Why may one hang a Marda'as on a donkey on Shabbos?

Rashi: It is to spare it pain of being cold. It is normal; it is not a load. Etz Yosef - people say that a donkey is cold in the hottest summer months.

Tosfos: Do not ask that one may move a Kli only for the sake of something that one may move on Shabbos. An animal is considered something that one may move on Shabbos, for one may pull it and take it anywhere. Rav Asi bar Nasan was unsure if it is permitted. This is not because it looks like he wants to take it to a far place, for we say 'the one who permits a basket, all the more so a Marda'as'! It is not a decree of the Chatzer due to Reshus ha'Rabim, like we say about a woman (64b). We do not decree for animals, like it says below in the Beraisa about going with a bell in a Chatzer! Rather, it is due to toil. Even though we permit Mekartzefim (combing it with a comb with big teeth - Beitzah 23a), that is to avoid great pain. Alternatively, it is permitted on Yom Tov, but not on Shabbos.

Rav Elyashiv: Above (43b), Tosfos asked why one may extend an Arai Ohel over goats (Eruvin 102a) - this is for the sake of something that one may not move! He answered that it is also for the sake of people. This is unlike he said here, that animals may be moved! Maharsha said that goats are different, for it is not normal to pull them via the hand. Tosfos did not ask why we may feed animals. This shows that they are considered something that may be moved!

Rav Elyashiv: R. Akiva Eiger and Rashash asked, here Rashi said that it is not a load. Above, Rashi (DH Mahu) explained that we ask about in Reshus ha'Yachid. If so, even a load is permitted! We must say that whatever is forbidden mid'Oraisa in Reshus ha'Rabim, mid'Rabanan it is forbidden in the Chatzer, lest it go to Reshus ha'Rabim. This is unlike Magen Avraham 305:6, and unlike Pnei Yehoshua, who says that even in Reshus ha'Rabim it is forbidden only mid'Rabanan. We find that Chazal decreed in a Chatzer due to Reshus ha'Rabim regarding women, and for a tailor with a needle in his garment (12a). Rashi holds that surely it is forbidden in Reshus ha'Rabim. This is a decree, lest it fall and the owner will carry it. We do not decree in Reshus ha'Yachid due to a decree about Reshus ha'Rabim. If it is a load in Reshus ha'Rabim, we decree in Reshus ha'Yachid. The Ran in Avodah Zarah says that Mechamer (making an animal work) applies even to a load in Reshus ha'Yachid. This would be another Perush why a load is forbidden in Reshus ha'Yachid. However, this is astounding. What Isur is there in Reshus ha'Yachid?!

Rav Elyashiv: The Shulchan Aruch permits only putting a Marda'as on a donkey, but not to remove it, and not even to put an Ukaf (a different kind of saddle), and not to put even a Marda'as on a horse. SMaG permits putting a Marda'as even on a horse. What is the reason? A horse is not pained due to the cold! The Vilna Gaon says that Rashi holds that the Gemara said that cold pains a donkey, to teach why one may not remove it. No reason was needed to permit putting it on. Above, the Gemara forbade putting or removing an Ukaf due to toil. If it is forbidden for all animals, even without toil, it is Muktzah! The Tur permits putting even an Ukaf on a horse. It seems that he holds like the Yerushalmi, that the concern is lest he use the animal when tying the saddle. There is more concern for Marda'as than for Ukaf (it is not normally tied).

Why is Shmuel called Aryoch?

Rashi: He was expert in laws and judged like a king judges the land. Richa is a king (Bava Basra 4a).

Rav Elyashiv: It says "Melech b'Mishpat Ya'amid Aretz."

Anaf Yosef: He had four names. (a) Shmuel Yarchina'ah (Bava Metzi'a 85), because he was expert in Sod ha'Ibur (when to add a 30th day to the Yerach (month). He said, I can fix the entire Galus (tell them in advance which months will be full and which short, even without witnesses who saw the Molad in Eretz Yisrael - Rosh Hashanah 20b, Rashi). (b) Shkod (Kesuvos 43), for he was Shoked (diligent) on the doors of Torah. (c) Aryoch. (d) Shevor Malka, for he was esteemed amidst Yisrael like Shevor Malka among the nations.

