Daf Ditty Beitzah 31: Firewood

1
MISHNA: One may bring wood chopped from a tree the previous day from an unfenced field,
but only from that which has been gathered into a pile before the Festival for the purpose of
using it for kindling. However, scattered wood is muktze and may not be handled. And if one
brings wood from a karpef used for storage, he may bring even from the scattered wood, as it is
considered a guarded courtyard rather than a field, and one does not remove even scattered items
from his mind if they are stored inside such an enclosure. The mishna explains: What is a karpef?
It is any enclosure that is near a city, but if it is far from a city, it is considered a field; this is the
statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: Any fenced place into which one can enter only
with a key is a karpef, even if it is located at a distance from a city, provided that it is within the
Shabbat limit.

2
GEMARA: Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: One may not bring wood except from the
wood that was gathered in a karpef. The Gemara challenges: But didn’t we learn in the mishna:
And from a karpef, even from scattered wood? The Gemara answers: The mishna follows an
individual opinion.

3
One may not rely on it, as is clear from a different source that the majority view is otherwise, as it
is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel did
not disagree with regard to wood scattered in fields that one may not bring it on a Festival to
one’s house for kindling, nor with regard to wood gathered in a karpef that one may bring it.
With regard to what did they disagree? It is with regard to scattered wood in a karpef and
gathered wood in fields, as Beit Shammai say: He may not bring it, and Beit Hillel say: He
may bring it. Although the lenient opinion with regard to gathered wood in a field is attributed to
Beit Hillel, this is only according to the minority view of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar. However,
most Sages disagree and say that one may not bring wood from a field at all, even according to
Beit Hillel.

4
Rava said: With regard to reed leaves and vine leaves, although they are gathered together
and placed in the same spot, since if a wind comes it will scatter them, they are already
considered scattered and are therefore prohibited. Given that they are likely to be scattered in
the wind, one does not intend to use them. However, if one placed a vessel on them the day
before to prevent their being scattered in the wind, it seems well and is permitted.

5
The mishna discussed the question: What is a karpef? Rabbi Yehuda states that it is any enclosure
that is near a city, while in Rabbi Yosei’s opinion it is any fenced place into which one can enter
only with a key, provided that it is within the Shabbat limit of a city. A dilemma was raised before
the Sages: With regard to what case is the mishna speaking? Does Rabbi Yehuda mean to say
that a karpef is any place that is near a city, provided that it has a key, otherwise it is not a
karpef at all; and Rabbi Yosei comes to say: Since it has a key, even if it is not near a city, as
long as it is within the Shabbat limit it is also considered a karpef? According to this
understanding, Rabbi Yosei’s view is more lenient than that of Rabbi Yehuda.

6
Or perhaps this is what Rabbi Yehuda is saying: Any enclosure that is near a city is a karpef,
whether it has a key or does not have a key, and Rabbi Yosei comes to say: With regard to the
distance, it is a karpef even if it is not near a city, provided that it is within the Shabbat limit, but
specifically if it has a key. However, if it does not have a key, even if it is near a city it is also
not considered a karpef. According to this understanding, the opinion of Rabbi Yosei is not
necessarily the more lenient one; rather, for him the defining issue is whether or not there is a key,
regardless of distance.

7
The Gemara answers: Come and hear from the fact that it is taught in the mishna that Rabbi
Yosei says: Any place into which one enters with a key, even within the Shabbat limit, and he
does not say: If one enters, but rather: Any place into which one enters, it shows that the key is not
the determining factor. One may learn from this that Rabbi Yosei stated two conditions as
leniencies. In other words, he is not more stringent than Rabbi Yehuda in any situation; he is
lenient in all cases. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from here that this is the case. Rav
Salla said that Rabbi Yirmeya said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi
Yosei as a leniency; Rabbi Yosei should be understood in this manner, and one should rule
accordingly.

Summary

Introduction

8
This mishnah deals with the places where a person can collect kindling wood in order to cook on
Yom Tov.

One may not take wood from a sukkah but only from [what is] next to it.

The “sukkah” referred to here is not a sukkah used on the festival of Sukkot, but rather a sort of
hut used for shade by farmers out in the field. It is forbidden to take wood that was used in
building the sukkah because this is considered “tearing down” which is forbidden on Shabbat
and Yom Tov. However, he may take the wood gathered next to the sukkah.

One may bring in from the field wood that is gathered together, and from a
karpef [an enclosure] even though it is scattered about.

He can bring in wood from the field if it has already been gathered together. However, if it is
scattered then it is muktzeh because there was no intent to use that wood for building a fire, and
therefore he may not bring it in. From a karpef, a type of enclosure used for storage (see also
Eruvin 2:3, 2:5 and 5:2) he may gather even loose wood. Since this wood was put into an
enclosure, it has already been designated for use and it is not muktzeh.

What is a karpef? Any [enclosure] next to the town, the words of Rabbi Judah.
Rabbi Yose says: Any [enclosure] which one enters with a key, even if it is [only
just] within the Shabbat border.

In this section Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Yose debate from what kind of a karpef he can bring in
wood. According to Rabbi Judah the karpef has to be close to the city, since only if it is close to
the city does he intend to use it on Yom Tov. Rabbi Yose says that the criterion is that the karpef
is locked and can only be opened with a key. The wood in such a karpef is not muktzeh, even if
the karpef is not next to the city. However, the karpef must be within the Shabbat limit (2,000
cubits in all directions), otherwise he won’t be able to even get there.

A Mishna teaches that we can use wood that has been put aside as kindling before the start of the
Festival. If that wood is in a field or in a karpef, a storehouse, we are permitted to use it as
kindling. What is a karpef, ask the rabbis? Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai disagree, of course,
about what is permitted when it comes to wood that is lying around in a field and wood in a
karpef. Other rabbis argue as well: are we speaking about a karpef that is inside the Shabbat
limit? Is there a key to this karpef? Or is it just a shed? And is it close to a city? How do we
define "close"?

A second Mishna: we cannot chop beams designated for construction nor can we chop from fallen
beams on a Festival. If we do cut wood, we cannot use weekday tools; we must use a cleaver. The
rabbis wonder why we might be able to cut wood at all on a Festival. They consider using the
'female' instead of the 'male' side of a cleaver or an ax.

9
A final Mishna for today: if a house is filled with produce and there is a hole in one wall of that
house, it is permitted to reach in and take the produce. The rabbis use this Mishna to understand
a number of guidelines for the Festivals. For example, the produce is not muktze, set aside, even
though we can hardly see it through this hole. They think about the doors to such a structure,
which might be tied to the ground with ropes and knots. They consider the
construction/dismantling of a homemade of different substances. We learn that on Festivals, but
not on Shabbat, we are permitted to create that hole ourselves. Similarly, we can cut and
untie/unwind ropes and knots on Festivals but not on Shabbat.

WOOD IN A "KARPAF" ON YOM TOV

Rabbi Mordechai Kornfeld writes:1

The Mishnah states that on Yom Tov one may gather wood from a Karpaf (a large, enclosed area) and
bring it into his home, even though the wood in the Karpaf is scattered about. Since the Karpaf is
enclosed, one presumably intended before Yom Tov to use the wood in the Karpaf on Yom Tov.

