Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Daf Yomi

January 11, 2021 | 讻状讝 讘讟讘转 转砖驻状讗

Masechet Pesachim is sponsored by Sivya Twersky in honor of her daughter, Shoshana Baker, her grandson's upcoming Bar Mitzvah ,and in memory of her father, Harav Pesach Zachariah Halevi ben Reuven and Leah Z'late Z'L. He lived Torah and emunah by example to congregational and biological families. His yahrzeit falls within this masechet.

Pesachim 51

Today鈥檚 Daf is sponsored by Paula Winnig in memory of Rabbi Robert (Ruby) Davis, z”l father of Suri Davis Stern. “In memory of someone who took pride in his learning and his transmission of his learning to his family and his students, particularly my dear friend Suri Davis Stern.”

The gemara brings a few cases where people wanted to change the custom in their town and the rabbis reactions. When is this principle used “things that are permitted that people decided to be stringent about and forbid, one cannot permit in front of them”? Is it only referring to Kutim? Can one permit聽 a custom that is a mistake? Rabba bar Chana came from Israel to Babylonia and ate the fat on the stomach that was a subject of debate between the rabbis in Israel and Babylonia. When the rabbis came, he hid what he was doing. Abaye commented that he treated them as if they were Kutim. Why didn’t he keep the stringency of the place where he went? Abaye and Rava each bring a different answer. How do the words of the mishna “one should not do anything different so as not to create conflict” with the case of one who doesn’t work going to the place where people do work?

讗讬 讗转讛 专砖讗讬 诇讛转讬专谉 讘驻谞讬讛诐 讗诪专 诇讜 讜诇讗讜 诪讬 讗讬转诪专 注诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讘讻讜转讗讬 讻讜转讗讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚诪住专讻讬 诪讬诇转讗 讛谞讱 讗讬谞砖讬 谞诪讬 住专讻讬 诪讬诇转讗


you are not allowed to permit these actions in their presence, lest they come to treat other prohibitions lightly, saying: If this previously prohibited activity was permitted, other prohibitions are not particularly stringent either. How did Rav Yosef permit the residents of 岣zai to eat rice dough? Rav Yosef said to Abaye: And wasn鈥檛 it stated about this halakha concerning stringencies that Rav 岣sda said: This was stated specifically with regard to Samaritans? The Gemara rejects this: What is the reason that this applies to Samaritans? It is due to the fact that they will extend this matter of leniency, and add to it additional, unjustified leniencies. These people of 岣zai will also extend this matter of leniency, and come to practice additional leniencies in other cases, as they are ignoramuses.


讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讞讝讬谞谉 讗讬 专讜讘谉 讗讜专讝 讗讻诇讬 诇讗 谞讬讻诇讛 讝专 讘讗驻讬讬讛讜 讚讬诇诪讗 诪砖转讻讞讗 转讜专转 讞诇讛 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讜讗讬 专讜讘谉 讚讙谉 讗讻诇讬 谞讬讻诇讛 讝专 讘讗驻讬讬讛讜 讚讬诇诪讗 讗转讬 诇讗驻专讜砖讬 诪谉 讛讞讬讜讘 注诇 讛驻讟讜专 讜诪谉 讛驻讟讜专 注诇 讛讞讬讜讘


Rather, Rav Ashi said: We see, if the majority of people in that place eat rice, do not let a non-priest eat 岣lla in their presence, lest the halakhic category of 岣lla be forgotten from them. And if most of them eat grain, let a non-priest eat 岣lla separated from rice dough in their presence, lest they separate 岣lla from grain, from which separating 岣lla is a requirement, on behalf of rice from which separating 岣lla is an exemption, in which case the priest eating the 岣lla would be eating bread from which 岣lla was not separated; or from that which is an exemption on behalf of that which is a requirement, in which case the person eating the grain bread would be eating bread from which 岣lla was not separated.


讙讜驻讗 讚讘专讬诐 讛诪讜转专讬谉 讜讗讞专讬诐 谞讛讙讜 讘讛谉 讗讬住讜专 讗讬 讗转讛 专砖讗讬 诇讛转讬专谉 讘驻谞讬讛谉 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讘讻讜转讗讬 注住拽讬谞谉 讜讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 讜讛转谞讬讗 专讜讞爪讬谉 砖谞讬 讗讞讬谉 讻讗讞讚 讜讗讬谉 专讜讞爪讬谉 砖谞讬 讗讞讬谉 讘讻讘讜诇 讜诪注砖讛 讘讬讛讜讚讛 讜讛诇诇 讘谞讬讜 砖诇 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 砖专讞爪讜 砖谞讬讛诐 讻讗讞讚 讘讻讘讜诇 讜诇注讝讛 注诇讬讛谉 讻诇 讛诪讚讬谞讛 讗诪专讜 诪讬诪讬谞讜 诇讗 专讗讬谞讜 讻讱 讜谞砖诪讟 讛诇诇 讜讬爪讗 诇讘讬转 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讜诇讗 专爪讛 诇讜诪专 诇讛谉 诪讜转专讬谉 讗转诐


After mentioning halakhot relating to customs, the Gemara returns to discuss the matter itself. If matters are permitted but others were accustomed to treat them as a prohibition, you are not allowed to permit these actions in their presence. Rav 岣sda said: We are dealing with Samaritans, not with Jews. The Gemara is surprised at this: And doesn鈥檛 this apply to everyone? Wasn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita to the contrary? Two brothers may bathe together, and there is no concern that doing so is immodest or will lead to sinful thoughts. However, the custom was that two brothers do not bathe together in the city of Kabul (see I Kings 9:13). And there was an incident involving Yehuda and Hillel, sons of Rabban Gamliel, who bathed together in Kabul, and the entire city denounced them and said: In all our days we have never seen that type of conduct. Hillel stole away and went out to the outer chamber and did not want to tell them: You are permitted to do so. He preferred to obey the city residents rather than rule it permitted for two brothers to bathe together.


