Explanation #1: Rashi explains - because it does not entail Kibuy (extinguishing).

Explanation #1 (cont.): And as for Hav'arah (lighting a fire), this is an unusual way of lighting a fire, which is permitted on Yom-Tov.

Explanation #2: Rebbi Yitzchak however, explains that it is considered a regular Hav'arah, and that it is nevertheless permitted, since Rav Yehudah holds that a Hav'arah that is unnecessary is permitted on Yom-Tov.

Support: And this is implied in the Yerushalmi in 'Mashilin, which cites Rebbi Yossi who forbids kindling a lamp of Batalah (that is not needed), whereas the Rabbanan permit it.

Reason:The reason of the one who forbids it is because he holds that the Torah mentions 'Havarah' to divide (the Melachos), in which case it is a Melachah, which is forbidden on Yom-Tov.

Reason (cont.): Whereas the one who permits it holds that the Torah mentions it because it is only a La'v. Consequently, it is not an Av Melachah, and is permitted on Yom-Tov even if it is not needed.

Reservation: The Gemara does say there however 'Don't forbid it, and don't permit it'.

Inferred Halachah: And from the fact that the Yerushalmi says that, we can learn that one should be careful not to make a fire that is not needed (on Yom-Tov).

Halachah: In any event, to do so on coals is Asur, seeing as there is Kibuy together with Hav'arah, and that everybody agrees is forbidden, seeing as it is not something that everybody does.

Halachah (cont.): And even the opinion in the Yerushalmi which permits Hav'arah for no purpose, that is only because sometimes it is needed for Ochel Nefesh ...

Halachah (cont.): But Kibuy, which is never needed to prepare the food, is certainly unanimously Asur on Yom-Tov.

Conclusion: And Rava, who permits even on coals, that is only because he considers something that everybody does - because if they were wealthy, they too would need it.

Question: But Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah lived long after the Churban ...

Proof: Since Rabban Gamliel was the Nasi before Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah, and Rabban Gamliel lived after the Churban Beis-Hamikdash.

Proof (cont.): Because Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai initiated Takanos immediately after the Churban Beis ha'Mikdash, since Raban Gamliel was still too young to take over the Nesi'us ...

Proof (cont.): As the Gemara says (in B'rachos 27:) 'After the destruction of the Beis ha'Mikdash, Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai instituted ... ', and then came Rabban Gamliel, and only then Rebbi Elazar ... .

Proof (cont.): Now Rebbi Elazar ... was only eighteen years old when he became Nasi - after the Churban.

Proof (concl.): And the Gemara in Bechoros (Daf 53.) says that 'After the Churban, Ma'aser Beheimah became Bateil?

Answer #1: It did not become Bateil immediately, only at a later date.

Answer #2: Alternatively, it was Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah's agent who gave Ma'aser Beheimah still in the time of the Beis ha'Mikdash.

Answer #3: Alternatively, Ma'aser Beheimah is La'v Davka, and what he actually gave annually was one tenth to the king.

Halachah: The Ri explains that the Halachah is like Rebbi Shimon, who permits (both Kirud and Kirtzuf).

Reservation: However that is confined to a wooden scraper, which does not create a wound.

Conclusion: But with regard to our scrapers that are made of metal, everyone agrees that it is Asur, since it is a matter of 'P'sik Reisha ve'Lo Yamus', as it is bound to tear out hairs.

Clarification: If one of them becomes Tamei, the others don't, even when it is in use, when they are all there together, seeing as each one is fit to work with independently.

Implied Question: It is not comparable to a pair of scissors made of two parts, or to the blade of a plane (where if one piece becomes Tamei, the other piece becomes Tamei too) ...

Answer: Because they are more firmly attached to one another when in use.

Explanation #1: Rashi explains that even though it is made of wood and is not a receptacle, so that nothing remains inside it.

Explanation #1 (cont.): Nevertheless, the Chachamim decreed Tum'ah on account of Arug (what is woven)

Refutation: But this is not correct, since Arug does not apply to wooden articles, only to (garments of) wool and linen.

Explanation #2: It must therefore be speaking about a sieve that is used to sift flour, since it says in the Yerushalmi a flour-sieve is Tamei because it has the status of a vessel which receives the bran, which in turn, is unable to pass through the holes.

Implied Question: So why does it then say 'because of K'lei Kevarah' and not 'because they are receptacles?

Answer: What the Gemara means is 'because of K'lei Kibul, of a sieve, whose Kibul is taken into account, as we explained.

Explanation #1: Rashi explains that the child sits inside it.

Refutation: But this is not correct however - because then it would not be teaching us anything, since there is no case of a vessel that is designated more than that?

) Explanation #2: Tosfos therefore explains that it is a wooden vessel that one makes for children to learn to walk; It stands on three legs and the child holds on to it with his hands, and it rolls in front of him constantly.

Implied Question: Rashi explains that, even though Ochel Nefesh is permitted ...

Answer (Explanation #1): That is confined to cooking, baking and Shechitah, which are impossible to do before Yom-Tov, since bread is tastier when it is warm, as is a cooked dish, and as for Shechitah, it go off (if performed before Yom-Tov.

Answer (Explanation #1) cont.: Whereas trapping one can do on Erev Yom-Tov, and place in water inside one's net, to prevent it from dying.

Refutation: This is not correct however, as Tosfos explained at the beginning of the Masechta (Daf 3. & 3:) in connection with the decree that one might detach, that regarding Ochel Nefesh itself, one cannot differentiate between whether one could have done before Yom-Tov and whether one could not ...

Refutation (cont.): A distinction that is confined to Machshirin (preparations for Ochel Nefesh).

Explanation #2: The correct explanation is therefore that of the Rabeinu Nesanel from Kinun, who explained there (at the end of DH 'Gezeirah') that it is forbidden because it is similar to cutting the harvest (See Tosfos there).

Explanation #1: Rashi explains that it is because the onus of feeding them is not on him, since they eat the vegetation that is found in the water, and sometimes even earth; moreover, the larger fish eat the smaller ones.

Explanation #1 (cont.): And even the opinion that permits (feeding one's animals) from the Pasuk (in Shmos 12) "Ach asher Ye'achel le'Chol Nefesh", implying even animals, nevertheless do not include fish, since you are not obligated to feed them.

Question: The Gemara asks from the Beraisa forbids trapping wild animals and fish, and answers that 'One speaks about a small enclosure/pool, the other, about a large one ...

Question (cont.): Now that is fine with regard to the question of trapping, but what about the question regarding feeding, since our Mishnah permits placing before them food, whereas the Beraisa forbids it?

Explanation #2: Therefore Tosfos explains that the one depends upon the other - anf if trapping is permitted, so is feeding.

Explanation #2 (cont.): And this is what the Beraisa means: 'One is not permitted to trap fish from the pools, and one is not permitted to place before them food' - in case one traps them, since trapping is them is forbidden on Yom-Tov.

Explanation #2 (concl.): Consequently, when the Gemara answers the question on trapping, the question on feeding them is answered automatically, seeing as the two are interdependent.

Question: The Kashya remains however, that here it seems that wherever trapping them is forbidden, one is not even permitted to throw them food, whilst in Perek Mi She'Hichshich (Shabbos 155:), the Gemara rules that things that one may not take away from them one is permitted to throw in front of them?

Answer: The Gemara there is speaking about Shabbos, where Ochel Nefesh is prohibited, in which case the suspicion that one might to take away from them is not applicable.

Answer (cont.): Whereas here, since it speaks about Yom-Tov, where Ochel Nefesh is permitted, we decree that when one comes to give them food, one might trap them.