Rebbi Yehudah says that the wood is permitted only when the Karpaf is near the city (in which case
the owner of the wood presumably intended to use it). Rebbi Yosi says that the wood is permitted only
when the Karpaf has a lock, in which case the wood may be used even if the Karpaf is far from the
city.

The Gemara asks what exactly is the dispute between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Yosi, and it offers
two approaches. The first possibility is that Rebbi Yehudah requires both that the Karpaf have a lock
and be near the city, while Rebbi Yosi says that it suffices either to have a lock (and be far away) or to
be near the city (without a lock). The second possibility is that Rebbi Yehudah says that the only factor
which matters is the proximity of the Karpaf to the city; the wood is permitted only when the Karpaf
is near the city (even if it has a lock). Rebbi Yosi says that the only factor which matters is whether the
Karpaf has a lock.

The Gemara concludes that Rebbi Yosi's words in the Mishnah imply that he maintains "Tarti l'Kula"
-- there are two leniencies.

The Gemara seems to follow its first suggestion, that Rebbi Yehudah requires that the Karpaf be both
nearby and have a lock in order for the wood to permitted, while Rebbi Yosi maintains that the wood
is permitted either when the Karpaf is nearby (without a lock) or when the Karpaf has a lock (and is
far away). These are the "two leniencies" of Rebbi Yosi. This is the way TOSFOS explains the
Gemara.

RASHI, however, writes that the Gemara's conclusion is a third explanation for the dispute. The
Gemara explains that Rebbi Yehudah maintains that the only determining factor is the distance of the

1
https://www.dafyomi.co.il/beitzah/insites/bt-dt-031.htm

10
Karpaf from the city -- which is Rebbi Yehudah's opinion according to the
Gemara's second suggestion, while Rebbi Yosi maintains that the Karpaf needs only to be nearby or to
have a lock -- which is the view of Rebbi Yosi according to the Gemara's first suggestion. (See Chart.)

WHAT TYPE OF WOOD DO BEIS SHAMAI AND BEIS HILLEL ARGUE

ABOUT?

FROM WHAT TYPE OF "KARPAF" MAY ONE BRING IN WOOD ON

YOM TOV?

(1) Apparently, this is the case in which Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel argue according to Rav Yehudah in the name of Shmuel since
he maintains that in all of the other cases they do not argue.

11
(2) According to Rebbi Yehudah, it is never permitted to bring in wood from a Karpaf that is far from the city.
*This is the conclusion of the Gemara according to Rashi (see Insights). According to Tosfos, the Gemara concludes entirely like
the First Suggestion (rows 1 and 2).

Why does Rashi write that the Gemara's conclusion combines the first and second explanations for the
dispute? The Gemara itself says merely that Rebbi Yosi maintains that there are two leniencies, which
implies the first version of the dispute. Why does Rashi assume that the Gemara maintains, in its
conclusion, that even Rebbi Yehudah agrees with one leniency (that the Karpaf does not need a lock
when it is nearby)? Moreover, since the Gemara suggests only two ways to understand the dispute in
the Mishnah, why does Rashi posit a third possibility?

The statement of Rebbi Yosi as it is worded in our text of the Mishnah permits one to bring in wood
from "any area (Karpaf) into which one enters with a key, and even (v'Afilu) if it is [far away but]
within the Techum Shabbos."

Rashi, in the end of the Mishnah, quotes this line of the Mishnah with a slight difference: "even if
(Afilu) it is [far away but] within the Techum Shabbos." Rashi's Girsa of the Mishnah omits the letter
"Vav" ("and") before the word "Afilu." This is also the Girsa recorded by the DIKDUKEI
SOFRIM (#80), the RIF (manuscript), and the Cambridge manuscript of the Mishnah (as the
Dikdukei Sofrim mentions).

However, when Rashi explains the Gemara which quotes this part of the Mishnah in its attempt to
clarify the argument between the Tana'im, Rashi (end of DH Rebbi Yosi l'Kula, and end of DH O
Dilma) records the phrase the way it appears in our text of the Mishnah -- "v'Afilu." Apparently, Rashi's
text of the Mishnah did not have the extra "Vav," but his text of the Gemara deliberately added the
"Vav." Why did the Gemara add the extra "Vav"?

Rashi understands that the Gemara added a "Vav" to denote that it is presenting a two-part proof. The
Gemara proves from the words of the Mishnah both the exact opinion of Rebbi Yehudah and the exact
opinion of Rebbi Yosi.

First, the Gemara cites the first half of Rebbi Yosi's statement, "any area (Karpaf) into which one enters
with a key," in order to prove one thing. It then cites the second half of Rebbi Yosi's statement, "even
(Afilu) if it is [far away but] within the Techum Shabbos," in order to prove a second point. To denote
that there are two distinct points, each of which can be proven from a different line of the Mishnah, the
Gemara adds the letter "Vav" before it cites the second half of Rebbi Yosi's statement in the Mishnah.
(The CHIDUSHEI HA'ME'IRI quotes a Girsa of the Gemara which explicitly shows that the
Gemara's intent is to cite separate proofs from each half of Rebbi Yosi's statement. That Girsa adds the
words, "v'Od, Mai Afilu...," which clearly show that the words from "Afilu" and on are a second proof.)

What does the Gemara intend to prove from each half of Rebbi Yosi's statement?
Rashi says that the first half of Rebbi Yosi's statement, "any area (Karpaf) into which one enters with
a key," implies that normally a Karpaf is not locked and does not need a key. This implication proves
that Rebbi Yehudah -- who permits taking wood from an ordinary, unqualified Karpaf -- permits taking
wood from a Karpaf even without a lock, as long as it is nearby.

12
The second half of Rebbi Yosi's statement, "even (Afilu) if it is [far away but] within the Techum
Shabbos," teaches that Rebbi Yosi maintains that when the Karpaf is nearby the law is more lenient
and the Karpaf does not need a lock.

Support for this approach may be drawn from two inferences in the words of Rashi. When the Gemara
concludes that "Rebbi Yosi Tarti l'Kula" (Rebbi Yosi maintains that there are two leniencies), Rashi
(beginning of DH Tarti) writes that we derive from Rebbi Yosi's words both the exact opinion of Rebbi
Yehudah and the exact opinion of Rebbi Yosi (in that order). Why does Rashi mention Rebbi Yehudah
first? He should mention Rebbi Yosi first, since the Gemara addresses his opinion explicitly ("Rebbi
Yosi Tarti l'Kula..."), while the inference from Rebbi Yosi's words which teaches Rebbi Yehudah's
opinion is Rashi's own addition! It must be that Rashi understands that the Gemara itself is making a
two-part inference from the Mishnah, and that it is the first half of Rebbi Yosi's statement which reveals
what Rebbi Yehudah maintains, and it is the second half which reveals what Rebbi Yosi himself
maintains. Rashi mentions Rebbi Yehudah before Rebbi Yosi because he is explaining the proofs of
the Gemara in the order in which the Gemara presents them.