讬讜爪讗讬诐 讘拽讜专讚拽讬住讜谉 讘砖讘转 讜讗讬谉 讬讜爪讗讬谉 讘拽讜专讚拽讬住讜谉 讘砖讘转 讘讘讬专讬 讜诪注砖讛 讘讬讛讜讚讛 讜讛诇诇 讘谞讬讜 砖诇 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 砖讬爪讗讜 讘拽讜专讚拽讬住讜谉 讘砖讘转 讘讘讬专讬 讜诇注讝讛 注诇讬讛谉 讛诪讚讬谞讛 讜讗诪专讜 诪讬诪讬谞讜 诇讗 专讗讬谞讜 讻讱 讜砖诪讟讜诐 讜谞转谞讜诐 诇注讘讚讬讛谉 讜诇讗 专爪讜 诇讜诪专 诇讛谉 诪讜转专讬谉 讗转诐


Similarly, one may go out with wide shoes that resemble slippers on Shabbat; however, one does not go out with wide shoes in the city of Birei. And there was an incident involving Yehuda and Hillel, sons of Rabban Gamliel, who went out with wide shoes in Birei, and the people of the city denounced them and said: In all our days we have never seen that type of conduct. And Yehuda and Hillel removed their shoes, and gave them to their gentile servants, and did not want to tell the residents of the city: You are permitted to go out with wide shoes on Shabbat.


讜讬讜砖讘讬谉 注诇 住驻住诇讬 讙讜讬诐 讘砖讘转 讜讗讬谞谉 讬讜砖讘讬谉 注诇 住驻住诇讬 讙讜讬诐 讘砖讘转 讘注讻讜 讜诪注砖讛 讘专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 砖讬砖讘 注诇 住驻住诇讬 讙讜讬诐 讘砖讘转 讘注讻讜 讜诇注讝讛 注诇讬讜 讻诇 讛诪讚讬谞讛 讗诪专讜 诪讬诪讬谞讜 诇讗 专讗讬谞讜 讻讱 谞砖诪讟 注诇 讙讘讬 拽专拽注 讜诇讗 专爪讛 诇讜诪专 诇讛谉 诪讜转专讬谉 讗转诐 讘谞讬 诪讚讬谞转 讛讬诐 谞诪讬 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讗 砖讻讬讞讬 专讘谞谉 讙讘讬讬讛讜 讻讻讜转讬诐 讚诪讜


Similarly, one may sit on gentiles鈥 stools on Shabbat, even though these stools are typically used for displaying merchandise. But one may not sit on gentiles’ stools on Shabbat in the city of Akko. And there was an incident involving Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel who sat on gentiles鈥 stools on Shabbat in the city of Akko, and the entire city denounced him. They said: In all our days we have never seen that type of conduct. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel moved onto the ground and did not want to tell them: You are permitted to sit on the stools. The Gemara answers: The legal status of people in the cities, since Sages are not found among them, is like that of the Samaritans. Therefore, it is prohibited to tell them that these activities are permitted.


讘砖诇诪讗 住驻住诇讬 讙讜讬诐 诪砖讜诐 讚诪讞讝讬 讻诪拽讞 讜诪诪讻专 讘拽讜专讚拽讬住讜谉 谞诪讬 讚讬诇诪讗 诪砖转诇驻讬谉 讜讗转讬 诇讗讬转讜讬讬谞讛讜 讗专讘注 讗诪讜转 讘专砖讜转 讛专讘讬诐


The Gemara proceeds to clarify the reasons for the stringent customs in those communities. Granted, sitting on gentiles鈥 stools is prohibited because it appears like one is engaged in buying and selling on Shabbat. In the case of wide shoes as well, it is prohibited to wear them due to the concern lest they fall off one鈥檚 feet and he come to carry them in his hand four cubits in the public domain, thereby violating a Torah prohibition.


讗诇讗 专讜讞爪讬谉 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讻讚转谞讬讗 注诐 讛讻诇 讗讚诐 专讜讞抓 讞讜抓 诪讗讘讬讜 讜讞诪讬讜 讜讘注诇 讗诪讜 讜讘注诇 讗讞讜转讜 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪转讬专 讘讗讘讬讜 诪驻谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讗讘讬讜 讜讛讜讗 讛讚讬谉 诇讘注诇 讗诪讜


However, what is the reason that two brothers may not bathe together? The Gemara answers: The custom to prohibit doing so is based on that which was taught in a baraita: A person may bathe with anyone except for his father, and his father-in-law, and his mother鈥檚 husband, and his sister鈥檚 husband. Due to the nature of their relation, one might come to ponder how they came to be related and have prohibited thoughts about intimacy between men and women. And Rabbi Yehuda permits one to bathe with his father, due to the honor that he can accord his father by assisting his father while bathing. The same is true for one鈥檚 mother鈥檚 husband.


讜讗转讜 讗讬谞讛讜 讜讙讝讜专 讘砖谞讬 讗讞讬谉 诪砖讜诐 讘注诇 讗讞讜转讜 转谞讗 转诇诪讬讚 诇讗 讬专讞抓 注诐 专讘讜 讜讗诐 专讘讜 爪专讬讱 诇讜 诪讜转专


And the people of Kabul came and issued a decree to prohibit bathing together for two brothers, due to their concern that it is similar to bathing with one鈥檚 sister鈥檚 husband. It was taught in the Tosefta: A student may not bathe with his teacher, since it is disrespectful to see one鈥檚 teacher naked. But if his teacher requires his help when bathing, it is permitted.