Tosfos: It is a king's name - "Aryoch Melech Elasar." This name was chosen, and not other kings' names, for 'Ari' (lion) is in it.

Ha'Boneh: A king reigns for two reasons. (a) To judge his nation righteously. (b) To fight wars for them and save them. So Yisrael requested "u'Shfatanu Malkenu v'Yatza Lefaneinu v'Nilcham Es Milchamosenu." A Chacham does both of these more than a king. This is why they said 'who are kings? Rabanan' (Gitin 62a). He judges the nation at all times, and informs them of Hash-m's laws. He protects them with the merit of his Torah and virtue. He is strong like an Ari (lion) to do Hash-m's will. Therefore, they called him Aryoch, which has both of these.

Etz Yosef citing Rashi (Menachos 38b): This is like "Gur Aryeh Yehudah." Shmuel was called Aryoch, for the Halachah follows him in monetary laws.

Why does one hang a basket on Shabbos?

Rashi: It is full of barley. He hangs it on the animal's neck, for pleasure, so it can eat without bending its neck down to the ground.

Rav Elyashiv: Rav permits this in the Chatzer, but not in Reshus ha'Rabim, for then the animal does Melachah. Even though one may bring his animal to attached [grain, to eat it, which is the Melachah of harvesting], this is its Menuchah (rest). It enjoys eating, so we are not concerned for the Melachah. Here, the animal does not enjoy Hotza'ah of the basket; it enjoys only what it eats. There is a reasoning to say that a load, which is surely forbidden in Reshus ha'Rabim, we do not decree in the Chatzer lest one permit in Reshus ha'Rabim. However, if the concern in Reshus ha'Rabim is only lest it fall and he will carry it, we decree in the Chatzer due to Reshus ha'Rabim.

Did the father truly nurse the baby?

Maharal #1: We can explain simply, that he did. Chulin 113b exempts one who cooks meat in a male's milk.

Maharal #2: Since his name was not mentioned, it seems that it was not a physical miracle. Rather, just like a mother nurses, and she does not lack, he felt that he can spend his money to buy milk and eggs for the baby, and he will not lack. Even though really, he did not get extra income, and he did not have money for his own food, he was like one who has bread in his basket (he is not hungry). We learn from here that just like a woman brings a child to the world, and her breasts supply his food, also a man helps to bring a child to the world, his breasts can help to supply his food.

Why did Rav Yosef hold that a great miracle was done for him?

Iyun Yakov: Had he merited wealth to hire a wet-nurse, the miracle would not have been evident to everyone. Abaye disagreed - had he received wealth, he would have ability for also other matters!

Why did Abaye say 'it is demeaning that creation had to be changed for him'?

Rashi: He did not merit income.

Maharsha: Even though he merited a miracle, it deducts from his merits, like we said above (32a). "Ein Kol Chadash Tachas ha'Shemesh" does not apply here, for man has breasts. Only the action (nursing) was a Chidush.

Rav Elyashiv: Abaye agrees that he was at a high level to merit a miracle, just he did not merit a miracle within the ways of nature.

Maharal: To change a man to a woman is not a change of Ma'ase Bereishis. For a man to be able to nurse is changing Ma'ase Bereishis. Abaye holds that leaving Seder ha'Beriyah is bad and lowly. Often, Hash-m did miracles for Tzadikim and changed Ma'ase Bereishis, but the change was not in the Tzadik himself.

Mesores ha'Shas and Etz Yosef, citing Tosfos Yeshanim and Nezer ha'Kodesh: Bereishis Rabah (30:8), regarding "va'Yhi Omen Es Hadasah", says that Mordechai developed breasts and nursed Esther. This was not lowly, for he had money, just he could not find a wet-nurse.