In addition, the Girsa which appears in an early manuscript of Rashi (as quoted by DIKDUKEI
SOFRIM #200) makes it even more evident that there are two parts to the proof. That text contains an
additional comment (DH Ta Shema) which does not appear in our text of Rashi. In that comment,
Rashi writes explicitly that from the fact that "[Rebbi Yosi says 'any area...'] and also in the end of his
words he adds 'even if it is [far away]...,' from here we learn that he maintains that there are two
leniencies." Rashi clearly understands that the Gemara is teaching a two-part proof: first, that Rebbi
Yosi maintains that there are two leniencies, and, second, that Rebbi Yehudah maintains that the Karpaf
needs to be nearby. (M. Kornfeld)

A STOREHOUSE WHICH BECAME BREACHED ON YOM TOV

The Mishnah states that if a storehouse of fruit became breached on Yom Tov, one may take fruit
by reaching in through the opening, but one may not break open any part of the storehouse
l'Chatchilah. Rebbi Meir says that one is permitted to break open the storehouse l'Chatchilah in
order to get to the fruit.

Why is one permitted to take the fruit on Yom Tov when the storehouse was locked at the onset
of Yom Tov but became breached? If the fruit was locked within the storehouse in such a way that
it was not accessible during Bein ha'Shemashos, the fruit should be Muktzah.

RASHI (DH Notel) explains that when an object may not be used at the start of Yom Tov only
because of an Isur d'Rabanan, the object is not considered Muktzah Machmas Isur. In this case, in
order to get to the fruits one merely needs to do an act which is an Isur d'Rabanan of Stirah, since
the storehouse is built with uncemented rows of bricks (as the Gemara says). Therefore, the fruit
is not Muktzah Machmas Isur.

TOSFOS asks that there are a number of sources which teach that an Isur d'Rabanan does create
an Isur of Muktzah, such as in the case of a bed on which money was left during Bein ha'Shemashos
(Shabbos 44b), and a basket on which there were chicks during Bein ha'Shemashos (Shabbos 43a).

13
In those cases, the bed and basket become a "Basis l'Davar he'Asur" and may not be moved the
entire Shabbos.

Perhaps Rashi understands that cases of a "Basis l'Davar he'Asur" are different because the non-
Muktzah object which supports the Muktzah object becomes a prohibited object itself by virtue of
its role as a "Basis." In contrast, when the non-Muktzah object is merely inaccessible due to an
Isur which stands in its way (for example, it is locked inside of a room, such as in the case of the
Mishnah here), the object (the fruit) is not prohibited as Muktzah.

The RAMBAN asks a different question. A candle that was aflame during Bein ha'Shemashos of
Shabbos is Muktzah, even though the act of extinguishing it is only an Isur d'Rabanan (because it
is a "Melachah she'Einah Tzerichah l'Gufah"). According to Rashi, who says that an Isur
d'Rabanan does not render an object prohibited as Muktzah, why is the flame Muktzah?

The answer to this question may be that Rashi maintains that a "Melachah she'Einah Tzerichah
l'Gufah" is considered a "Melachah," and therefore it is treated with the stringency of a Melachah
d'Oraisa even though it is prohibited only mid'Rabanan.

(b) TOSFOS (DH v'Nifchas) cites RABEINU MOSHE who offers a different answer. He asserts
that whether the object may not be used because of an Isur d'Oraisa or because of an Isur d'Rabanan
is not relevant. Rather, the object's permissibility depends on whether the Isur has been removed
entirely from the world, or whether it is still in existence but no longer acts to prohibit the object.
In the case of a storehouse built with uncemented rows of bricks once some of the bricks are
breached absolutely no Isur of Stirah is involved in entering through the breach and taking some
fruit. Similarly, fruits of Tevel are not Muktzah on Shabbos and may be eaten when Ma'aser is
separated from them (even though one is not permitted to separate Ma'aser on Shabbos), since the
Isur Tevel of those fruits is no longer extant. In the case of a "Basis," however, the object of
Muktzah which made the permitted object a "Basis" in the first place is still in existence (it has
just been removed from the object that was supporting it), and therefore the object remains a
"Basis" and is prohibited.

Tosfos challenges the answer of Rabeinu Moshe. According to the logic of Rabeinu Moshe, one
should be prohibited from taking the fruits from the storehouse because the rest of the bricks are
still present and, therefore, the Isur of Stirah is still present. Only when all of the bricks have been
removed is one permitted to take the fruits.

(c) TOSFOS explains that the Mishnah is in accordance with the opinion of Rebbi Shimon who
maintains that there is no general category of Muktzah.

Tosfos' intention is not clear. Rebbi Shimon agrees that in order for an object which was
inaccessible because of an Isur during Bein ha'Shemashos to become permitted, one must be
"Yoshev u'Metzapeh" (anticipate that it will become permitted). In this case, however, there seems
to be no reason for the owner of the storehouse to anticipate being able to eat the fruit on Yom
Tov.

14
The RASHBA asks this question. He proposes that the Mishnah refers to a case of a storehouse
which is already beginning to break down and is likely to collapse on Yom Tov, and thus one
certainly had intention to use the fruit inside of it.

(d) The RASHBA himself writes that if the storehouse in the Mishnah's case has a shaky wall
("Kosel Re'u'ah"), then the Mishnah may follow the opinions of both Rebbi Shimon and Rebbi
Yehudah. The Mishnah refers to a case in which one stipulates before the onset of Yom Tov that
he intends to use the fruit when the wall of the storehouse breaks down. Such a Tenai works even
according to Rebbi Yehudah.

(e) The RAMBAN (in Milchamos, page 19b of the pages of the Rif) explains that the Mishnah
refers to a case in which the storehouse became breached before Shabbos. This explains why the
fruits are not Muktzah Machmas Isur.

If this is the case, however, then it is obvious that one may take the fruit on Shabbos. What is the
Chidush of the Mishnah?

The Ramban explains that one might have thought that the Rabanan prohibit taking fruit from the
place of the breach lest one increase the size of the breach. Therefore, the Mishnah teaches that
one may take the fruit and there is no concern that he will make the opening larger.

Alternatively, one might have thought that the Rabanan prohibited taking fruit from the place of
the breach because the room has the status of an Otzar, a storehouse; since it was originally sealed
shut, the fruit is like an object that was placed in a storehouse, which Rebbi Yehudah maintains is
Muktzah. Therefore, the Mishnah teaches that the fruit is not considered Muktzah.

The Ramban asserts that this is the opinion of the RIF (and, by inference, of the RAMBAM).

(f) The Ramban suggests a second way to understand the Rif (and Rambam). Perhaps the fruits
are not considered Muktzah Machmas Isur because there is nothing inherently wrong with them.
It is an external factor which prevents one from eating them -- the wall that stands between the
fruits and the person. The fruits themselves are fit to be eaten on Shabbos. For this reason, the
fruits cannot be compared to an oil-lamp that was burning at the start of Shabbos, in which case
the oil was unable to be used because of the Isur against extinguishing the fire (Mechabeh) by
removing the oil from the lamp. That Isur is inherent in the oil itself. (The Ramban adds that a
"Basis l'Davar he'Asur" is an exception to this rule. Although the object which serves as the "Basis"
is rendered inaccessible due to an external factor (the object of Muktzah that is placed upon it), the
Basis nevertheless becomes Muktzah Machmas Isur since it becomes an object of Isur itself; see
(a) above.)2

HALACHAH: The SHULCHAN ARUCH (OC 518:9) permits one to take fruit from behind a
fallen wall with no limitations. It seems that he permits the fruit whether an Isur d'Rabanan is

2
The Ramban himself, in Milchamos to Pesachim 56a, seems to reject this argument when he writes that detached dates that are
high up in a tree become Muktzah Machmas Isur because one cannot climb the tree to get them at the start of Shabbos.