讻讬 讗转讗 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗讻诇 讚讗讬讬转专讗 注讜诇 诇讙讘讬讛 专讘 注讜讬专讗 住讘讗 讜专讘讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讻讬讜谉 讚讞讝讬谞讛讜 讻住讬讬讛 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗转讜 讜讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 诇讗讘讬讬 讗诪专 诇讛讜 砖讜讜讬谞讻讜 讻讻讜转讗讬


The Gemara relates: When Rabba bar bar 岣na came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he ate the fat found over the straight part of an animal鈥檚 stomach. The fat along the stomach consists of two parts: The inner, straight portion, which is shaped like a bowstring, and the outer, rounded portion, which is shaped like a bow. With regard to the fat surrounding the inner, straight portion, the custom in Eretz Yisrael was lenient, whereas in Babylonia it was stringent. Rav Avira the Elder and Rabba, son of Rav Huna, entered to see Rabba bar bar 岣na. When he saw them coming, he concealed from them what he was eating. They came and told Abaye what had happened, and he said to them: Through his conduct, he rendered you Samaritans, as he could have told you that it is permitted but did not do so.


讜专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 诇讬转 诇讬讛 讛讗 讚转谞谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 注诇讬讜 讞讜诪专讬 讛诪拽讜诐 砖讬爪讗 诪砖诐 讜讞讜诪专讬 讛诪拽讜诐 砖讛诇讱 诇砖诐 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 诪讘讘诇 诇讘讘诇 讜诪讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 诇讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 讗讬 谞诪讬 诪讘讘诇 诇讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 讗讘诇 诪讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 诇讘讘诇 诇讗 讻讬讜谉 讚讗谞谉 讻讬讬驻讬谞谉 诇讛讜 注讘讚讬谞谉 讻讜讜转讬讬讛讜


The Gemara asks: And is Rabba bar bar 岣na, who was lenient with regard to a matter that is prohibited, not in agreement with that which we learned in the mishna: When one travels from one place to another, the Sages impose upon him the stringencies of the place from which he left and the stringencies of the place to which he went? Abaye said: That applies when one travels from one place in Babylonia to another place in Babylonia, or from one place in Eretz Yisrael to another place in Eretz Yisrael, or alternatively, from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael. However, when traveling from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, no, this principle does not apply. Since we, the residents of Babylonia, are subordinate to them in terms of halakha, we act in accordance with their custom, but a resident of Eretz Yisrael is not required to follow the Babylonian custom.


专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 诪讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 诇讘讘诇 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚讗讬谉 讚注转讜 诇讞讝讜专 讜专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讚注转讜 诇讞讝讜专 讛讜讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 诇讘谞讬讛 讘谞讬 诇讗 转讗讻诇 诇讗 讘驻谞讬 讜诇讗 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬 讗谞讬 砖专讗讬转讬 讗转 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 砖讗讻诇 讻讚讬 讛讜讗 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇住诪讜讱 注诇讬讜 讘驻谞讬讜 讜砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 讗转讛 诇讗 专讗讬转 讗讜转讜 诇讗 转讗讻诇 讘讬谉 讘驻谞讬 讘讬谉 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬


Rav Ashi said: Even if you say that when one travels from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he is required to act stringently in accordance with the local custom, this applies only when his intent is not to return. One is required to adopt the local customs when permanently settling in a new location. However, as Rabba bar bar 岣na鈥檚 intent was to return to Eretz Yisrael, his point of origin, he continued to follow the custom of Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara relates that Rabba bar bar 岣na said to his son: My son, you live in Babylonia. Therefore, do not eat this fat, neither when you are in my presence nor when you are not in my presence. I, who saw Rabbi Yo岣nan eat this fat, can say that Rabbi Yo岣nan is worthy for one to rely upon him both in his presence and not in his presence. You did not see him. Therefore, do not eat it, neither when you are in my presence nor when you are not in my presence, since you may not rely upon my opinion alone in this matter.


讜驻诇讬讙讗 讚讬讚讬讛 讗讚讬讚讬讛 讚讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 住讞 诇讬 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 驻注诐 讗讞转 谞讻谞住转讬 讗讞专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘谉 诇拽讜谞讬讗 诇讙讬谞讛


The Gemara comments: And this statement of his disagrees with another statement of his, as Rabba bar bar 岣na said: Rabbi Yo岣nan ben Elazar told me: Once I followed Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi Yosei ben Lakonya into the garden next to his house,


讜谞讟诇 住驻讬讞讬 讻专讜讘 讜讗讻诇 讜谞转谉 诇讬 讜讗诪专 诇讬 讘谞讬 讘驻谞讬 讗讻讜诇 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬 诇讗 转讗讻诇 讗谞讬 砖专讗讬转讬 讗转 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讜讞讬 砖讗讻诇 讻讚讬 讛讜讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讜讞讬 诇住诪讜讱 注诇讬讜 讘驻谞讬讜 讜砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 讗转讛 讘驻谞讬 讗讻讜诇 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬 诇讗 转讗讻诇


and he took cabbage after-growths that had grown during the Sabbatical Year, and ate from them and gave some to me. And he said to me: My son, in my presence, you may eat this. But when you are not in my presence, you may not eat cabbage that grew as an after-growth. I, who saw Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i eat, can say that Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i is worthy for one to rely upon him both in his presence and not in his presence. You, who did not see him eat, in my presence, rely on what I saw and eat; however, not in my presence, do not rely on my testimony and do not eat. In this case, Rabba bar bar 岣na maintained that one who saw a Sage act in a certain way may rely on what he saw, as may his students when they are in the presence of their teacher.


