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

Today's Daf Yomi

June 29, 2020 | 讝壮 讘转诪讜讝 转砖状驻

Masechet Shabbat is sponsored in memory of Elliot Freilich, Eliyahu Daniel ben Bar Tzion David Halevi z"l by a group of women from Kehilath Jeshurun, Manhattan.

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Shabbat 115

Shoshana and Moshe Halberstadt are sponsoring the daf learning in memory of Shoshana’s father, AJ Kurtz, Avraham Yaakov ben Eliyakum v’Chana z’l on his 3rd yahrzeit.

If there is a fire, what types of sacred books would you be able to remove from your house in a case of a fire (|in a place without an eiruv)? Can one move sacred books that are translated? Do those books need to be buried? Rav Huna and Rav Chisda disagree regarding books that were translated. How do each of the opinions fit in with the mishna? The gemara brought sources to question Rav Huna’s opinion. If there a difference between books that are written in ink and ones written with substances that don’t last? What if the Torah had large portions erased an only 85 letters in the scroll – could one carry it out of the fire? On what is it dependent?

诪讜转专 讘拽谞讬讘转 讬专拽 (讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讬讜诐 讻讬驻讜专讬诐 砖讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘讞讜诇) 诪驻爪注讬谉 讘讗讙讜讝讬诐 讜诪驻专讻住讬谉 讘专讬诪讜谞讬诐 诪谉 讛诪谞讞讛 讜诇诪注诇讛 诪驻谞讬 注讙诪转 谞驻砖 讚讘讬 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪拽谞讘讬 讻专讘讗 讚讘讬 专讘讛 讙专讚讬 拽讗专讬 讻讬讜谉 讚讞讝讗 讚讛讜讜 拽讗 诪讞专驻讬 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗转讗 讗讬讙专转讗 诪诪注专讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讚讗住讬专:

trimming vegetables is permitted. And Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: If Yom Kippur occurs on a weekday, one may crack nuts and remove pomegranate seeds from the late afternoon and onward, because doing so involves no actual labor and due to anxiety, i.e., if a person does not know that there is food prepared for when the fast ends, he suffers more during the final hours of the day (Rabbi Zera岣a HaLevi). The Gemara relates: The members of Rav Yehuda鈥檚 house would trim cabbage. The members of Rabba鈥檚 house would scrub gourds. Once Rabba saw that they were doing this early, before the late afternoon, he said to them: A letter came from the West, i.e., from Eretz Yisrael, in the name of Rabbi Yo岣nan, saying that doing so is prohibited.

讛讚专谉 注诇讱 讜讗诇讜 拽砖专讬诐

 

诪转谞讬壮 讻诇 讻转讘讬 讛拽讚砖 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讘讬谉 砖拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讜讘讬谉 砖讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讻转讜讘讬诐 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 讟注讜谞讬诐 讙谞讬讝讛 讜诪驻谞讬 诪讛 讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛诐 诪驻谞讬 讘讬讟讜诇 讘讬转 讛诪讚专砖:

MISHNA: With regard to all sacred writings, one may rescue them from the fire on Shabbat, whether they are read in public, e.g., Torah or Prophets scrolls, or whether they are not read in public, e.g., Writings scrolls. This ruling applies even though they were written in any foreign language. According to the Rabbis, those scrolls are not read in public, but they are still sacred and require burial. And why does one not read the Writings on Shabbat? Due to suspension of Torah study in the study hall. People came to the study hall at specific times on Shabbat to hear words of halakha, and other texts were not allowed at those times.

讙诪壮 讗讬转诪专 讛讬讜 讻转讜讘讬诐 转专讙讜诐 讗讜 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讜专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讗诇讬讘讗 讚诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚诪爪讬诇讬谉 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讗诇讬讘讗 讚诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诇讗 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讚讛讗 诇讗 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 诪爪讬诇讬谉 诪砖讜诐 讘讝讬讜谉 讻转讘讬 讛拽讚砖 转谞谉 讻诇 讻转讘讬 讛拽讚砖 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讘讬谉 砖拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讘讬谉 砖讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讻转讜讘讬谉 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 砖拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 谞讘讬讗讬诐 讜砖讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讻转讜讘讬诐 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讻转讜讘讬谉 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 讚诇讗 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 讜拽转谞讬 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讜转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗

GEMARA: It was stated that amora鈥檌m debated the status of sacred writings written in Aramaic translation or in any other language. Rav Huna said: One may not rescue them from the fire on Shabbat. And Rav 岣sda said: One may rescue them from the fire on Shabbat. The Gemara adds: According to the one who said that sacred writings written in other languages may be read, everybody agrees that one may rescue them. Where they argue is according to the one who said that they may not be read. Rav Huna said: One may not rescue them, as they may not be read. Whereas Rav 岣sda said: One may rescue them due to disgrace to sacred writings that will result. We learned in the mishna: With regard to all sacred writings, one may rescue them from the fire on Shabbat whether they are read in public or whether they are not read in public, even if they are written in any foreign language. What, is it not that the phrase: 鈥淭hat they are read鈥 is referring to the books of the Prophets, and the phrase: 鈥淭hat they are not read鈥 is referring to the Writings? Even though these are books written in any foreign language, which may not be read, it is taught that one may save them. This then is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna.