15
involved in dismantling the wall or an Isur d'Oraisa is involved, whether part or the wall or the
entire wall collapsed, whether it collapsed on Erev Yom Tov or on Yom Tov, and whether the wall
was weak or strong. The Poskim point out that the only way to explain this ruling is as the Ramban
suggests (f), that the fruits did not become Muktzah since the Isur is not due to a factor inherent in
them.

The BI'UR HALACHAH, however, writes that since most of the Rishonim do not accept this
ruling (and the Ramban himself offers another way to interpret the Gemara), one should not move
or eat such fruits except under extenuating circumstances ("She'as ha'Dechak").

Steinzaltz (OBM) writes: 3

Since we are allowed to cook on Yom Tov, we are also permitted to add fuel to burning fires. Even
so, wood or other fuel that is to be used should be prepared for that purpose before Yom Tov begins;
otherwise it is considered muktzeh – set aside for a purpose other than to be burned. What wood is
considered prepared for use as fuel on Yom Tov is the topic of discussion of the Mishnayot on
our daf.

One of the Mishnayot discusses whether wood can be chopped for use as fuel, even if the wood
was prepared for burning before Yom Tov began. As we learned on yesterday’s daf, the crucial
question here is whether it appears to be a weekday activity; as such, the suggestion of the Mishnah
is to chop the wood in an out-of-the-ordinary manner. Thus, using a kardom (spade),
a megerah (saw), or a magal (scythe) is forbidden, while a kopitz (a knife for cutting bones) would
be permitted.

It is interesting to note that the act of chopping wood is not, in itself, considered a forbidden act
on Yom Tov. Many of the rishonim (Rashi, the R”id, and the Rashba, among others) argue that
there is nothing intrinsically forbidden in making a large piece of wood into smaller pieces (unless
it were turned into sawdust, in which case it would be forbidden because of the prohibition
against grinding). According to this position, the reason some types of implements cannot be used
is because they are clearly professional tools, and it appears that the person using them is
participating in forbidden weekday activities. The Ra’avad explains that chopping the wood would
generally be considered a forbidden activity, but it is permitted on Yom Tov as an essential part of
food preparation. We limit the types of tools that can be used only because these activities should
really be done prior to the onset of the holiday. Since proper preparations had not been done, the
Sages insisted that they can only be done on Yom Tov in an unusual fashion.

3
https://www.ou.org/life/torah/masechet_beitzah_2834/

16
The ‫ ח”צל‬notes that in the Mishnah we find that the ‫ חכמים‬prohibit dismantling the rows of bricks
which are not cemented unless the area first becomes semi-demolished. This is not allowed, even
if the person wishes to access the fruit which is in the enclosure to enhance his Yom Tov.4

Yet later the ‫ חכמים‬allow the rope which secures the door of the pit to be untied, unraveled or cut
in consideration of ‫—שמחת טוב יום‬the celebration of Yom Tov. Why do they defer the rabbinic
injunction against untying and removal of the rope which secures the door of the pit, yet they do
not dismiss the rabbinic prohibition in the case of the layers of brick which enclose the fruit? ‫ח”צל‬
points out that in the case of the bricks, in addition to the issue of demolishing, we also have a
second prohibition, the issue of muktzah.

We do not permit and dismiss two rabbinic prohibitions for the sake of ‫ טוב יום שמחת‬.The case of
untying the rope of the door of the pit only entails one rabbinic infringement, and the celebration
of Yom Tov overrides this one issue. We can use this insight to explain the difference of opinion
in our Mishnah. Tanna Kamma considers muktzah an issue, and the removal of bricks would
therefore entail the dismissal of two rabbinic laws for the sake of ‫ טוב יום שמחת‬, which we are not
prepared to do.

Rabbi Meir, on the other hand, does not agree with the law of muktzah in this case. The only issue
is the rabbinic law not to untie the rope lock. For the sake of simchas Yom Tov, he is prepared to
override the one rabbinic law.

On our daf we see that one may not bring in light foliage on Yom Tov even if it was gathered
ahead of time because the owner knows that it is likely to be blown away and it cannot be depended
upon.

The Mekor Chaim, zt”l, explains that these leaves represent the “lightweight” amei ha’aretz who
lack inner content and the gravity of genuine convictions. Even if such people are “gathered”
together in shul often, their vulnerability to being swayed by any wind that comes along renders
their attendance at shul simply insufficient.

The Torah Temima, zt”l, commented in his memoirs that the American obsession with the pursuit
of money bred an odd sort of commitment to Judaism. People, unfortunately, just didn’t take the
time to consider their priorities.

As an example of this, he records that, in 1873, a fairly large American congregation was blessed
with a God-fearing rabbi, but their very capable chazzan had far less yiras Shomayim. In this

4
https://www.dafdigest.org/masechtos/Beitza%20031.pdf

17
particular congregation, the custom was to recite all of the yotzros without exception. When the
chazzan decided to lighten his load by skipping one of the yotzros during Shabbos Parshas Zachor,
the rabbi was justifiably incensed. He delivered a fiery sermon about the importance of guarding
every single custom of the Jewish people.

The congregation was very moved by the derasha, and they fired the chazzan for trifling with time-
honored minhag. A few years later, the congregation hired a different rabbi, one who identified
himself as “progressive.” As soon as he assumed his new post, the rabbi delivered a fiery sermon
about how unnecessary it is to continue saying ‫ עינינו ותחזינה‬.

This very same congregation that had fired its chazzan for disregarding tradition immediately
obeyed the rabbi and changed the prayers! How can going to shul preserve Jewish identity pure if
one does not know what pure Jewish identity is to begin with?

Gila Bieler-Hoch writes:5

With all the discussion in this tractate of how to prepare food on festivals, the sages need to address
a critical question: How does one acquire enough firewood to maintain a cooking fire for the
duration of the holiday?

A mishnah on our daf reads as follows:

One may not chop wood (on a festival) neither from beams (intended for construction) nor from
a beam that broke on a festival (although it no longer serves any purpose). And one may not
chop (wood on a festival), neither with an ax, nor with a saw, nor with a sickle, (as these are
clearly craftsman’s tools used on weekdays). Rather, one may chop only with a cleaver.

This mishnah teaches that one may not chop wood which had not been previously designated for
use on a festival. It also tells us that one cannot use the typical implements for chopping wood —
an axe or a saw or a sickle — but only atypical ones, like a cleaver. One can assume from all this
that the act of chopping is permissible so long as the wood had been previously designated for
festival use and it is chopped in a different manner than is normal. (We’ve already seen this
principle a few times in this tractate, most prominently in Beitzah 14.)

Yet the subsequent discussion in the Gemara briefly entertains the idea that the act of chopping
itself is the problem here, as chopping is clearly a form of work. The rabbis quickly conclude that
the mishnah cannot possibly intend a blanket prohibition on chopping wood, as it only forbids
chopping wood that has not been designated for use and it tells us explicitly which
implement may be used for such chopping.

