Dvar Ha'aved on Chol Hamoed: Difference between revisions

# If someone planned to do work before the moed but then forgot about it, or delayed to do it after the moed and thought it wouldn't be lost beforehand and then it became a dvar haaved on the moed, or if an unforeseen circumstance arose that created a dvar haaved that he couldn't deal with before the moed, then it is permitted to do melacha on the moed.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 538:1</ref>

# If someone was busy and didn't deal with something before the moed and then it was a dvar haaved on the moed, some achronim write that isn't like he intended to intentionally leave it for the moed and it is permitted, while others are strict.<ref>Levush 538:6 writes that if someone forgot, was lazy, or made a bad assessment of whether he needed to do melacha, it isn't considered mechaven melachto bmoed. Mishna Brurah (Shaar Hatzion 540:23) seems to agree. Chazon Ovadia p. 186 is lenient for the person who was lazy to deal with the dvar haaved before the moed and delayed. However, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 538:1 implies that someone lazy is called mechaven melachto bmoed unless he also made a bad assessment of when the item would become lost. Magen Avraham 108:11 and Chatom Sofer (CM 42) imply this as well that only someone who forgot, made a bad assessment, or had an unforeseen circumstance is not considered mechaven melachto bmoed. However, someone who was just lazy is called mechaven melachto bmoed. Shemirat Hamoed Khilchato (siman 27) shows that Ritva 11b and Rosh 2:1 are strict, while Rambam (Yom Tov 7:4) and Nemukei Yosef 6b are lenient. Rashi (Moed Katan kyad yad 11a s..v. ubilvad, 12b s.v. ubilvad, Gittin 44b s.v. vkulan, Bechorot 34b s.v. vkulan) also seems to be lenient. </ref>

== Safek Dvar Ha'aved ==