讗诪专 诇讱 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讜转住讘专讗 讗讬诪讗 住讬驻讗 讟注讜谞讬谉 讙谞讬讝讛 讛砖转讗 讗爪讜诇讬 诪爪讬诇讬谞谉 讙谞讬讝讛 诪讬讘注讬 讗诇讗 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪转专抓 诇讟注诪讬讛 讜专讘 讞住讚讗 诪转专抓 诇讟注诪讬讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪转专抓 诇讟注诪讬讛 讘讬谉 砖拽讜专讬谉 讘讛诐 谞讘讬讗讬诐 讜讘讬谉 砖讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛诐 讻转讜讘讬诐 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 砖讻转讜讘讬谉 讘诇砖讜谉 讛拽讚砖 讗讘诇 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讛讻讬 讙谞讬讝讛 讘注讜 专讘 讞住讚讗 诪转专抓 诇讟注诪讬讛 讘讬谉 砖拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 谞讘讬讗讬诐 讜讘讬谉 砖讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讻转讜讘讬诐 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讻转讜讘讬谉 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 谞诪讬 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讜讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讜诪拽拽 砖诇讛谉 讟注讜谞讬谉 讙谞讬讝讛

Rav Huna could have said to you: And do you understand the mishna that way? Say the latter clause of the mishna, which states: They require burial. This is unnecessary, as now, that it was mentioned that we rescue them from the fire, is it necessary to say that they require burial? Rather, the mishna must be emended. Rav Huna reconciles the mishna in accordance with his reasoning, and Rav 岣sda reconciles the mishna in accordance with his reasoning. Rav Huna reconciles this in accordance with his reasoning: Whether they are read is referring to the Prophets, and whether they are not read is referring to the Writings. In what case is this statement said? It is in a case where they are written in the holy tongue, but if they are not written in Hebrew but in any other language, they are not rescued from the fire on Shabbat, and even so, they require burial. Rav 岣sda reconciles the mishna in accordance with his reasoning: Whether they are read is referring to the Prophets, and whether they are not read is referring to the Writings, even if they are written in any language other than Hebrew, they are also rescued. And this is what the mishna is saying: And even the decayed sections of parchment require burial.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讛讬讜 讻转讜讘讬诐 转专讙讜诐 讜讻诇 诇砖讜谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 诇讱 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讗讬 转谞讗 住讘专 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 转讗 砖诪注 讛讬讜 讻转讜讘讬谉 讙讬驻讟讬转 诪讚讬转 注讬讘专讬转 注讬诇诪讬转 讬讜讜谞讬转 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖诇讗 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 诇讱 专讘 讛讜谞讗 转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讛讬讜 讻转讜讘讬谉 转专讙讜诐 讜讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛

The Gemara raises an objection from that which was taught in a baraita: If they were written in Aramaic translation or in any language other than Hebrew, they are rescued from the fire on Shabbat. And this is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna, who states that these are not rescued. Rav Huna could have said to you: This tanna holds that sacred writings not written in Hebrew may be read, whereas Rav Huna stated his ruling in accordance with the opinion of the tanna who holds that they may not be read, and therefore may not be rescued. Come and hear another proof from that which was taught in a different baraita: Sacred writings that were written in Coptic, Egyptian; Median; Ivrit, i.e., ancient Hebrew script; Eilamitic; or Greek are rescued from the fire on Shabbat, even though they may not be read. This is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna, who holds that they are not rescued. Rav Huna could have said to you: This is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it was taught in a baraita: If they were written in Aramaic translation or in any language other than Hebrew, one may rescue them from the fire on Shabbat. Rabbi Yosei says: One may not rescue them from the fire.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 诪注砖讛 讘讗讘讗 讞诇驻转讗 砖讛诇讱 讗爪诇 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讘专讬讘讬 诇讟讘专讬讗 讜诪爪讗讜 砖讛讬讛 讬讜砖讘 注诇 砖诇讞谞讜 砖诇 (讬讜讞谞谉 讛谞讝讜祝) 讜讘讬讚讜 住驻专 讗讬讜讘 转专讙讜诐 讜讛讜讗 拽讜专讗 讘讜 讗诪专 诇讜 讝讻讜专 讗谞讬 讘专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讘讬 讗讘讬讱 砖讛讬讛 注讜诪讚 注诇 讙讘讬 诪注诇讛 讘讛专 讛讘讬转 讜讛讘讬讗讜 诇驻谞讬讜 住驻专 讗讬讜讘 转专讙讜诐 讜讗诪专 诇讘谞讗讬 砖拽注讛讜 转讞转 讛谞讚讘讱 讗祝 讛讜讗 爪讜讛 注诇讬讜 讜讙谞讝讜 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 注专讬讘讛 砖诇 讟讬讟 讻驻讜 注诇讬讜 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖转讬 转砖讜讘讜转 讘讚讘专 讞讚讗 讜讻讬 讟讬讟 讘讛专 讛讘讬转 诪谞讬谉 讜注讜讚 讜讻讬 诪讜转专 诇讗讘讚谉 讘讬讚 讗诇讗 诪谞讬讞谉 讘诪拽讜诐 讛转讜专驻讛 讜讛谉 诪专拽讬讘讬谉 诪讗诇讬讛谉 诪讗谉 转谞讗讬

Rabbi Yosei said: There was an incident involving my father, 岣lafta, who went to the esteemed Rabban Gamliel of Yavne in Tiberias, where he found him sitting at the table of Yo岣nan HaNazuf and in his hand there was a translation of the book of Job, and he was reading from it. Yo岣nan said to Rabban Gamliel of Yavne: I remember Rabban Gamliel, your father鈥檚 father, who was standing on top of a step on the Temple Mount. And they brought before him a translation of the book of Job, and he said to the builder: Bury this book under the course of bricks. When he heard of that incident, Rabban Gamliel of Yavne ordered that it be buried and he buried it. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says that on the Temple Mount they overturned a large bowl of mortar on it. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: There are two responses to this that prove that it did not happen: One, from where would they get mortar on the Temple Mount? Construction on the Temple Mount was performed with other materials, not with mortar. And furthermore, is it permitted to actively destroy even sacred writings that are not read, with one鈥檚 hands? Rather, at the very least they leave them in a neglected place, where they are likely to decompose quickly, and they decay on their own. The Gemara seeks to clarify: Who are the tanna鈥檌m who dispute this halakha according to Rav Huna?