诪讗讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜诪专 讻诇 讛住驻讬讞讬诐 讗住讜专讬谉 讞讜抓 诪住驻讬讞讬 讻专讜讘 砖讗讬谉 讻讬讜爪讗 讘讛谉 讘讬专拽 讛砖讚讛 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讻诇 讛住驻讬讞讬谉 讗住讜专讬诐


The Gemara asks: What is that statement of Rabbi Shimon? As it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon says: All after-growths that grow on their own during the Sabbatical Year are prohibited and may not be eaten, except for the after-growths of cabbage, as there is nothing similar to them among the vegetables in the field. The Sages did not extend the decree prohibiting after-growths to cabbage, because it is unlike other vegetables. Rather, it is like fruit of a tree, which may be eaten if it grows wild during the Sabbatical Year. And the Rabbis say: All after-growths are prohibited, including the after-growths of cabbage.


讜转专讜讬讬讛讜 讗诇讬讘讗 讚专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讚转谞讬讗 讛谉 诇讗 谞讝专注 讜诇讗 谞讗住祝 讗转 转讘讜讗转谞讜 讗诪专 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讜讻讬 诪讗讞专 砖讗讬谉 讝讜专注讬谉 诪讛讬讻讗 讗讜住驻讬谉 诪讻讗谉 诇住驻讬讞讬谉 砖讛谉 讗住讜专讬谉


The Gemara comments: And both Rabbi Shimon and the Rabbis, who disagree in this case, hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. As it was taught in a baraita: The verse states, 鈥淎nd if you shall say: What shall we eat in the seventh year? Behold, we may not sow, nor gather our crops鈥 (Leviticus 25:20). Rabbi Akiva said: And since they cannot sow, from where would they gather? Why does the verse mention gathering? It is derived from here that gathering after-growths that were not planted but grew on their own is prohibited.


讘诪讗讬 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 专讘谞谉 住讘专讬 讙讝专讬谞谉 住驻讬讞讬 讻专讜讘 讗讟讜 砖讗专 住驻讬讞讬 讚注诇诪讗 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 住讘专 诇讗 讙讝专讬谞谉 住驻讬讞讬 讻专讜讘 讗讟讜 住驻讬讞讬 讚注诇诪讗:


The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle then, do they disagree? The Gemara answers: The Rabbis, who prohibit all after-growths, hold: We issue a decree prohibiting cabbage after-growths due to other after-growths in general. And Rabbi Shimon holds: We do not issue a decree prohibiting cabbage after-growths due to other after-growths in general.


讛讛讜诇讱 诪诪拽讜诐 讜讻讜壮: 讘砖诇诪讗 讛讛讜诇讱 诪诪拽讜诐 砖注讜砖讬谉 诇诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 注诇讬讜 讞讜诪专讬 诪拽讜诐 砖讛诇讱 诇砖诐 讜讗诇 讬砖谞讛 讗讚诐 诪驻谞讬 讛诪讞诇讜拽转 讜诇讗 诇讬注讘讬讚


We learned in the mishna with regard to refraining from performance of labor on Passover eve: With regard to one who travels from a place where people perform labor on Passover eve to a place where people do not, or from a place where people do not perform labor on Passover eve to a place where people do, the Sages impose upon him the stringencies of the place from which he left and the stringencies of the place to which he went. The Gemara asks: Granted, in the case of one who travels from a place where people perform labor to a place where they do not perform labor, the Sages impose upon him the stringencies of the place to which he went, and a person should not deviate from the standard practice in that place due to potential dispute, and he should not perform labor.


讗诇讗 诪诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 诇诪拽讜诐 砖注讜砖讬谉 讗诇 讬砖谞讛 讗讚诐 诪驻谞讬 讛诪讞诇讜拽转 讜谞注讘讬讚 讛讗 讗诪专转 谞讜转谞讬谉 注诇讬讜 讞讜诪专讬 诪拽讜诐 砖讛诇讱 诇砖诐 讜讞讜诪专讬 诪拽讜诐 砖讬爪讗 诪砖诐


However, if one traveled from a place where people do not perform labor to a place where they do perform labor, is the ruling there too, that a person should not deviate from the standard practice in that place due to conflict, and perform labor? That cannot be. Didn鈥檛 you say: The Sages impose upon him the stringencies of the place to which he went and the stringencies of the place from which he left? He should not perform any labor.


讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讗专讬砖讗 专讘讗 讗诪专 诇注讜诇诐 讗住讬驻讗 讜讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讗讬谉 讘讝讜 诪驻谞讬 砖讬谞讜讬 讛诪讞诇讜拽转 诪讗讬 拽讗 讗诪专转 讛专讜讗讛 讗讜诪专 诪诇讗讻讛 讗住讜专讛 诪讬诪专 讗诪专讬 讻诪讛 讘讟诇谞讬 讛讜讬 讘砖讜拽讗


Abaye said: The principle that one should not deviate due to potential dispute is referring to the first clause, that one who arrives at a place where people do not perform labor adopts the local stringency. Rava said: Actually, it is possible to say this halakha is also referring to the latter clause of the mishna, and this is what it is saying: Refraining from labor does not constitute a deviation that causes dispute. What are you saying; one who sees him will say that he is not working because he believes that performing labor is prohibited, contrary to local practice? That is unlikely, as when people see him inactive that will not be their assumption. Instead, they will say: How many idle people there are in the market every day who do not work. In this case, people will assume that this individual was unable to find work that day.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 住驻专讗 诇专讘讬 讗讘讗 讻讙讜谉 讗谞谉 讚讬讚注讬谞谉 讘拽讘讬注讗 讚讬专讞讗