So why does the Talmud even bother to suggest such a ludicrous reading of the mishnah? Why
even raise the possibility that chopping is forbidden just to quickly shoot it down?

5
Myjewishlearning.com

18
In truth, when we consider the act of chopping wood in the broader picture of Shabbat and festival
regulations, it is astonishing that gathering and chopping firewood — both labor intensive
activities that could easily be done in advance — are permitted at all. The 39 categories of labor
prohibited on Shabbat were derived from the building of the Tabernacle and the actions later
performed in the daily Tabernacle service. Chopping wood was an essential element in both of
these. The Tabernacle was made almost entirely from wood and fire was required for the making
of the dyes of the cloths. The ensuing service required daily sacrifices on an altar of fire.

Furthermore, the Torah names very few specific actions which are forbidden on Shabbat, but one
of those is the gathering of wood. In Numbers 15:33-37, we find the dramatic story of
the mekoshesh eitzim, a person who was found gathering wood on Shabbat and was stoned to
death for it at God’s instruction. The sages disagree as to the exact nature of the violation. A plain
reading of the text suggests it’s the gathering of wood, but it also may have been the chopping.
Either way, both this story and the underlying logic of Shabbat prohibitions would seem to make
clear that gathering and chopping wood are forbidden.

Yet today’s daf makes no mention of any of this. There is no discussion about the severity of the
prohibition of chopping (or gathering) wood on Shabbat. There is no mention that chopping wood
was a basic part of life in the Tabernacle and therefore should be forbidden. Instead, the rabbis
seem oblivious to the context in which they are permitting one to chop and possibly even gather
firewood.

So perhaps this brief entertaining of the possibility that chopping wood might be forbidden on
festivals is not a genuine reading of the mishnah, but rather a hint to the fact that the rabbis weren’t
entirely comfortable with the idea of chopping or gathering wood on a festival, even though the
plain meaning of the mishnah is that such actions are permitted. Yet the rabbis quickly brush this
possibility aside, for how can one truly experience the pleasure of fresh food on festivals without
maintaining a fire? On festivals, even the most basic of Shabbat prohibitions are put aside to make
room for the joy that comes from feasting.

Rabbi Johnny Solomon writes:6

Our daf (Beitzah 31b) raises the question of whether food may be taken on Yom Tov from a room
that was previously sealed - which the Gemara initially understands to refer to a room that is
literally sealed with bricks and mortar.

To give some background, the laws of mukzeh teach us that items that are ‘set aside’ and are not
intended for use on Shabbat and Yom Tov may not be moved or used on Shabbat and Yom Tov.
In this case, by virtue of the food being sealed in a room prior to Yom Tov, we would imagine that
whatever is in that room is regarded as being mukzeh.

Based on this, the Gemara asks about the circumstances in which a room that is truly sealed
somehow became accessible on Yom Tov, and it then informs us that while food had been sealed

6
www.rabbijohnnysolomon.com

19
in a room, this room was merely constructed by bricks piled together without mortar.
Consequently, since the room was not truly sealed, the food inside the room is not truly considered
mukzeh, and in a situation where a wall of that room was (unintentionally) breached, ‫נוטל ממקום‬
‫הפחת‬, ‘one may take from the place of the breach’.

In life, we often think that certain dreams and aspirations are beyond the realms of possibility
because unmovable and unbreachable walls stand in our way. Yet while, from a distance, the walls
surrounding those dreams and aspirations look like they are built with brick and mortar, many
times they merely have the appearance of a sealed wall and they are actually just bricks that have
been piled together without mortar.

And in such a situation, either through the slow but steady effort of removing those bricks, or the
blessing of unexpected breaches in that wall, we can reach what we are striving towards.

Stackology – The Art and Science of Stacking Firewood

Bill Klase writes:7

It is not often that my trusty assistant (who shall remain nameless) and I get into arguments, but
the stacking of split wood for drying is one place we constantly butt heads. He argues that the way
they have always stacked wood has worked just fine, so why change. To which I counter that he
has dropped too many trees onto his head. Needless to say, we don’t haul and stack wood together
very often.

7
https://woodlandinfo.org/stackology-the-art-and-science-of-stacking-firewood/

20
His way of stacking wood involves piles, trees, and a brooder house. Namely, throw the wood onto
a pile below trees or into the old brooder house to finish drying. According to him, after a summer
like this, the wood would be ready for burning. Note that I did not say the wood would be dry, just
ready. In fact they ended up with a mixture of well dried wood, wood with a pretty high moisture
content, and rotting wood. Burning less than fully dried wood can lead to poor combustion, smoke,
and ultimately less heat.

Now, the thought of wood that I have invested timeless hours felling, bucking, splitting, and
hauling ending up rutting before it can be burnt just sickens me. So I took it upon myself to set my
trusty assistant down the path of enlightened wood drying. He didn’t take kindly to my preaching
the “right” way to stack wood. In fact, he would often circumvent the stacking methodology I was
employing while saying things like “that is more work than is needed” and “that will never work”
and “I need a beer”.

Ultimately, I would win out mostly because I had the most energy and determination. The wood
ended up stacked firmly and neatly in places that allowed the sun and the wind to dry the wood.
Additionally, the wood was off the ground and had some kind of a cover (usually a tarp, but
sometimes pieces of bark) to keep the rain off.

Getting the wood off the ground was a big part of speeding up the drying process. We have a lot
of rock or slippery elm growing on the property that we don’t care for very much and that make
great ground rails. I fell them when they are between two and four inches in diameter and buck
them into four foot lengths. I utilize shorter lengths of rails to accommodate the uneven terrain
around the homestead. Pallets are a great alternative, but best employed on a flat and wide surface.
To make sure my stacks were solid, I started them against a solid post. Trees work pretty well, but
are not always in the best spot and tend to shade the wood more than I would like. Utilizing posts
driven into the ground allows us to set up a stack wherever works for us. The key is to tie the posts
together or tie a rope from a post to a piece of wood buried somewhere in the stack. This will keep
the posts from being pushed outward by the weight of the wood. For long stacks, a string tied
between the posts about a foot off the ground will help guide in placing the wood so the stack starts
out and stays straight.

We tend to use shorter pieces of wood in the stove, so our stacks can’t be very tall or they would
topple over. We work to stabilize the stack by placing the bigger pieces on the bottom. Pieces with
fat ends can be a problem, and are best handled by matching them with skinny ended pieces or
saving them for the top. Finally, placing the stacks more than 30 feet from the house is a good way
to ensure that it doesn’t become the fuel that burns down the house.

None of this may seem like rocket science to folks who are well versed in stackology, but it can
be hard to overcome the inertia created by decades of tradition. My trusty assistant will still go
back to his old ways when I am not looking, but he can’t argue with the results I achieve compared
to his efforts.

21
 The Science of Stacking Firewood
Stack wood the in a deliberate and effective manner using this primer on a variety of methods
that ensure your timber is seasoned to the max.

Ceylon Monroe writes:8

A Shaker round covered with thick shingles and surrounding a holed

plastic leach field drainpipe.