讗讬诇讬诪讗 转谞讗 拽诪讗 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜讚讬诇诪讗 讘讛讗 拽诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 讜诪专 住讘专 诇讗 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 讗诇讗 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜转谞讗 讚讙讬驻讟讬转

If we say it is the first tanna who disagrees with Rabbi Yosei, that is not necessarily so, and perhaps they are disagreeing about this: This Master, the first tanna, holds that books written in other languages may be read; and this Master, Rabbi Yosei, holds that they may not be read, and their dispute is unrelated to the dispute between Rav Huna and Rav 岣sda. Rather, it is the dispute between Rabbi Yosei and the first tanna, who spoke about books written in Coptic. According to that tanna, even books that may not be read are rescued, whereas Rabbi Yosei holds that they are not rescued.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讘专讻讜转 讜讛拽诪讬注讬谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讬砖 讘讛谉 讗讜转讬讜转 砖诇 砖诐 讜诪注谞讬讬谞讜转 讛专讘讛 砖讘转讜专讛 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讗诇讗 谞砖专驻讬诐 讘诪拽讜诪谉 [讛谉 讜讗讝讻专讜转讬讛谉] 诪讻讗谉 讗诪专讜 讻讜转讘讬 讘专讻讜转 讻砖讜专驻讬 转讜专讛 诪注砖讛 讘讗讞讚 砖讛讬讛 讻讜转讘 讘爪讬讚谉 讘讗讜 讜讛讜讚讬注讜 讗转 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讜讛诇讱 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 诇讘讜讚拽讜 讻砖讛讬讛 注讜诇讛 讘住讜诇诐 讛专讙讬砖 讘讜 谞讟诇 讟讜诪讜住 砖诇 讘专讻讜转 讜砖拽注谉 讘住驻诇 砖诇 诪讬诐 讜讘诇砖讜谉 讛讝讛 讗诪专 诇讜 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讙讚讜诇 注讜谞砖 讛讗讞专讜谉 诪谉 讛专讗砖讜谉

The Sages taught in a baraita: The blessings that are written and the amulets, even though there are the letters of the Name of God in them and matters that appear in the Torah are mentioned in them, they are not rescued from the fire; rather, they burn in their place, they and the names of God contained therein. From here the Sages said: Writers of blessings are like burners of Torah scrolls, as it is prohibited to rescue these texts from the fire on Shabbat even though it is likely that they will be destroyed. There was an incident involving one who was writing pages with blessings in Sidon. They came and informed Rabbi Yishmael of his actions, and Rabbi Yishmael went to examine him to determine if the report was true. When Rabbi Yishmael was ascending the ladder to confront him, the scribe sensed his presence, took a bundle [tomos] of blessings, and submerged it in a basin of water to conceal it from Rabbi Yishmael. And in these words Rabbi Yishmael said to him: The punishment for the latter action is greater than the punishment for the former. Although it is prohibited to write blessings, destroying them is a greater violation.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讬砖 讙诇讜转讗 诪专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讬讜 讻转讜讘讬谉 讘住诐 讜讘住讬拽专讗 讘拽讜诪讜住 讜讘拽谞拽谞转讜诐 讘诇砖讜谉 讛拽讚砖 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讗讜 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪爪讬诇讬谉 转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚讻转讬讘讬 转专讙讜诐 讜讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讚讻转讬讘讬 讘诇砖讜谉 讛拽讚砖 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜 讚讬诇诪讗 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚讻转讬讘讬 讘讚讬讜 讚诪讬拽讬讬诐 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讗 诪讬拽讬讬诐 诇讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讜讛讗 专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 转谞讗 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬 转谞讬讗 转谞讬讗 诪讗讬 转谞讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讻讚转谞讬讗 讗讬谉 讘讬谉 住驻专讬诐 诇诪讙讬诇讛 讗诇讗 砖讛住驻专讬诐 谞讻转讘讬诐 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 讜诪讙讬诇讛 注讚 砖转讛讗 讻转讜讘讛 讗砖讜专讬转 注诇 讛住驻专 讜讘讚讬讜

The Exilarch raised a dilemma before Rabba bar Rav Huna: If the sacred scrolls were written in yellow-tinged arsenic, or red paint, in gum, or in iron sulfate, types of ink which may not be used to write Torah scrolls; however, the scrolls were written properly in the holy tongue, does one rescue them from the fire on Shabbat or does one not rescue them? The Gemara adds: This dilemma is raised according to the one who said that one rescues sacred writings written in other languages; and this dilemma is raised according to the one who said that one does not rescue them. The Gemara elaborates. This dilemma is raised according to the one who said that one does not rescue them: Perhaps that applies specifically in a case where they are written in Aramaic translation and in any foreign language; however, here, where they are written in the holy tongue, one rescues them. Or perhaps even according to the one who said that one rescues them, that applies specifically in a case where they are written in ink that endures; however, here, since the script does not endure, they are not rescued. Rabba bar Rav Huna said to him: One does not rescue them. The Exilarch said to him: Didn鈥檛 Rav Hamnuna teach in a baraita that one saves them. Rabba bar Rav Huna said to him: If it was taught in a baraita, it was taught, and I retract my statement. The Gemara asks: What is the baraita that was taught on this matter? Rav Ashi said, as it was taught in a baraita: The only difference between the books of the Bible and the Megilla of Esther is that the books are written in any language and are valid, and the Megilla is only valid if it is written in Assyrian script, the familiar square Hebrew script, on a parchment scroll, and in ink. Apparently, other sacred books need not be written in ink.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专 讞诇讜讘 诪专讘 谞讞诪谉 住驻专 转讜专讛 砖讗讬谉 讘讜 诇诇拽讟 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讜讞诪砖 讗讜转讬讜转 讻讙讜谉 驻专砖转 讜讬讛讬 讘谞住讜注 讛讗专讜谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讗讜 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讜转讬讘注讬 诇讱 驻专砖转 讜讬讛讬 讘谞住讜注 讛讗专讜谉 讙讜驻讛 讛讬讻讗 讚讞住专 驻专砖转 讜讬讛讬 讘谞住讜注 诇讗 拽诪讬讘注讬讗 诇讬 讚讻讬讜谉 讚讗讬转 讘讬讛 讛讝讻专讜转 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚诇讬转 讘讬讛 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讜讞诪砖 讗讜转讬讜转 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讻讬 拽讗 诪讬讘注讬讗 诇讬 住驻专 转讜专讛 砖讗讬谉 讘讜 诇诇拽讟 诪讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉

Rav Huna bar 岣luv raised a dilemma before Rav Na岣an: With regard to a Torah scroll in which there is not enough to compile from it eighty-five complete letters written properly and in order, which is the minimum measure determined by the Sages for a Torah to maintain the sanctity of a Torah scroll, as in the portion of: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled鈥 (Numbers 10:35鈥36), does one rescue it from the fire on Shabbat or does one not rescue it? Rav Na岣an said to him: And raise a dilemma with regard to the portion of: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled,鈥 itself, i.e., does one rescue it on Shabbat if it is missing a single letter? Rav Huna bar 岣luv answered: In a case where the portion of: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled,鈥 is incomplete, it is not a dilemma for me, as since it contains names of God, even though there are not eighty-five letters in it, it is rescued. However, the case where it is a dilemma for me is with regard to a Torah scroll in which there is not enough to compile from it eighty-five complete letters; what is the ruling? Is it rescued on Shabbat or not? Rav Na岣an said to him: It is not rescued.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 转专讙讜诐 砖讻转讘讜 诪拽专讗 讜诪拽专讗 砖讻转讘讜 转专讙讜诐 讜讻转讘 注讘专讬转 诪爪讬诇讬谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讜讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讜诪专 转专讙讜诐 砖讘注讝专讗 讜砖讘讚谞讬讗诇 讜砖讘转讜专讛 转专讙讜诐 砖讘转讜专讛 诪讗讬 谞讬讛讜 讬讙专 砖讛讚讜转讗 讜讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚诇讬转 讘讛 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讜讞诪砖 讗讜转讬讜转 讻讬 转谞讬讗 讛讛讬讗 诇讛砖诇讬诐

Rav Huna bar 岣luv raised an objection to his opinion from that which we learned: A verse that is originally written in Aramaic translation that was written in the language of the Bible, and a verse that is originally written in the language of the Bible that was written in Aramaic translation, and a Torah that was written in ancient Hebrew script, one rescues them from the fire on Shabbat. And, needless to say, one saves the verses written in Aramaic translation that are in the book of Ezra, and that are in the book of Daniel, and that are in the Torah. What are the verses originally written in Aramaic translation in the Torah? It is the verse: 鈥淎nd Laban called it Yegar Sahaduta, and Jacob called it Gal Ed鈥 (Genesis 31:47), and apparently, it is rescued, even though there are not eighty-five letters in it. Rav Na岣an answered him: That is no proof, as when that baraita was taught, it was in a case where the Aramaic verse is counted to complete the total of eighty-five letters, but it is not independently significant.

讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 讛谞讬 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讜讞诪砖 讗讜转讬讜转 诪讻讜谞住讜转 讗讜 诪驻讜讝专讜转 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 诪讻讜谞住讜转 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 诪驻讜讝专讜转 诪讬转讬讘讬 住驻专 转讜专讛 砖讘诇讛 讗诐 讬砖 讘讜 诇诇拽讟 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讜讞诪砖 讗讜转讬讜转 讻讙讜谉 驻专砖转 讜讬讛讬 讘谞住讜注 讛讗专讜谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 转专讙诪讛 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诇讬讘讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘转讬讘讜转

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to these eighty-five letters that allow one to rescue a Torah scroll, is that specifically when they are juxtaposed, or even when they are scattered? Rav Huna said: Only when they are juxtaposed. Rav 岣sda said: Even when they are scattered. The Gemara raises an objection from that which we learned: With regard to a Torah scroll that is worn, if there is enough to compile from it eighty-five complete letters as in the portion of: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled,鈥 one rescues it from the fire, and if not one does not rescue it. The term: To compile, indicates that the letters are not juxtaposed, and this is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna. Rav 岣sda interpreted it according to the opinion of Rav Huna: Indeed, the baraita is referring to a case where the letters are scattered, but they are juxtaposed in the form of words. In that case, even Rav Huna agrees that it is a sacred book. Rav Huna and Rav 岣sda only disagree in a case where isolated letters are scattered.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讜讬讛讬 讘谞住讜注 讛讗专讜谉 讜讬讗诪专 诪砖讛 驻专砖讛 讝讜 注砖讛 诇讛 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 住讬诪谞讬讜转 诪诇诪注诇讛 讜诇诪讟讛 诇讜诪专

Apropos the portion: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled,鈥 the Gemara cites that which the Sages taught in a baraita. It is stated: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled and Moses proclaimed: Rise up, God, and Your enemies will scatter and those who hate You will flee from before You.鈥 And The Holy One, Blessed be He, made signs in the Torah for this portion, above and below, i.e., before and after it, in order to say

Masechet Shabbat is sponsored in memory of Elliot Freilich, Eliyahu Daniel ben Bar Tzion David Halevi z"l by a group of women from Kehilath Jeshurun, Manhattan.