After discussing stringencies resulting from customs, the Gemara elaborates on the second day of a Festival observed in the Diaspora. Rav Safra said to Rabbi Abba: Communities in a situation like us, who, based on calculations, already know the determination of the month and are no longer concerned lest the Festival be observed on the wrong day, clearly, on the second day of a Festival,


Masechet Pesachim is sponsored by Sivya Twersky in honor of her daughter, Shoshana Baker, her grandson's upcoming Bar Mitzvah ,and in memory of her father, Harav Pesach Zachariah Halevi ben Reuven and Leah Z'late Z'L. He lived Torah and emunah by example to congregational and biological families. His yahrzeit falls within this masechet.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Pesachim 46-52 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time

This week we will learn about 鈥渄eaf dough鈥 and if you can separate Challah from your impure matzah dough. We...
daf_icon

Customs

Pesachim Daf 51 Local customs and personal customs. Moving from place to place - do you take your customs with...
talking talmud_square

Pesachim 51: In Trouble for NOT Following the Local Practice

Following the practice in the place that you're in: 3 examples, including a certain kind of wide shoes. As discovered...

Pesachim 51

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Pesachim 51

讗讬 讗转讛 专砖讗讬 诇讛转讬专谉 讘驻谞讬讛诐 讗诪专 诇讜 讜诇讗讜 诪讬 讗讬转诪专 注诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讘讻讜转讗讬 讻讜转讗讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚诪住专讻讬 诪讬诇转讗 讛谞讱 讗讬谞砖讬 谞诪讬 住专讻讬 诪讬诇转讗


you are not allowed to permit these actions in their presence, lest they come to treat other prohibitions lightly, saying: If this previously prohibited activity was permitted, other prohibitions are not particularly stringent either. How did Rav Yosef permit the residents of 岣zai to eat rice dough? Rav Yosef said to Abaye: And wasn鈥檛 it stated about this halakha concerning stringencies that Rav 岣sda said: This was stated specifically with regard to Samaritans? The Gemara rejects this: What is the reason that this applies to Samaritans? It is due to the fact that they will extend this matter of leniency, and add to it additional, unjustified leniencies. These people of 岣zai will also extend this matter of leniency, and come to practice additional leniencies in other cases, as they are ignoramuses.


讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讞讝讬谞谉 讗讬 专讜讘谉 讗讜专讝 讗讻诇讬 诇讗 谞讬讻诇讛 讝专 讘讗驻讬讬讛讜 讚讬诇诪讗 诪砖转讻讞讗 转讜专转 讞诇讛 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讜讗讬 专讜讘谉 讚讙谉 讗讻诇讬 谞讬讻诇讛 讝专 讘讗驻讬讬讛讜 讚讬诇诪讗 讗转讬 诇讗驻专讜砖讬 诪谉 讛讞讬讜讘 注诇 讛驻讟讜专 讜诪谉 讛驻讟讜专 注诇 讛讞讬讜讘


Rather, Rav Ashi said: We see, if the majority of people in that place eat rice, do not let a non-priest eat 岣lla in their presence, lest the halakhic category of 岣lla be forgotten from them. And if most of them eat grain, let a non-priest eat 岣lla separated from rice dough in their presence, lest they separate 岣lla from grain, from which separating 岣lla is a requirement, on behalf of rice from which separating 岣lla is an exemption, in which case the priest eating the 岣lla would be eating bread from which 岣lla was not separated; or from that which is an exemption on behalf of that which is a requirement, in which case the person eating the grain bread would be eating bread from which 岣lla was not separated.


讙讜驻讗 讚讘专讬诐 讛诪讜转专讬谉 讜讗讞专讬诐 谞讛讙讜 讘讛谉 讗讬住讜专 讗讬 讗转讛 专砖讗讬 诇讛转讬专谉 讘驻谞讬讛谉 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讘讻讜转讗讬 注住拽讬谞谉 讜讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 讜讛转谞讬讗 专讜讞爪讬谉 砖谞讬 讗讞讬谉 讻讗讞讚 讜讗讬谉 专讜讞爪讬谉 砖谞讬 讗讞讬谉 讘讻讘讜诇 讜诪注砖讛 讘讬讛讜讚讛 讜讛诇诇 讘谞讬讜 砖诇 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 砖专讞爪讜 砖谞讬讛诐 讻讗讞讚 讘讻讘讜诇 讜诇注讝讛 注诇讬讛谉 讻诇 讛诪讚讬谞讛 讗诪专讜 诪讬诪讬谞讜 诇讗 专讗讬谞讜 讻讱 讜谞砖诪讟 讛诇诇 讜讬爪讗 诇讘讬转 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讜诇讗 专爪讛 诇讜诪专 诇讛谉 诪讜转专讬谉 讗转诐


After mentioning halakhot relating to customs, the Gemara returns to discuss the matter itself. If matters are permitted but others were accustomed to treat them as a prohibition, you are not allowed to permit these actions in their presence. Rav 岣sda said: We are dealing with Samaritans, not with Jews. The Gemara is surprised at this: And doesn鈥檛 this apply to everyone? Wasn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita to the contrary? Two brothers may bathe together, and there is no concern that doing so is immodest or will lead to sinful thoughts. However, the custom was that two brothers do not bathe together in the city of Kabul (see I Kings 9:13). And there was an incident involving Yehuda and Hillel, sons of Rabban Gamliel, who bathed together in Kabul, and the entire city denounced them and said: In all our days we have never seen that type of conduct. Hillel stole away and went out to the outer chamber and did not want to tell them: You are permitted to do so. He preferred to obey the city residents rather than rule it permitted for two brothers to bathe together.