Rav Elyashiv: R. Chaim of Volozhin said that it was not lowly for Mordechai, for Tzadikim are above nature, so it is not considered changing Ma'ase Bereishis, like for R. Chanina ben Dosa, who said 'the One who said that oil will burn, He will tell vinegar to burn' (Ta'anis 25a). For a simple person not at their level, it is a change, and it is lowly. Ohr ha'Chayim (Shemos 14:27) says that all Ma'ase Bereishis are submissive to Torah and those who toil in it.

Ya'avetz: The miracle was in the merit of the baby

Why is changing the order of creation easier than income?

Maharal: When Hash-m changed the staff into a snake, the physical substance was already in the world. The creation of food is called Nesinah (giving); this is harder. Creation of man was in the world's nature. Man does not get food via nature. People err, and think that Hash-m gives food to man alone, and everyone merits what he merits. No! Hash-m finances each creation by itself - "Nosen Lechem l'Chol Basar." This is harder than Keri'as Yam Suf, which is a mere change of nature. The cause is higher than the result. Man's income is the cause of his existence. The last Ma'amar of creation is "Nasati Lachem... Pri Etz... Le'achlah." A hint to this is 'Hashem dwells in the height of the world' (Pesachim 118a), i.e. He preceded the world and caused the world. Therefore, income is from Him.

Rav Elyashiv: We learn from here how much one must thank for income in Birkas ha'Mazon. We find that Resha'im have income; they must have some merit. We find that Hash-m offered to remake the world, and perhaps R. Elazar will get a Mazal for income (Ta'anis 25a). Even changing Ma'ase Bereishis is not guaranteed to bring income!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Igros Moshe (OC 2:111): Since income is such a miracle, one should not ask Hash-m to give him extra to remain for his old age and to bequeath. Hash-m caused that recently, there are insurance policies for this; it is fine to trust in Hash-m to be able to pay the premium each year.

Does Hash-m not create food?!

Rashi: It is not common that Hash-m creates food in Tzadikim's houses, that it grows by itself in their storehouses.

Maharsha: This is not even in potential, therefore "Ein Kol Chadash Tachas ha'Shemesh" applies to it.

Rav Elyashiv: Rashi said that such a miracle is not common. We do find such a miracle, e.g. Hash-m created loaves for R. Chanina ben Dosa's wife. We do not find that Hash-m creates [miraculously] something that will supply, e.g. a field with wheat growing, or breasts that will supply milk.

Why did he realize that she was missing a hand on the day that she died?

Iyun Yakov: Perhaps she consoled him not to be pained so much over her death, for she is blemished.

What is the argument about whether or not she was exceedingly Tzenu'ah?

Rashi: R. Chiya holds that she was not, for women normally cover themselves, and especially she needed to [to cover up her blemish].

Rav Elyashiv: Rebbi holds that even though she surely used all strategies to conceal her blemish, her ability to do so constantly reveals her great modesty.

What Halachos may we derive from this episode?

Ya'avetz: A modest man may be Mekadesh a woman even if he never saw her. (Kidushin 41a forbids, i.e. for commoners.)

Daf Al ha'Daf: This is a big Chidush. Many Gedolim arranged marriages for their children, and the Chasan did not see the Kalah before the Chupah. Shabbos Shel Mi says that the Chiyuv is only to see her face; there is no source that he did not see her face. Avraham said "now I know that you are beautiful" (Bereishis 12:11)! Pardes Yosef (Vayeshev 90) says that the Isur to be Mekadesh before seeing her is mid'Rabanan; the Avos were not concerned for it].

Rav Elyashiv: Was this a Mekach Ta'os, and she was never married to him? Acharonim say that visible blemishes, since he did not check her, his Kidushin was unconditional (even if she has blemishes). However, if he recognized it later, he can nullify the Kidushin. Hagahah - above he said that he was Mekadesh her in any case! Perhaps holds that meant that the Kidushin is valid as long as he will not notice the blemish. (NOTE: He cited the Mishnah (Kesuvos 75b) that there is no Mekach Ta'os for open blemishes, i.e. even after he notices! - PF)