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

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

Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time – Shabbat 110-116

We will review concepts in Daf 110-116 including how to prevent snake bites, which knots are prohibited and which are...
talking talmud_square

Shabbat 115: Holy Letters

A new chapter: If holy writings are threatened by a fire, save them on Shabbat, no matter what language they're...

Shabbat 115

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Shabbat 115

诪讜转专 讘拽谞讬讘转 讬专拽 (讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讬讜诐 讻讬驻讜专讬诐 砖讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘讞讜诇) 诪驻爪注讬谉 讘讗讙讜讝讬诐 讜诪驻专讻住讬谉 讘专讬诪讜谞讬诐 诪谉 讛诪谞讞讛 讜诇诪注诇讛 诪驻谞讬 注讙诪转 谞驻砖 讚讘讬 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪拽谞讘讬 讻专讘讗 讚讘讬 专讘讛 讙专讚讬 拽讗专讬 讻讬讜谉 讚讞讝讗 讚讛讜讜 拽讗 诪讞专驻讬 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗转讗 讗讬讙专转讗 诪诪注专讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讚讗住讬专:

trimming vegetables is permitted. And Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: If Yom Kippur occurs on a weekday, one may crack nuts and remove pomegranate seeds from the late afternoon and onward, because doing so involves no actual labor and due to anxiety, i.e., if a person does not know that there is food prepared for when the fast ends, he suffers more during the final hours of the day (Rabbi Zera岣a HaLevi). The Gemara relates: The members of Rav Yehuda鈥檚 house would trim cabbage. The members of Rabba鈥檚 house would scrub gourds. Once Rabba saw that they were doing this early, before the late afternoon, he said to them: A letter came from the West, i.e., from Eretz Yisrael, in the name of Rabbi Yo岣nan, saying that doing so is prohibited.

讛讚专谉 注诇讱 讜讗诇讜 拽砖专讬诐

 

诪转谞讬壮 讻诇 讻转讘讬 讛拽讚砖 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讘讬谉 砖拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讜讘讬谉 砖讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讻转讜讘讬诐 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 讟注讜谞讬诐 讙谞讬讝讛 讜诪驻谞讬 诪讛 讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛诐 诪驻谞讬 讘讬讟讜诇 讘讬转 讛诪讚专砖:

MISHNA: With regard to all sacred writings, one may rescue them from the fire on Shabbat, whether they are read in public, e.g., Torah or Prophets scrolls, or whether they are not read in public, e.g., Writings scrolls. This ruling applies even though they were written in any foreign language. According to the Rabbis, those scrolls are not read in public, but they are still sacred and require burial. And why does one not read the Writings on Shabbat? Due to suspension of Torah study in the study hall. People came to the study hall at specific times on Shabbat to hear words of halakha, and other texts were not allowed at those times.

讙诪壮 讗讬转诪专 讛讬讜 讻转讜讘讬诐 转专讙讜诐 讗讜 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讜专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讗诇讬讘讗 讚诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚诪爪讬诇讬谉 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讗诇讬讘讗 讚诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诇讗 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讚讛讗 诇讗 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 诪爪讬诇讬谉 诪砖讜诐 讘讝讬讜谉 讻转讘讬 讛拽讚砖 转谞谉 讻诇 讻转讘讬 讛拽讚砖 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讘讬谉 砖拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讘讬谉 砖讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讻转讜讘讬谉 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 砖拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 谞讘讬讗讬诐 讜砖讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讻转讜讘讬诐 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讻转讜讘讬谉 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 讚诇讗 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 讜拽转谞讬 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讜转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗

GEMARA: It was stated that amora鈥檌m debated the status of sacred writings written in Aramaic translation or in any other language. Rav Huna said: One may not rescue them from the fire on Shabbat. And Rav 岣sda said: One may rescue them from the fire on Shabbat. The Gemara adds: According to the one who said that sacred writings written in other languages may be read, everybody agrees that one may rescue them. Where they argue is according to the one who said that they may not be read. Rav Huna said: One may not rescue them, as they may not be read. Whereas Rav 岣sda said: One may rescue them due to disgrace to sacred writings that will result. We learned in the mishna: With regard to all sacred writings, one may rescue them from the fire on Shabbat whether they are read in public or whether they are not read in public, even if they are written in any foreign language. What, is it not that the phrase: 鈥淭hat they are read鈥 is referring to the books of the Prophets, and the phrase: 鈥淭hat they are not read鈥 is referring to the Writings? Even though these are books written in any foreign language, which may not be read, it is taught that one may save them. This then is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna.