讬讜爪讗讬诐 讘拽讜专讚拽讬住讜谉 讘砖讘转 讜讗讬谉 讬讜爪讗讬谉 讘拽讜专讚拽讬住讜谉 讘砖讘转 讘讘讬专讬 讜诪注砖讛 讘讬讛讜讚讛 讜讛诇诇 讘谞讬讜 砖诇 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 砖讬爪讗讜 讘拽讜专讚拽讬住讜谉 讘砖讘转 讘讘讬专讬 讜诇注讝讛 注诇讬讛谉 讛诪讚讬谞讛 讜讗诪专讜 诪讬诪讬谞讜 诇讗 专讗讬谞讜 讻讱 讜砖诪讟讜诐 讜谞转谞讜诐 诇注讘讚讬讛谉 讜诇讗 专爪讜 诇讜诪专 诇讛谉 诪讜转专讬谉 讗转诐


Similarly, one may go out with wide shoes that resemble slippers on Shabbat; however, one does not go out with wide shoes in the city of Birei. And there was an incident involving Yehuda and Hillel, sons of Rabban Gamliel, who went out with wide shoes in Birei, and the people of the city denounced them and said: In all our days we have never seen that type of conduct. And Yehuda and Hillel removed their shoes, and gave them to their gentile servants, and did not want to tell the residents of the city: You are permitted to go out with wide shoes on Shabbat.


讜讬讜砖讘讬谉 注诇 住驻住诇讬 讙讜讬诐 讘砖讘转 讜讗讬谞谉 讬讜砖讘讬谉 注诇 住驻住诇讬 讙讜讬诐 讘砖讘转 讘注讻讜 讜诪注砖讛 讘专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 砖讬砖讘 注诇 住驻住诇讬 讙讜讬诐 讘砖讘转 讘注讻讜 讜诇注讝讛 注诇讬讜 讻诇 讛诪讚讬谞讛 讗诪专讜 诪讬诪讬谞讜 诇讗 专讗讬谞讜 讻讱 谞砖诪讟 注诇 讙讘讬 拽专拽注 讜诇讗 专爪讛 诇讜诪专 诇讛谉 诪讜转专讬谉 讗转诐 讘谞讬 诪讚讬谞转 讛讬诐 谞诪讬 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讗 砖讻讬讞讬 专讘谞谉 讙讘讬讬讛讜 讻讻讜转讬诐 讚诪讜


Similarly, one may sit on gentiles鈥 stools on Shabbat, even though these stools are typically used for displaying merchandise. But one may not sit on gentiles’ stools on Shabbat in the city of Akko. And there was an incident involving Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel who sat on gentiles鈥 stools on Shabbat in the city of Akko, and the entire city denounced him. They said: In all our days we have never seen that type of conduct. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel moved onto the ground and did not want to tell them: You are permitted to sit on the stools. The Gemara answers: The legal status of people in the cities, since Sages are not found among them, is like that of the Samaritans. Therefore, it is prohibited to tell them that these activities are permitted.


讘砖诇诪讗 住驻住诇讬 讙讜讬诐 诪砖讜诐 讚诪讞讝讬 讻诪拽讞 讜诪诪讻专 讘拽讜专讚拽讬住讜谉 谞诪讬 讚讬诇诪讗 诪砖转诇驻讬谉 讜讗转讬 诇讗讬转讜讬讬谞讛讜 讗专讘注 讗诪讜转 讘专砖讜转 讛专讘讬诐


The Gemara proceeds to clarify the reasons for the stringent customs in those communities. Granted, sitting on gentiles鈥 stools is prohibited because it appears like one is engaged in buying and selling on Shabbat. In the case of wide shoes as well, it is prohibited to wear them due to the concern lest they fall off one鈥檚 feet and he come to carry them in his hand four cubits in the public domain, thereby violating a Torah prohibition.


讗诇讗 专讜讞爪讬谉 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 讻讚转谞讬讗 注诐 讛讻诇 讗讚诐 专讜讞抓 讞讜抓 诪讗讘讬讜 讜讞诪讬讜 讜讘注诇 讗诪讜 讜讘注诇 讗讞讜转讜 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪转讬专 讘讗讘讬讜 诪驻谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讗讘讬讜 讜讛讜讗 讛讚讬谉 诇讘注诇 讗诪讜


However, what is the reason that two brothers may not bathe together? The Gemara answers: The custom to prohibit doing so is based on that which was taught in a baraita: A person may bathe with anyone except for his father, and his father-in-law, and his mother鈥檚 husband, and his sister鈥檚 husband. Due to the nature of their relation, one might come to ponder how they came to be related and have prohibited thoughts about intimacy between men and women. And Rabbi Yehuda permits one to bathe with his father, due to the honor that he can accord his father by assisting his father while bathing. The same is true for one鈥檚 mother鈥檚 husband.


讜讗转讜 讗讬谞讛讜 讜讙讝讜专 讘砖谞讬 讗讞讬谉 诪砖讜诐 讘注诇 讗讞讜转讜 转谞讗 转诇诪讬讚 诇讗 讬专讞抓 注诐 专讘讜 讜讗诐 专讘讜 爪专讬讱 诇讜 诪讜转专


And the people of Kabul came and issued a decree to prohibit bathing together for two brothers, due to their concern that it is similar to bathing with one鈥檚 sister鈥檚 husband. It was taught in the Tosefta: A student may not bathe with his teacher, since it is disrespectful to see one鈥檚 teacher naked. But if his teacher requires his help when bathing, it is permitted.


