמו לאתים ולמזמרות » (בית יוסף אורח חיים סימן ר״נ)
The Taz keeps the second derivation and tightens it: the word את in the verse, taken as superfluous, points to the knife, from the same root as Isaiah’s ploughshares and pruning hooks.
« מדכתיב והכינו את אשר יביאו הך את נרמז בו סכין מל׳ לאתים ולמזמרות » (ט״ז אורח חיים סימן ר״נ ס״ק ב)
The Mishnah Berurah keeps the first, and draws from it the consequence the Sifri had in view — the peace of the household.
« ובספרי מסמיך לה אקרא וידעת כי שלום אהלך זו השחזת הסכין כי אם קהה הסכין יוכל לבוא לפעמים לידי קטטה ח״ו » (משנה ברורה סימן ר״נ ס״ק ה)
Chakira: of what order is the preparation called “sharpening the knife”?
- First ofen — symbolic: a practice that counts for what it signifies, and does not oblige of itself.
- Second ofen — part of kavod Shabbat: an integral part. Not doing it detracts from kavod Shabbat. That is the reason the Rama himself gives: כי זהו מכבוד השבת.
- Third ofen — the quality of the meal: so that the meat may be cut properly and the meal be what it should. That is the rest of the Rama’s sentence: שמכין עצמו לאכילה.
Terutz: the three hold together, and the two derivations reported by the Beit Yosef map out the division. The sharpened knife is a material reality — the verse והכינו את as read by Sefer Chayei Olam and by the Taz; it carries a meaning — the verse וידעת כי שלום אהלך as read by the Sifri and the Kol Bo; and it belongs within kavod Shabbat, which is what the Rama says in his own sentence. That the Mishnah Berurah placed the Sifri’s derashah at ס״ק ה — that is, on the Mechaber’s words כי זה הוא, and not on the Rama’s gloss — is worth noting and is not commented on here.
8. Seif ב — ירבה בבשר ויין — the measure of the increase
The text of the seif
The source of the seif
The source is in the Gemara, on the daf preceding our sugya. Rabbi Yochanan attaches to oneg Shabbat a promise without bounds.
« אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: כָּל הַמְעַנֵּג אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת נוֹתְנִין לוֹ נַחֲלָה בְּלִי מְצָרִים » (שבת קי״ח.)
The increase at the table therefore belongs to oneg as much as to kavod, and that is why the Mechaber places it here, in the seif immediately following the one about preparation.
The sense of « כפי יכלתו »
Chakira: what is כפי יכלתו?
- First ofen — objective: according to his financial state. The poor man will add little, the rich man much.
- Second ofen — subjective: according to his own capacity — attachment and care count, not money alone.
- Third ofen — adjusted to real life: between the two limits.
The Mishnah Berurah does not develop the matter here: on these very words she refers to siman 242, where all the details are set out.
« כפי יכלתו - עיין לעיל בסימן רמ״ב שם מבואר כל הפרטים בזה » (משנה ברורה סימן ר״נ ס״ק ו)
9. The sugya of « כפי יכלתו » — the case of the poor man
Siman 250 does not treat the case of the poor man: it is the Mishnah Berurah who sends the reader on, and the question is settled in siman 242. One must therefore follow her there, and put nothing under the name of the Beit Yosef or the Taz of our siman, whose entries deal with the hour of rising and with the knife.
« וְאֵינוֹ חַיָּב לְהָצֵר לְעַצְמוֹ וְלִשְׁאל מֵאֲחֵרִים כְּדֵי לְהַרְבּוֹת בְּמַאֲכָל בְּשַׁבָּת » (רמב״ם הלכות שבת פרק ל׳ הלכה ז׳)
« עֲשֵׂה שַׁבַּתְּךָ חֹל וְאַל תִּצְטָרֵךְ לַבְּרִיּוֹת » (רמב״ם הלכות שבת פרק ל׳ הלכה ז׳)
What the Shulchan Arukh does with it in siman 242: he does not set it aside, he bounds it. That saying was not addressed to every poor man, but to one whose hour is exceedingly pressed; whoever has a little of his own must on the contrary hasten to honour Shabbat, even at the cost of restricting himself on other days.
« אפילו מי שצריך לאחרים אם יש לו מעט משלו צריך לזרז עצמו לכבד את השבת ולא אמרו עשה שבתך חול ולא תצטרך לבריות אלא למי שהשעה דחוקה לו ביותר » (שולחן ערוך אורח חיים רמ״ב:א)
Nafka mina: the Mishnah Berurah, at siman 242, draws a concrete consequence from that limit — one who has something to pledge must borrow rather than let oneg Shabbat lapse; the saying “make your Shabbat a weekday” applies only to one who has neither pledge nor means.
« דאל״ה צריך ללות כדי שלא לבטל מצות עונג שבת וכמו שאחז״ל שאומר הקב״ה בני לוו עלי ואני פורע » (משנה ברורה סימן רמ״ב ס״ק ג)
On the reference: the referral is indeed to siman רמ״ב (242), ס״ק ג — that is where the Mishnah Berurah of our siman herself sends the reader, at her ס״ק ו.
10. Practical nafka minot
What follows adds no din: these are applications of the same sentence of the Mechaber — ישתדל להכין בעצמו שום דבר (ר״נ:א) — under the reach the Mishnah Berurah gives it at ס״ק ד, וזהו חיוב גמור על כל אדם. For the detail of an actual case, ask your Rav.
1. The householder who has domestic help: the Mechaber’s sentence addresses exactly this case — ואפי׳ יש לו כמה עבדים לשמשו. Something still remains for his own hands: setting the table, preparing the kiddush, the candles, putting the house in order.
2. The yeshiva bachur: the acts within his reach — tidying his own place, preparing himself for tefillah, studying the Shulchan Arukh of siman ר״נ.
3. One whose work is demanding: if another ordinarily does the shopping, one’s own share is not thereby extinguished — the Mishnah Berurah’s ס״ק ד holds על כל אדם; at least one act remains to be done in person.
4. One who orders the meal from a caterer: setting the table, making the kiddush with his own hands, attending to the reception of Shabbat.
5. One whose position is high: he in particular, since it is his case the Rambam treats with אף על פי שהיה אדם חשוב ביותר… חייב (פ״ל ה״ו), and it is the act of Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak.
Going further
Level 3 — Synthesis: a structured recap, memory markers, decision trees and rules of thumb.
Level 4 — Daat HaRav: the shita of the Admur HaZaken in his own Shulchan Arukh, which divides this siman into eight seifim where the Mechaber has two.