- Is a son penalized for his father’s work that was done on Chol HaMoed?
On the bottom of Daf 12b, Rebbe Yirmiyah asked Rebbe Zeira, כוון מלאכתו במועד ומת מהו שיקנסו בניו אחריו – Regarding someone who scheduled his work to be done on Chol HaMoed, and then died, did the Rabbanon penalize his sons by making them forgo the payment from his forbidden work? After the Gemara clarifies that this case is not like the d’Oraysa case where a son was penalized for his father blemishing a bechor, nor is it like the case where a son was penalized for his father selling an eved Canaani to a nochri, the Gemara says the question is the following: גברא קניס רבנן והא ליתיה – Were the Rabbanon fining the man, and he is no longer alive, או דלמא ממונא קניס רבנן והא איתיה – or perhaps the Rabbanon were penalizing his money, and it is still here? Rabbi Yose bar Chanina said that we have a tradition regarding shemittah, הטיבה ומת בנו זורעה – If one improved a field during shemittah by fertilizing it, which is assur m’diRabbanon, and then died, his son may sow it in the year after shemittah. We see from here that in the case of a d’Rabbanon, the penalty is against the person, not his money . So too, in the case of work done on Chol HaMoed, the penalty is against the father, not his money, and therefore his son would not be penalized.
- שכר פעולה שאין לו מה יאכל
The next Mishnah states: אין לוקחין בתים עבדים ובהמה – We may not buy homes, slaves or animals on Chol HaMoed, אלא לצורך המועד או לצורך המוכר שאין לו מה יאכל – unless it is to provide for the needs of the Moed, or for the needs of a seller who does not have anything to eat. Rav asked Rav Nachman: שכר פעולה שאין לו מה יאכל מהו – What is the halachah regarding paying wages for work on Chol HaMoed to a worker that does not have anything to eat? Was the Mishnah limited to a case of a needy seller or does it include a case of a needy worker? Rav Nachman answered: What does the phrase, "שאין לו מה יאכל" – "that does not have anything to eat," come to include? The phrase, לצורך המוכר – for the needs of a seller, should have been sufficient. Does it not come to include שכר פעולה – the wages of a worker? Rava rejected this proof but Abaye brought a support for it.
- Machlokes regarding how to cover cut figs with straw
The third Mishnah on the Daf states: מחפין את הקציעות בקש רבי יהודה אומר אף מעבין – We may cover cut figs with straw, to protect them from the rain. Rebbe Yehudah says that we may even make it thick. To explain the Mishnah, the Gemara brings a machlokes between Rebbe Chiya bar Abba and Rebbe Assi, who both stated their opinions in the name of Chizkiyah and Rebbe Yochanan. One said: מחפין אקלושי – that the term “we may cover” refers to covering the figs sparsely. We cover them with stalks of straw that are spread out so that the pile is not completely covered. The Tanna Kamma holds that we may not cover them completely because of עובדא דחול –it resembles a weekday activity . מעבין אסמוכי – The phrase, “we make it thick” refers to covering them closely with stalks of straw, so that they are completely covered. Rebbe Yehudah permits the straw to be laid as it is on weekdays in order to block out all moisture. The other opinion holds that מחפין – “we may cover” means that the straw can be laid out sparsely or closely, and the term מעבין – we make it thick, refers to מעבין אותו כמין כרי – making the figs into a pile to be covered. Rashi explains that piling the figs makes it easier to cover. According to this, the Tanna Kamma does permit עובדא דחול but prohibits piling the figs because of טירחא יתירה – excessive exertion .