8
https://www.motherearthnews.com/homesteading-and-livestock/stacking-wood-zmaz94onzraw

22
•

23
 •

In my part of upper New England, winters are long and cold; security is a big stack of well-
seasoned firewood. The urge to "get the wood in" runs deep. It's an itch that kicks up when the
leaves begin turning in mid-August and that won't stay scratched until the snow season's fuel
supply is split, stacked, and ready to hand.

There is an art and a science to stacking firewood in a woodpile. Some say there's a spiritual side
to it as well, but I can't help you much with that. You'd have to come to meeting already knowing
that there's something more to a tree than wood, bark, and leaves as the Indians and the old-time
French-Canadian axmen did, and the way a few modern woodsmen and women still do.

Firewood just dumped in a heap won't dry and it won't burn well. Rain will run down and soak
into cut ends while ground moisture will migrate up and soak into spongy inner bark. But even the
toughest ash and beech fire logs will start quickly and burn efficiently (with little creosote-making
smoke) if seasoned in the woods for 6 months to a year, sectioned to stove length, the big logs
half-split, and all of it piled in the woodshed or barn for some months more. The hardwood should
be quartered; the pine should be split to kindling and piled again to surface-dry in a warm cellar
for a few weeks or months and finally brought upstairs to heat and dry crisp for a day or two near
the stove. Henry Thoreau neglected the work of piling and repiling when he wrote, "Wood warms
you twice ...once when you cut it and again when you burn it." By my count it warms you six or
seven times — most of that in building and tearing down woodpiles.

Stacked in the Woods

Since colonial days, wood cut from trees too small to saw into lumber has been bought, sold, and
traded by the cord — 128 cu ft of 4-ft-long logs and air in a stack 8 ft long and 4 ft high. Loggers
were paid by the cord as piled in the woods — each cord was anchored at one end against a standing
tree with the other end ricked against a pair of stout poles sunk in the snow or soft ground. A crafty
woodcutter would build in as much air as he could, padding his wages a bit and helping speed the
seasoning process. Left in the woods through at least one season of dry winter air, the logs would

24
lose their live wood moisture content in excess of ambient humidity (about 20%) through
evaporation in warm weather and, more slowly, via sublimation after a frost.

Come the wood selling season next fall, big-wheeled log wagons pulled by ox teams would haul
the 2-ton cords to wood yards in town. There, the 4-ft logs would be sectioned to stove length (a
bit less than the width of a parlor stove's door or length of a range's firebox), or divided in the
middle for 2-ft-log-burning stoves. And it would be stacked in 4 x 4 x 8 cords again for sale. A
clever wood merchant would show the yard hands how to stack in as much air as possible and a
clever buyer would insist on restacking his own way or would go elsewhere.

It works largely the same way today, except that much of the work is automated. High-powered
skidders and logging trucks can harvest and transport whole trees to be seasoned and processed in
the yard. Logs are aged whole and then sectioned to order with a big cordwood saw, split with a
hydraulic ram, and moved by conveyer belt into trucks with one-, two-, or four-cord-sized beds
that will dump the wood in your yard. It never sees a cord-sized pile. Modern wood merchants
have been known to sell air, charging exorbitant prices for little ricks or full-cord prices for face
cords that measure 8 ft long and 4 ft high but are only one stick deep. Some years ago, many states
passed laws defining a cord as 128 cu ft and imposed fines on merchants selling air for the price
of wood.

Wood is often sold wet and green — right off the stump — or aged for just a few months. While
seasoned wood sells for $100 per cord, green may go for $80, so you can save money and make
splitting easier by seasoning it yourself.

Stacking at Home
Whether bought or grown at home, wood should be stacked so it will continue drying. Give the
wood as much sun as you do your garden. Wood stacked in the moist shade will never dry. To
encourage air to move through channels in the stack, orient sticks so that the cut ends face the
direction of prevailing wind or air movement. Local winds are variable, but in most of North
America, weather systems move from west to east, changing all of the continent's air every three
days. Lacking a steady prevailing wind, orient wood so that cut ends face west — into moving air.

In hilly terrain, the air will flow up and down the hills or along the valley floor as the sun warms
it each day. If you are a hunter or naturalist, you know that deer bed down for the day on the ridges,
then travel uphill at dawn so they are informed of danger ahead by scent carried on the cold and
dense hilltop air falling into the warm valleys below. Then at dusk they come down to feed and
water in the lowlands, facing into sun-warmed air rising up out of the valley. Try to orient the
woodpile with cut ends facing the directions the deer move.

25
A woodpile is a public thing — as much of a "statement" as your garden or your mailbox or the
vehicle you park out front. In my up-country Maine town, they say that a reliable, hardworking
man will stack his wood square and straight, while a slacker stacks sloppily. If a pile weaves,
wavers, or leans out of plumb, its builder is suspected of a need for eyeglasses, of tippling, or
worse. Know those old wives whose tales are famous? Well, when their daughters reach courting
age, they gauge the marital prospects of a man by the way he stacks wood. Weak and insecure men
(too timid to get far) build a low stack arranged by log size — heavy logs on the bottom, little stuff
on top. The socially or politically ambitious (they're all crooks) stack high and show-offish with
big logs on top. The lazy (who never will amount to nothin') leave their wood in a heap or start a
pile but never finish. And the sly and mercenary (watch yer virtue and yer pocketbook) stack
ground-fall tree limbs and apple tree prunings in with the wood. If you want to keep your psyche
to yourself, stack as the sticks come out of the pile.

Preventing Bottom Rot

Build your woodpile on a base that will prevent bottom rot — evidenced by streaks of yellow mold
or white fruiting bodies of fungus on the ground course of (ruined) wood. The best base I've seen
was a ribbon of concrete paving blocks that a neighbor cast himself in a wood frame, then laid out
along his fence line. It shed rain, kept ground water where it belonged, and gave the pile a level
and solid base.

Keep horizontal courses as even and level as possible. In a really fine stack, facing tiers dip down
in the middle in a shallow V shape so the faces lean on one another for mutual support. Small kids
can run on a good woodpile without fear of knocking it down. Set logs one-over-two/two-over-
one for best stability. Just as in a stone wall, stacking round logs one above the other creates long
vertical seams called "runs" that can fold at the crease and the pile will collapse. Wood cures fastest
if stacked in one-stick-thick ricks, but you can't take it very high unless supported by a fence or
barn wall. For a stable, self-supporting pile, build two or more tiers.

Build in as much air as you can, using irregularities and odd-shaped logs to create cross-stack
channels for drying air. Always stack splits bark side up. Bark is designed to keep water out of the
living tree and it will continue to shed moisture in the woodpile. To support ends of piles, you can
use a standing tree, a fence post, or any other found support. At free ends, build stable, square log
cribs by alternating courses of north-south logs with east-west. Fashion a water-shedding weather
cap by building a peaked roof from overlapping splits or shingles, bought or riven on the spot with
your ax from any good splitting logs. Birch, beech, or another smooth bark makes the best cap
logs. Or cover the stack securely with a sheet of plastic or a tarp.