讗诪专 诇讱 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讜转住讘专讗 讗讬诪讗 住讬驻讗 讟注讜谞讬谉 讙谞讬讝讛 讛砖转讗 讗爪讜诇讬 诪爪讬诇讬谞谉 讙谞讬讝讛 诪讬讘注讬 讗诇讗 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪转专抓 诇讟注诪讬讛 讜专讘 讞住讚讗 诪转专抓 诇讟注诪讬讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪转专抓 诇讟注诪讬讛 讘讬谉 砖拽讜专讬谉 讘讛诐 谞讘讬讗讬诐 讜讘讬谉 砖讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛诐 讻转讜讘讬诐 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 砖讻转讜讘讬谉 讘诇砖讜谉 讛拽讚砖 讗讘诇 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讛讻讬 讙谞讬讝讛 讘注讜 专讘 讞住讚讗 诪转专抓 诇讟注诪讬讛 讘讬谉 砖拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 谞讘讬讗讬诐 讜讘讬谉 砖讗讬谉 拽讜专讬谉 讘讛谉 讻转讜讘讬诐 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讻转讜讘讬谉 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 谞诪讬 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讜讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讜诪拽拽 砖诇讛谉 讟注讜谞讬谉 讙谞讬讝讛

Rav Huna could have said to you: And do you understand the mishna that way? Say the latter clause of the mishna, which states: They require burial. This is unnecessary, as now, that it was mentioned that we rescue them from the fire, is it necessary to say that they require burial? Rather, the mishna must be emended. Rav Huna reconciles the mishna in accordance with his reasoning, and Rav 岣sda reconciles the mishna in accordance with his reasoning. Rav Huna reconciles this in accordance with his reasoning: Whether they are read is referring to the Prophets, and whether they are not read is referring to the Writings. In what case is this statement said? It is in a case where they are written in the holy tongue, but if they are not written in Hebrew but in any other language, they are not rescued from the fire on Shabbat, and even so, they require burial. Rav 岣sda reconciles the mishna in accordance with his reasoning: Whether they are read is referring to the Prophets, and whether they are not read is referring to the Writings, even if they are written in any language other than Hebrew, they are also rescued. And this is what the mishna is saying: And even the decayed sections of parchment require burial.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讛讬讜 讻转讜讘讬诐 转专讙讜诐 讜讻诇 诇砖讜谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 诇讱 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讗讬 转谞讗 住讘专 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 转讗 砖诪注 讛讬讜 讻转讜讘讬谉 讙讬驻讟讬转 诪讚讬转 注讬讘专讬转 注讬诇诪讬转 讬讜讜谞讬转 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖诇讗 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 诇讱 专讘 讛讜谞讗 转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讛讬讜 讻转讜讘讬谉 转专讙讜诐 讜讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛

The Gemara raises an objection from that which was taught in a baraita: If they were written in Aramaic translation or in any language other than Hebrew, they are rescued from the fire on Shabbat. And this is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna, who states that these are not rescued. Rav Huna could have said to you: This tanna holds that sacred writings not written in Hebrew may be read, whereas Rav Huna stated his ruling in accordance with the opinion of the tanna who holds that they may not be read, and therefore may not be rescued. Come and hear another proof from that which was taught in a different baraita: Sacred writings that were written in Coptic, Egyptian; Median; Ivrit, i.e., ancient Hebrew script; Eilamitic; or Greek are rescued from the fire on Shabbat, even though they may not be read. This is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna, who holds that they are not rescued. Rav Huna could have said to you: This is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it was taught in a baraita: If they were written in Aramaic translation or in any language other than Hebrew, one may rescue them from the fire on Shabbat. Rabbi Yosei says: One may not rescue them from the fire.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 诪注砖讛 讘讗讘讗 讞诇驻转讗 砖讛诇讱 讗爪诇 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讘专讬讘讬 诇讟讘专讬讗 讜诪爪讗讜 砖讛讬讛 讬讜砖讘 注诇 砖诇讞谞讜 砖诇 (讬讜讞谞谉 讛谞讝讜祝) 讜讘讬讚讜 住驻专 讗讬讜讘 转专讙讜诐 讜讛讜讗 拽讜专讗 讘讜 讗诪专 诇讜 讝讻讜专 讗谞讬 讘专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讘讬 讗讘讬讱 砖讛讬讛 注讜诪讚 注诇 讙讘讬 诪注诇讛 讘讛专 讛讘讬转 讜讛讘讬讗讜 诇驻谞讬讜 住驻专 讗讬讜讘 转专讙讜诐 讜讗诪专 诇讘谞讗讬 砖拽注讛讜 转讞转 讛谞讚讘讱 讗祝 讛讜讗 爪讜讛 注诇讬讜 讜讙谞讝讜 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 注专讬讘讛 砖诇 讟讬讟 讻驻讜 注诇讬讜 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖转讬 转砖讜讘讜转 讘讚讘专 讞讚讗 讜讻讬 讟讬讟 讘讛专 讛讘讬转 诪谞讬谉 讜注讜讚 讜讻讬 诪讜转专 诇讗讘讚谉 讘讬讚 讗诇讗 诪谞讬讞谉 讘诪拽讜诐 讛转讜专驻讛 讜讛谉 诪专拽讬讘讬谉 诪讗诇讬讛谉 诪讗谉 转谞讗讬

Rabbi Yosei said: There was an incident involving my father, 岣lafta, who went to the esteemed Rabban Gamliel of Yavne in Tiberias, where he found him sitting at the table of Yo岣nan HaNazuf and in his hand there was a translation of the book of Job, and he was reading from it. Yo岣nan said to Rabban Gamliel of Yavne: I remember Rabban Gamliel, your father鈥檚 father, who was standing on top of a step on the Temple Mount. And they brought before him a translation of the book of Job, and he said to the builder: Bury this book under the course of bricks. When he heard of that incident, Rabban Gamliel of Yavne ordered that it be buried and he buried it. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says that on the Temple Mount they overturned a large bowl of mortar on it. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: There are two responses to this that prove that it did not happen: One, from where would they get mortar on the Temple Mount? Construction on the Temple Mount was performed with other materials, not with mortar. And furthermore, is it permitted to actively destroy even sacred writings that are not read, with one鈥檚 hands? Rather, at the very least they leave them in a neglected place, where they are likely to decompose quickly, and they decay on their own. The Gemara seeks to clarify: Who are the tanna鈥檌m who dispute this halakha according to Rav Huna?