讻讬 讗转讗 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗讻诇 讚讗讬讬转专讗 注讜诇 诇讙讘讬讛 专讘 注讜讬专讗 住讘讗 讜专讘讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讻讬讜谉 讚讞讝讬谞讛讜 讻住讬讬讛 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗转讜 讜讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 诇讗讘讬讬 讗诪专 诇讛讜 砖讜讜讬谞讻讜 讻讻讜转讗讬


The Gemara relates: When Rabba bar bar 岣na came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he ate the fat found over the straight part of an animal鈥檚 stomach. The fat along the stomach consists of two parts: The inner, straight portion, which is shaped like a bowstring, and the outer, rounded portion, which is shaped like a bow. With regard to the fat surrounding the inner, straight portion, the custom in Eretz Yisrael was lenient, whereas in Babylonia it was stringent. Rav Avira the Elder and Rabba, son of Rav Huna, entered to see Rabba bar bar 岣na. When he saw them coming, he concealed from them what he was eating. They came and told Abaye what had happened, and he said to them: Through his conduct, he rendered you Samaritans, as he could have told you that it is permitted but did not do so.


讜专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 诇讬转 诇讬讛 讛讗 讚转谞谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 注诇讬讜 讞讜诪专讬 讛诪拽讜诐 砖讬爪讗 诪砖诐 讜讞讜诪专讬 讛诪拽讜诐 砖讛诇讱 诇砖诐 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 诪讘讘诇 诇讘讘诇 讜诪讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 诇讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 讗讬 谞诪讬 诪讘讘诇 诇讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 讗讘诇 诪讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 诇讘讘诇 诇讗 讻讬讜谉 讚讗谞谉 讻讬讬驻讬谞谉 诇讛讜 注讘讚讬谞谉 讻讜讜转讬讬讛讜


The Gemara asks: And is Rabba bar bar 岣na, who was lenient with regard to a matter that is prohibited, not in agreement with that which we learned in the mishna: When one travels from one place to another, the Sages impose upon him the stringencies of the place from which he left and the stringencies of the place to which he went? Abaye said: That applies when one travels from one place in Babylonia to another place in Babylonia, or from one place in Eretz Yisrael to another place in Eretz Yisrael, or alternatively, from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael. However, when traveling from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, no, this principle does not apply. Since we, the residents of Babylonia, are subordinate to them in terms of halakha, we act in accordance with their custom, but a resident of Eretz Yisrael is not required to follow the Babylonian custom.


专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 诪讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 诇讘讘诇 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚讗讬谉 讚注转讜 诇讞讝讜专 讜专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讚注转讜 诇讞讝讜专 讛讜讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 诇讘谞讬讛 讘谞讬 诇讗 转讗讻诇 诇讗 讘驻谞讬 讜诇讗 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬 讗谞讬 砖专讗讬转讬 讗转 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 砖讗讻诇 讻讚讬 讛讜讗 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇住诪讜讱 注诇讬讜 讘驻谞讬讜 讜砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 讗转讛 诇讗 专讗讬转 讗讜转讜 诇讗 转讗讻诇 讘讬谉 讘驻谞讬 讘讬谉 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬


Rav Ashi said: Even if you say that when one travels from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he is required to act stringently in accordance with the local custom, this applies only when his intent is not to return. One is required to adopt the local customs when permanently settling in a new location. However, as Rabba bar bar 岣na鈥檚 intent was to return to Eretz Yisrael, his point of origin, he continued to follow the custom of Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara relates that Rabba bar bar 岣na said to his son: My son, you live in Babylonia. Therefore, do not eat this fat, neither when you are in my presence nor when you are not in my presence. I, who saw Rabbi Yo岣nan eat this fat, can say that Rabbi Yo岣nan is worthy for one to rely upon him both in his presence and not in his presence. You did not see him. Therefore, do not eat it, neither when you are in my presence nor when you are not in my presence, since you may not rely upon my opinion alone in this matter.


讜驻诇讬讙讗 讚讬讚讬讛 讗讚讬讚讬讛 讚讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 住讞 诇讬 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 驻注诐 讗讞转 谞讻谞住转讬 讗讞专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘谉 诇拽讜谞讬讗 诇讙讬谞讛


The Gemara comments: And this statement of his disagrees with another statement of his, as Rabba bar bar 岣na said: Rabbi Yo岣nan ben Elazar told me: Once I followed Rabbi Shimon ben Rabbi Yosei ben Lakonya into the garden next to his house,


讜谞讟诇 住驻讬讞讬 讻专讜讘 讜讗讻诇 讜谞转谉 诇讬 讜讗诪专 诇讬 讘谞讬 讘驻谞讬 讗讻讜诇 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬 诇讗 转讗讻诇 讗谞讬 砖专讗讬转讬 讗转 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讜讞讬 砖讗讻诇 讻讚讬 讛讜讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讜讞讬 诇住诪讜讱 注诇讬讜 讘驻谞讬讜 讜砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 讗转讛 讘驻谞讬 讗讻讜诇 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬 诇讗 转讗讻诇


and he took cabbage after-growths that had grown during the Sabbatical Year, and ate from them and gave some to me. And he said to me: My son, in my presence, you may eat this. But when you are not in my presence, you may not eat cabbage that grew as an after-growth. I, who saw Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i eat, can say that Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i is worthy for one to rely upon him both in his presence and not in his presence. You, who did not see him eat, in my presence, rely on what I saw and eat; however, not in my presence, do not rely on my testimony and do not eat. In this case, Rabba bar bar 岣na maintained that one who saw a Sage act in a certain way may rely on what he saw, as may his students when they are in the presence of their teacher.