A top cover of black plastic will absorb heat and encourage evaporation in sunny climes. If you
live in a humid or rainy climate, you can build a drying house of wood framing and a black plastic
cover. The Oregon Cooperative Extension Service publishes free plans for a great little solar dryer
suitable to their cool and foggy weather.

26
Shape and size of the woodpile is your option. Straight ranks marching along fence lines are
traditional. Some wood stackers like to build a series of cubes like little blockhouses; others raise
whimsical shapes. But my favorite woodpile is the Shaker round. You start by making a flat circle
of split logs arranged like spokes in a wheel and increase its size up and out, ending with a
shoulder-high, cone-topped, disk-shaped woodpile. Covered with lapped birch splits or thick
shingles riven from good splitting white oak or cedar logs, it will keep your wood dry and dazzle
the neighbors. If you build with a section of holed plastic leach field drainpipe down the center
and covered with a tin stovepipe cap painted black, air will be drawn up through the wood and out
like a chimney. I know one wood heater who topped his stack's center pipe with a muffin fan on a
long, weatherproof extension cord and got himself kiln-dried fire logs that lit with a match.

Stacking Inside
Don't store green or punky, old, waterlogged wood in the cellar of a modern, airtight, and well-
insulated house. Up to a half-ton of water per cord will evaporate out to make your ceilings sprout
mold and the wallpaper peel. Fresh red oak or cherry or black (peppermint) birch can reek. And
legions of tiny, hard-shelled bark beetles can emerge from any wood to buzz around the cellar to
mate and look for live trees to lay their eggs in.

But if the wood is left to season for a year in the woods, aromatic oils will dissipate; live tree
wildlife will move out; and salamanders, centipedes, and other decaying-wood critters won't move
in, so the wood will be easy to live with. Always stack it loosely and up off the floor on pallets,
grids of poles, or old lumber. And don't stack tightly against cellar walls. Air should be able to
circulate all around to enhance drying and will keep earwigs, pill bugs, and spiders from
multiplying horribly in wet wood trash littering the floor.

Despite what you may read elsewhere, termites or carpenter ants that might come in with firewood
won't chew your house up; the queens that lay eggs are protected in nests deep underground. Any
individual bugs you see (even big black ants carrying larvae or eggs around) are harmless and
won't live long. Powder-post beetles dig networks of tiny tunnels between bark and wood but won't
bother finished lumber or debarked logs. But if bugs worry you, leave a light on in the cellar and,
over a concrete floor under the pile (or on plastic sheeting over a dirt floor), apply a generous
sprinkling of a chlorine-type household scouring powder. Freshen the powder around the border
of the woodpile once in a while after the wood is stacked. Bugs will avoid the light and the smell
of chlorine and will burrow deep into the stack, staying there till they join their maker. Don't use
an insecticide—spray or powder. Some bug poisons develop virulently toxic (if short-lived) dioxin
compounds when exposed to high firebox heat. You don't want the fragrant smoke that escapes
from any wood fire to be more hazardous to your lungs' health than it is naturally.

27
Uncle Will's Woodpile
My farming Great Uncle Will made it a point of pride to have the wood in and stacked well before
the first hard frost in October. There were several cords of 4-ft logs ranged along the roadside
fence, stove-length, unsplit sections filling one front bay of the barn, half-splits piled along each
way between barn and house to turn the path from milking parlor to kitchen into a seasonal tunnel.
Quarter-splits and kindling were on pallets to fill the north end of the cellar. All of it was stacked
square and even. Where exposed to public view, only the most perfectly round, freshly cut ends
looked out on the road, the vertical face of each stack as flat and plumb and slick as any newly
plastered wall. Indeed, the house looked almost walled in by firewood. Neighbors driving by would
nod approvingly. Leaf-peeping tourists would stop to snap pictures. And, with all the wood stacked
and his itch scratched, Will would go around looking mighty self-satisfied for a day or two. He'd
glance up from his chores from time to time and comment to anyone within hearing. including the
dog, any cat that was handy, or an adoring young grandnephew who'd been allowed to help stack,
"Yep. We'll stay warm this winter. Now the wood's in."

Benefit Mind, Body, and Spirit

Uncle Will spent most winter forenoons working up next year's wood. This meant hauling logs out
of the snow-filled woods with Gawd 'n' Dammit, the team of geriatric Belgian draft horses that he
treated like house pets but worked hard enough that all three of them stayed trim and hard-muscled
into a robust old age. He was more than content to leave the family and kids snug in a house heated
with fuel he'd felled, bucked, split, and stacked with his own hands.

Few of us moderns have so tangible a reason to feel good about ourselves. This is why I prescribe
a bucksaw, a maul, and set of splitting wedges along with a really big woodpile as therapy for the
twitches, gout, flabby midsection, jangled nerves, or deep-seated feelings of alienation,
powerlessness, inadequacy, and most other ills of modern society. A heap of fresh cordwood
begging to be sawed, split, and stacked beats Valium any day.

Two final cautions. Don't lay heavy logs in a stack lest you snag a glove on a splintery edge and
crush a finger. Bring them in over their place and pull your hands away briskly so they drop a short
distance and land with a satisfying klunk! Never swat at a bug you uncover in a woodpile. There
is a very small chance that a brown recluse spider will take up housekeeping in your wood. These
smallish and unremarkable-appearing, medium-brown, hairless spiders love woodpiles. They
deliver a dangerous (even occasionally fatal) bite. Fortunately they live up to their name and will
scuttle for cover if exposed to light. Let them go in peace.

28
 9 Kinds of Firewood Not To Burn
Karuna Eberl writes:9

Be the fire pit champion instead of that host who smokes everyone out and makes them sick. It's
easy — just learn what firewood not to burn.

Whether exchanging tales around the fire pit or getting cozy indoors on a winter night, wood-
burning fires are the ultimate ambiance setter. But using the wrong wood will choke up the scene
quickly, and perhaps cause long-term damage to your home, health and nature.

Not to worry. We’re not talking about splitting the atom here. Just avoid these kinds of firewood,
and you’ll be the combustion superstar of chilly evenings.

• Driftwood
• Green Wood
• Pine Wood
• Construction and Furniture Wood
• Non-Local Wood
• Poisonous Wood
• Endangered Wood
• Habitat Wood

9
https://www.familyhandyman.com/article/firewood-not-to-burn/

29
 • Rotten and Moldy Wood
• Products Containing Wood Pulp
• Not Wood

Driftwood

Ocean driftwood has a high salt content, and chlorine is a chemical compound of salt. So when
you burn driftwood, it releases high doses of dioxins.

“If you’re breathing it in, it’s carcinogenic, and that’s not a good thing,” says naturalist and TV
survivalist instructor Roger Hammer. “It’s also not a good a thing to use under your steak. All
wood has some dioxins, but driftwood is particularly high.”

Green Wood

Like a greenhorn, green wood is fresh on the scene. It’s just been cut and it’s full of moisture. That
makes it embarrassingly difficult to light. And if you are lucky enough to get it lit, it will smoke
like crazy. Besides being annoying, that smoke will add creosote to your chimney, which can build
up and cause a fire.

The solution? Always use wood that has been properly seasoned or kiln dried.