讗讬诇讬诪讗 转谞讗 拽诪讗 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜讚讬诇诪讗 讘讛讗 拽诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 讜诪专 住讘专 诇讗 谞讬转谞讜 诇拽专讜转 讘讛谉 讗诇讗 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜转谞讗 讚讙讬驻讟讬转

If we say it is the first tanna who disagrees with Rabbi Yosei, that is not necessarily so, and perhaps they are disagreeing about this: This Master, the first tanna, holds that books written in other languages may be read; and this Master, Rabbi Yosei, holds that they may not be read, and their dispute is unrelated to the dispute between Rav Huna and Rav 岣sda. Rather, it is the dispute between Rabbi Yosei and the first tanna, who spoke about books written in Coptic. According to that tanna, even books that may not be read are rescued, whereas Rabbi Yosei holds that they are not rescued.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讘专讻讜转 讜讛拽诪讬注讬谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讬砖 讘讛谉 讗讜转讬讜转 砖诇 砖诐 讜诪注谞讬讬谞讜转 讛专讘讛 砖讘转讜专讛 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讗诇讗 谞砖专驻讬诐 讘诪拽讜诪谉 [讛谉 讜讗讝讻专讜转讬讛谉] 诪讻讗谉 讗诪专讜 讻讜转讘讬 讘专讻讜转 讻砖讜专驻讬 转讜专讛 诪注砖讛 讘讗讞讚 砖讛讬讛 讻讜转讘 讘爪讬讚谉 讘讗讜 讜讛讜讚讬注讜 讗转 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讜讛诇讱 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 诇讘讜讚拽讜 讻砖讛讬讛 注讜诇讛 讘住讜诇诐 讛专讙讬砖 讘讜 谞讟诇 讟讜诪讜住 砖诇 讘专讻讜转 讜砖拽注谉 讘住驻诇 砖诇 诪讬诐 讜讘诇砖讜谉 讛讝讛 讗诪专 诇讜 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讙讚讜诇 注讜谞砖 讛讗讞专讜谉 诪谉 讛专讗砖讜谉

The Sages taught in a baraita: The blessings that are written and the amulets, even though there are the letters of the Name of God in them and matters that appear in the Torah are mentioned in them, they are not rescued from the fire; rather, they burn in their place, they and the names of God contained therein. From here the Sages said: Writers of blessings are like burners of Torah scrolls, as it is prohibited to rescue these texts from the fire on Shabbat even though it is likely that they will be destroyed. There was an incident involving one who was writing pages with blessings in Sidon. They came and informed Rabbi Yishmael of his actions, and Rabbi Yishmael went to examine him to determine if the report was true. When Rabbi Yishmael was ascending the ladder to confront him, the scribe sensed his presence, took a bundle [tomos] of blessings, and submerged it in a basin of water to conceal it from Rabbi Yishmael. And in these words Rabbi Yishmael said to him: The punishment for the latter action is greater than the punishment for the former. Although it is prohibited to write blessings, destroying them is a greater violation.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讬砖 讙诇讜转讗 诪专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讬讜 讻转讜讘讬谉 讘住诐 讜讘住讬拽专讗 讘拽讜诪讜住 讜讘拽谞拽谞转讜诐 讘诇砖讜谉 讛拽讚砖 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讗讜 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪爪讬诇讬谉 转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚讻转讬讘讬 转专讙讜诐 讜讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讚讻转讬讘讬 讘诇砖讜谉 讛拽讚砖 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜 讚讬诇诪讗 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚讻转讬讘讬 讘讚讬讜 讚诪讬拽讬讬诐 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讗 诪讬拽讬讬诐 诇讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讜讛讗 专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 转谞讗 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬 转谞讬讗 转谞讬讗 诪讗讬 转谞讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讻讚转谞讬讗 讗讬谉 讘讬谉 住驻专讬诐 诇诪讙讬诇讛 讗诇讗 砖讛住驻专讬诐 谞讻转讘讬诐 讘讻诇 诇砖讜谉 讜诪讙讬诇讛 注讚 砖转讛讗 讻转讜讘讛 讗砖讜专讬转 注诇 讛住驻专 讜讘讚讬讜

The Exilarch raised a dilemma before Rabba bar Rav Huna: If the sacred scrolls were written in yellow-tinged arsenic, or red paint, in gum, or in iron sulfate, types of ink which may not be used to write Torah scrolls; however, the scrolls were written properly in the holy tongue, does one rescue them from the fire on Shabbat or does one not rescue them? The Gemara adds: This dilemma is raised according to the one who said that one rescues sacred writings written in other languages; and this dilemma is raised according to the one who said that one does not rescue them. The Gemara elaborates. This dilemma is raised according to the one who said that one does not rescue them: Perhaps that applies specifically in a case where they are written in Aramaic translation and in any foreign language; however, here, where they are written in the holy tongue, one rescues them. Or perhaps even according to the one who said that one rescues them, that applies specifically in a case where they are written in ink that endures; however, here, since the script does not endure, they are not rescued. Rabba bar Rav Huna said to him: One does not rescue them. The Exilarch said to him: Didn鈥檛 Rav Hamnuna teach in a baraita that one saves them. Rabba bar Rav Huna said to him: If it was taught in a baraita, it was taught, and I retract my statement. The Gemara asks: What is the baraita that was taught on this matter? Rav Ashi said, as it was taught in a baraita: The only difference between the books of the Bible and the Megilla of Esther is that the books are written in any language and are valid, and the Megilla is only valid if it is written in Assyrian script, the familiar square Hebrew script, on a parchment scroll, and in ink. Apparently, other sacred books need not be written in ink.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专 讞诇讜讘 诪专讘 谞讞诪谉 住驻专 转讜专讛 砖讗讬谉 讘讜 诇诇拽讟 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讜讞诪砖 讗讜转讬讜转 讻讙讜谉 驻专砖转 讜讬讛讬 讘谞住讜注 讛讗专讜谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讗讜 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讜转讬讘注讬 诇讱 驻专砖转 讜讬讛讬 讘谞住讜注 讛讗专讜谉 讙讜驻讛 讛讬讻讗 讚讞住专 驻专砖转 讜讬讛讬 讘谞住讜注 诇讗 拽诪讬讘注讬讗 诇讬 讚讻讬讜谉 讚讗讬转 讘讬讛 讛讝讻专讜转 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚诇讬转 讘讬讛 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讜讞诪砖 讗讜转讬讜转 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讻讬 拽讗 诪讬讘注讬讗 诇讬 住驻专 转讜专讛 砖讗讬谉 讘讜 诇诇拽讟 诪讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉

Rav Huna bar 岣luv raised a dilemma before Rav Na岣an: With regard to a Torah scroll in which there is not enough to compile from it eighty-five complete letters written properly and in order, which is the minimum measure determined by the Sages for a Torah to maintain the sanctity of a Torah scroll, as in the portion of: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled鈥 (Numbers 10:35鈥36), does one rescue it from the fire on Shabbat or does one not rescue it? Rav Na岣an said to him: And raise a dilemma with regard to the portion of: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled,鈥 itself, i.e., does one rescue it on Shabbat if it is missing a single letter? Rav Huna bar 岣luv answered: In a case where the portion of: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled,鈥 is incomplete, it is not a dilemma for me, as since it contains names of God, even though there are not eighty-five letters in it, it is rescued. However, the case where it is a dilemma for me is with regard to a Torah scroll in which there is not enough to compile from it eighty-five complete letters; what is the ruling? Is it rescued on Shabbat or not? Rav Na岣an said to him: It is not rescued.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 转专讙讜诐 砖讻转讘讜 诪拽专讗 讜诪拽专讗 砖讻转讘讜 转专讙讜诐 讜讻转讘 注讘专讬转 诪爪讬诇讬谉 诪驻谞讬 讛讚诇讬拽讛 讜讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讜诪专 转专讙讜诐 砖讘注讝专讗 讜砖讘讚谞讬讗诇 讜砖讘转讜专讛 转专讙讜诐 砖讘转讜专讛 诪讗讬 谞讬讛讜 讬讙专 砖讛讚讜转讗 讜讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚诇讬转 讘讛 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讜讞诪砖 讗讜转讬讜转 讻讬 转谞讬讗 讛讛讬讗 诇讛砖诇讬诐

Rav Huna bar 岣luv raised an objection to his opinion from that which we learned: A verse that is originally written in Aramaic translation that was written in the language of the Bible, and a verse that is originally written in the language of the Bible that was written in Aramaic translation, and a Torah that was written in ancient Hebrew script, one rescues them from the fire on Shabbat. And, needless to say, one saves the verses written in Aramaic translation that are in the book of Ezra, and that are in the book of Daniel, and that are in the Torah. What are the verses originally written in Aramaic translation in the Torah? It is the verse: 鈥淎nd Laban called it Yegar Sahaduta, and Jacob called it Gal Ed鈥 (Genesis 31:47), and apparently, it is rescued, even though there are not eighty-five letters in it. Rav Na岣an answered him: That is no proof, as when that baraita was taught, it was in a case where the Aramaic verse is counted to complete the total of eighty-five letters, but it is not independently significant.

讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 讛谞讬 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讜讞诪砖 讗讜转讬讜转 诪讻讜谞住讜转 讗讜 诪驻讜讝专讜转 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 诪讻讜谞住讜转 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 诪驻讜讝专讜转 诪讬转讬讘讬 住驻专 转讜专讛 砖讘诇讛 讗诐 讬砖 讘讜 诇诇拽讟 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讜讞诪砖 讗讜转讬讜转 讻讙讜谉 驻专砖转 讜讬讛讬 讘谞住讜注 讛讗专讜谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谉 诪爪讬诇讬谉 转讬讜讘转讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 转专讙诪讛 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诇讬讘讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘转讬讘讜转

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to these eighty-five letters that allow one to rescue a Torah scroll, is that specifically when they are juxtaposed, or even when they are scattered? Rav Huna said: Only when they are juxtaposed. Rav 岣sda said: Even when they are scattered. The Gemara raises an objection from that which we learned: With regard to a Torah scroll that is worn, if there is enough to compile from it eighty-five complete letters as in the portion of: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled,鈥 one rescues it from the fire, and if not one does not rescue it. The term: To compile, indicates that the letters are not juxtaposed, and this is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna. Rav 岣sda interpreted it according to the opinion of Rav Huna: Indeed, the baraita is referring to a case where the letters are scattered, but they are juxtaposed in the form of words. In that case, even Rav Huna agrees that it is a sacred book. Rav Huna and Rav 岣sda only disagree in a case where isolated letters are scattered.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讜讬讛讬 讘谞住讜注 讛讗专讜谉 讜讬讗诪专 诪砖讛 驻专砖讛 讝讜 注砖讛 诇讛 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 住讬诪谞讬讜转 诪诇诪注诇讛 讜诇诪讟讛 诇讜诪专

Apropos the portion: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled,鈥 the Gemara cites that which the Sages taught in a baraita. It is stated: 鈥淎nd when the Ark traveled and Moses proclaimed: Rise up, God, and Your enemies will scatter and those who hate You will flee from before You.鈥 And The Holy One, Blessed be He, made signs in the Torah for this portion, above and below, i.e., before and after it, in order to say

Scroll To Top