诪讗讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜诪专 讻诇 讛住驻讬讞讬诐 讗住讜专讬谉 讞讜抓 诪住驻讬讞讬 讻专讜讘 砖讗讬谉 讻讬讜爪讗 讘讛谉 讘讬专拽 讛砖讚讛 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讻诇 讛住驻讬讞讬谉 讗住讜专讬诐


The Gemara asks: What is that statement of Rabbi Shimon? As it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon says: All after-growths that grow on their own during the Sabbatical Year are prohibited and may not be eaten, except for the after-growths of cabbage, as there is nothing similar to them among the vegetables in the field. The Sages did not extend the decree prohibiting after-growths to cabbage, because it is unlike other vegetables. Rather, it is like fruit of a tree, which may be eaten if it grows wild during the Sabbatical Year. And the Rabbis say: All after-growths are prohibited, including the after-growths of cabbage.


讜转专讜讬讬讛讜 讗诇讬讘讗 讚专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讚转谞讬讗 讛谉 诇讗 谞讝专注 讜诇讗 谞讗住祝 讗转 转讘讜讗转谞讜 讗诪专 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讜讻讬 诪讗讞专 砖讗讬谉 讝讜专注讬谉 诪讛讬讻讗 讗讜住驻讬谉 诪讻讗谉 诇住驻讬讞讬谉 砖讛谉 讗住讜专讬谉


The Gemara comments: And both Rabbi Shimon and the Rabbis, who disagree in this case, hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. As it was taught in a baraita: The verse states, 鈥淎nd if you shall say: What shall we eat in the seventh year? Behold, we may not sow, nor gather our crops鈥 (Leviticus 25:20). Rabbi Akiva said: And since they cannot sow, from where would they gather? Why does the verse mention gathering? It is derived from here that gathering after-growths that were not planted but grew on their own is prohibited.


讘诪讗讬 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 专讘谞谉 住讘专讬 讙讝专讬谞谉 住驻讬讞讬 讻专讜讘 讗讟讜 砖讗专 住驻讬讞讬 讚注诇诪讗 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 住讘专 诇讗 讙讝专讬谞谉 住驻讬讞讬 讻专讜讘 讗讟讜 住驻讬讞讬 讚注诇诪讗:


The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle then, do they disagree? The Gemara answers: The Rabbis, who prohibit all after-growths, hold: We issue a decree prohibiting cabbage after-growths due to other after-growths in general. And Rabbi Shimon holds: We do not issue a decree prohibiting cabbage after-growths due to other after-growths in general.


讛讛讜诇讱 诪诪拽讜诐 讜讻讜壮: 讘砖诇诪讗 讛讛讜诇讱 诪诪拽讜诐 砖注讜砖讬谉 诇诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 注诇讬讜 讞讜诪专讬 诪拽讜诐 砖讛诇讱 诇砖诐 讜讗诇 讬砖谞讛 讗讚诐 诪驻谞讬 讛诪讞诇讜拽转 讜诇讗 诇讬注讘讬讚


We learned in the mishna with regard to refraining from performance of labor on Passover eve: With regard to one who travels from a place where people perform labor on Passover eve to a place where people do not, or from a place where people do not perform labor on Passover eve to a place where people do, the Sages impose upon him the stringencies of the place from which he left and the stringencies of the place to which he went. The Gemara asks: Granted, in the case of one who travels from a place where people perform labor to a place where they do not perform labor, the Sages impose upon him the stringencies of the place to which he went, and a person should not deviate from the standard practice in that place due to potential dispute, and he should not perform labor.


讗诇讗 诪诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉 诇诪拽讜诐 砖注讜砖讬谉 讗诇 讬砖谞讛 讗讚诐 诪驻谞讬 讛诪讞诇讜拽转 讜谞注讘讬讚 讛讗 讗诪专转 谞讜转谞讬谉 注诇讬讜 讞讜诪专讬 诪拽讜诐 砖讛诇讱 诇砖诐 讜讞讜诪专讬 诪拽讜诐 砖讬爪讗 诪砖诐


However, if one traveled from a place where people do not perform labor to a place where they do perform labor, is the ruling there too, that a person should not deviate from the standard practice in that place due to conflict, and perform labor? That cannot be. Didn鈥檛 you say: The Sages impose upon him the stringencies of the place to which he went and the stringencies of the place from which he left? He should not perform any labor.


讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讗专讬砖讗 专讘讗 讗诪专 诇注讜诇诐 讗住讬驻讗 讜讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讗讬谉 讘讝讜 诪驻谞讬 砖讬谞讜讬 讛诪讞诇讜拽转 诪讗讬 拽讗 讗诪专转 讛专讜讗讛 讗讜诪专 诪诇讗讻讛 讗住讜专讛 诪讬诪专 讗诪专讬 讻诪讛 讘讟诇谞讬 讛讜讬 讘砖讜拽讗


Abaye said: The principle that one should not deviate due to potential dispute is referring to the first clause, that one who arrives at a place where people do not perform labor adopts the local stringency. Rava said: Actually, it is possible to say this halakha is also referring to the latter clause of the mishna, and this is what it is saying: Refraining from labor does not constitute a deviation that causes dispute. What are you saying; one who sees him will say that he is not working because he believes that performing labor is prohibited, contrary to local practice? That is unlikely, as when people see him inactive that will not be their assumption. Instead, they will say: How many idle people there are in the market every day who do not work. In this case, people will assume that this individual was unable to find work that day.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 住驻专讗 诇专讘讬 讗讘讗 讻讙讜谉 讗谞谉 讚讬讚注讬谞谉 讘拽讘讬注讗 讚讬专讞讗


After discussing stringencies resulting from customs, the Gemara elaborates on the second day of a Festival observed in the Diaspora. Rav Safra said to Rabbi Abba: Communities in a situation like us, who, based on calculations, already know the determination of the month and are no longer concerned lest the Festival be observed on the wrong day, clearly, on the second day of a Festival,


Scroll To Top