Pine Wood

Pine, a softwood, is resinous. That means when burned, it emits a lot of soot that adds dangerous
creosote to your chimney walls. It also burns more quickly than hardwood, so it’s less efficient,
though it can be used as kindling. If you have a leftover pine Christmas tree, it’s best not to burn
the wood in your fireplace.

“I wouldn’t cook meat over it because it’s really sappy,” says Hammer.

Australian pine is the exception because it has far less resin. According to Hammer, it’s considered
one of the best firewoods in the world.

Construction and Furniture Wood

A bonfire with leftover construction materials and broken chairs might sound like heaven, but it’ll
be one toxic party.

Most construction wood is treated with chemicals to prevent decay. And up until the early 2000s,
a lot of pressure-treated wood contained arsenic. Furniture is often made from plywood or
chipboard and strong adhesives. Painted wood is definitely not good as firewood.

Many wood pallets are also treated with chemicals and shouldn’t be burned in recreational fires.

30
Non-Local Wood

Firewood from afar is a major transmitter of invasive insects and diseases. Just one log can
jeopardize a forest or a species, like what has happened with the emerald ash borer, gold-spotted
oak borer, gypsy moth and sudden oak death.

Solution: Buy wood cut close to your home. Use this map for more details on firewood transmitters
in your area.

Poisonous Wood

Burning poison oak, poison ivy, poison sumac and poisonwood creates smoke with irritant oils
that can cause severe breathing problems and eye irritation. “If it’s got the word poison in it, I
wouldn’t be burning it, or eating it or anything else,” says Hammer. “Oleander is another bad one,
that can hospitalize you if you breathe it or use it for hot dog sticks.”

Endangered Wood

Use this U.S. Department of Agriculture chart to make sure the firewood you’re buying or
harvesting is not an endangered or threatened species.

Habitat Wood

When collecting wood in the outdoors, check if animals are using it. Birds and other animals may
be nesting in dead trees and downed logs.

31
“You know there’s an environmental ethic, some of that wood is useful for critters to live in,” says
Hammer. “Sometimes dead trees attract more wildlife than living trees.”

Rotten and Moldy Wood

Rotten wood is less dense and won’t produce as much heat as dried wood. Moldy wood can create
toxic fumes when burned. Both tend to have higher water contents so they produce a lot of smoke.
Solution: Leave it for the bugs and fungi.

Products Containing Wood Pulp

Burning newspaper, cardboard, wrapping paper and magazines can float long-lasting embers into
the air and even up the chimney, where they can set creosote and the roof ablaze. One exception:
You can use a small bit of tightly twisted newspaper to start a fire.

Not Wood

Styrofoam, plastic, empty food containers and boxes, cigarette butts and all that other trash contain
toxins. Many of those poisons are harmful to breathe and can travel far in the wind. Solution: Don’t
burn them.

32
33
34
35
36
 Trash and Wood Burning
Why be concerned about trash and wood burning?10

When wood, household garbage, plastic, or leaves are burned, they produce smoke and release
toxic gases. The smoke contains vapors and particulate matter (solid compounds suspended in the
air). The particulate matter and toxic gases released during burning can be very irritating to
people’s health.

People exposed to these air pollutants can experience eye and nose irritation, breathing difficulty,
coughing, and headaches. People with heart disease, asthma, emphysema, or other respiratory
diseases are especially sensitive to air pollutants. The chance of human health effects occurring
depends mostly on the concentration of air pollutants in people’s breathing zone (the air around
the nose and mouth).

Typically, no adverse health effects are expected unless people are very close to the source of
smoke or the smoke isn’t diluted enough with clean air.

The toxic chemicals released during burning include nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, volatile
organic chemicals (VOCs), and polycyclic organic matter (POMs). Burning plastic and treated
wood also releases heavy metals and toxic chemicals such as dioxin.

Trash Burning

Before scientists learned about the dangers, trash was commonly burned at homes and landfills.
Because of the smoke, air pollution, and odor complaints from backyard burning, many local

10
https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/air/burning.htm

37
governments prohibit residential trash burning. Wisconsin state law also restricts certain types of
open burning.

Backyard trash burning is especially harmful because it releases chemicals that are persistent in
the environment, polluting our air, food, lakes and streams. A recent study found that residential
trash burning from a single home could release more dioxin into the air than an industrial
incinerator.

Wood Burning for Residential Heating

Most people do not know that wood smoke can cause air pollution. Campfires, residential
fireplaces, and wood stoves all release toxic chemicals when they burn wood. However, burning
only clean, dry wood with lots of oxygen can greatly reduce air pollution and smoke. New U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved wood stoves and fireplaces greatly reduce the
level of air pollution.

Burning particle board, or treated, stained, painted or wet wood, should be avoided. When these
materials are burned, they release very toxic chemicals.

Outdoor wood-burning stoves, also called waterstoves, are used to heat water for homes. These
stoves operate by damping the fire to prolong the fuel source. This "damping" produces harmful
chemicals and smoke due to incomplete (low temperature, oxygen-starved) burning. For this
reason, some local ordinances ban or regulate their use.

How does burning trash and wood cause health problems?

The gases released by trash and wood burning can cause breathing irritation. Some of these gases
are called aldehydes, which cause strong irritation when they contact the eyes, nose, and throat.
Aldehyde and other organic gases are the reason why smoke is irritating to the eyes.

Smoke from burning wood and trash contains very small particles that can be breathed deep into
the lungs. Once trapped in the lungs, these particles can cause cell damage. The cell damage can
eventually make breathing difficult. In general, the health risk posed by smoke is small if the smoke
is mixed with plenty of outdoor air. However, smoke from burning trash and wood can still be
harmful if the smoke accumulates near homes.

The small particles in wood smoke can worsen heart conditions by preventing oxygen from
reaching tissues. Asthma and other breathing difficulties may increase in adults or children who
breathe too much smoke. Other health problems aggravated by burning include lung infections,
such as acute pneumonia and bronchiolitis, and allergies. Burning trash can cause other long-term
health problems.

What can be done to reduce air pollution from residential burning?

38
Do not burn residential trash, such as garbage, plastic, or old furniture, or construction material,
such as treated wood products or particle board.

Become aware of state and local burning laws. For example, Wisconsin Administrative Code
NR 429.04 prohibits burning:

• Wet cardboard, paper or other trash

• Plastics of any kind, including milk bottles and plastic bags
• Oily substances, such as greasy rags, oil filters
• Rubber products, including tires and hoses
• Asphalt, including asphalt roofing shingles or tarpaper
Ensure that wood stoves are properly installed and swept regularly. Reduce pollution further by
increasing chimney height, allowing plenty of oxygen (keeping the flue open), and burning only
clean, dry, untreated wood.

Use cleaner heating devices, such as EPA certified wood stoves. Fireplace inserts and indoor wood
burning stoves manufactured after 1992 meet EPA efficiency standards. Compared to older stoves,
these emit 85 percent less smoke or pollution and require 30 percent less wood to heat.

Use composting, mulching, recycling, or other garbage disposal options.

Encourage your local government to regulate leaf burning, waterstoves, and other sources of air
pollution.

For more information

• For health-related questions, contact the Division of Public Health, Bureau of Environmental and Occupational Health,
PO Box 2659
Madison, WI 53701-2659
Telephone: 608-266-1120

• DNR website on open burning

39