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

Today's Daf Yomi

July 6, 2020 | 讬状讚 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 122

Today’s daf is sponsored in memory of Helen Glucksman, Chana Rachel bat Moshe Aharon Halevi z”l, beloved grandmother of our teacher, Lisa Septimus, from Malkie, Marcy, Rochelle, Sami and Gitta.聽

When a non-Jew performs an act that a Jew is forbidden to do on Shabbat, can a Jew benefit from what the non-Jew did? On what does it depend? Is it only for a candle or items like that as one candle can be used for many people? Does it depend on whether the non-Jew knows the Jew? Can one carry an item that is generally used for forbidden purposes for its own sake (if one needs it for a permitted purpose)? If a door breaks on Shabbat or before Shabbat, can it be carried? Can one put it back in its place? Is there a difference between a door that is serving something that is attached to the ground or a door of a utensil? Why? Does the melacha of building include building utensils or not?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讻讗讜转谉 砖诇 讘讬转 讗讘讬讱

Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said to him: They are like those from your father鈥檚 house, which are large (Tosafot).

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 拽专讜谞讜转 砖诇 讘讬转 专讘讬 诪讜转专 诇讟诇讟诇谉 讘砖讘转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讘谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘讗讚诐 讗讞讚 讗讜 讘砖谞讬 讘谞讬 讗讚诐 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讻讗讜转谉 砖诇 讘讬转 讗讘讬讱

And Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said that Rabbi 岣nina said: The sedan chairs of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi may be moved on Shabbat. Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Abba bar Kahana: Are you referring to sedan chairs that can be moved by one person or those that can be only moved by two people? He said to him: They are like those from your father鈥檚 house.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讛转讬专 诇讛诐 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 诇讘讬转 专讘讬 诇砖转讜转 讬讬谉 讘拽专讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讜讬 讘讞讜转诐 讗讞讚 讜诇讗 讬讚注谞讗 讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讚住讘专 诇讛 讻专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讗讬诪转讗 讚讘讬 谞砖讬讗讛:

And Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Rabbi 岣nina permitted the members of the household of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi to drink wine transported in a gentile鈥檚 wagons even though the wine was sealed only with one seal. He was not concerned that perhaps the gentile may have opened the barrel and poured wine libations to idolatry from it or touched it, which would prohibit drinking it. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana adds: And I do not know if that is because Rabbi 岣nina holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who permits drinking wine from a gentile that was protected by a single seal, or if it was because the gentile would not dare to open these specific casks due fear of the household of the Nasi, but in general Rabbi 岣nina prohibited drinking wine protected by a single seal.

诪转谞讬壮 讙讜讬 砖讛讚诇讬拽 讗转 讛谞专 诪砖转诪砖 诇讗讜专讜 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗诐 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 诪讬诇讗 诪讬诐 诇讛砖拽讜转 讘讛诪转讜 诪砖拽讛 讗讞专讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗诐 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 注砖讛 讙讜讬 讻讘砖 诇讬专讚 讘讜 讬讜专讚 讗讞专讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗诐 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 诪注砖讛 讘专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜讝拽谞讬诐 砖讛讬讜 讘讗讬谉 讘住驻讬谞讛 讜注砖讛 讙讜讬 讻讘砖 诇讬专讚 讘讜 讜讬专讚讜 讘讜 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜讝拽谞讬诐:

MISHNA: If a gentile kindled a lamp on Shabbat for his own purposes, a Jew also uses its light; and if the gentile kindled it for a Jew, the Sages prohibited to utilize its light. Similarly, if a gentile drew water from a well in the public domain to give his animal to drink, a Jew gives his own animal to drink after him from the same water; and if he drew the water initially for the benefit of a Jew, it is prohibited for a Jew to give his animal to drink from that water. Similarly, if a gentile made a ramp on Shabbat to disembark from a ship, a Jew disembarks after him; and if he made the ramp for a Jew, it is prohibited. There was an incident in which Rabban Gamliel and the Elders were traveling on a ship and a gentile made a ramp on Shabbat in order to disembark from the ship on it; and Rabban Gamliel and the Elders disembarked on it as well.

讙诪壮 讜爪专讬讻讗 讚讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 谞专 诪砖讜诐 讚谞专 诇讗讞讚 谞专 诇诪讗讛 讗讘诇 诪讬诐 诇讬讙讝专 讚讬诇诪讗 讗转讬 诇讗驻讜砖讬 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讜讻讘砖 诇诪讛 诇讬 诪注砖讛 讚专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜讝拽谞讬诐 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

GEMARA: The Gemara comments: And it was necessary to teach this halakha in all these cases. As, had it taught us only the halakha with regard to a lamp, I would have said that this is the halakha because the light of a lamp for one is the light of a lamp for one hundred people. There is no need to kindle multiple lamps for multiple people; the light of one candle suffices for many. Therefore, it is permitted to use the light of a lamp kindled by a gentile. However, with regard to water, there is room to issue a decree against benefitting from the gentile鈥檚 efforts, lest one come to increase the amount of water he draws for a Jew, even without stating that intention. The Gemara asks: And why do I need the mishna to mention that it is permitted to use the ramp? The Gemara answers: It taught us the case of the ramp to cite the incident involving Rabban Gamliel and the Elders to indicate that they followed this ruling in practice.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讙讜讬 砖诇讬拽讟 注砖讘讬诐 诪讗讻讬诇 讗讞专讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗诐 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 诪讬诇讗 诪讬诐 诇讛砖拽讜转 讘讛诪转讜 诪砖拽讛 讗讞专讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗诐 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 砖讗讬谉 诪讻讬专讜 讗讘诇 诪讻讬专讜 讗住讜专

The Sages taught: If a gentile collected grass on Shabbat for himself, in order to feed his animal, a Jew may feed his own animal after him, and if he collected it for the benefit of a Jew, it is prohibited. If he drew water to give his animal to drink, a Jew may give water to his own animal to drink after him, and if he drew it for the benefit of a Jew it is prohibited. In what case is this statement, that if the gentile acted for himself it is permitted for a Jew to benefit, said? When the gentile does not know him; however, if the gentile knows him, it is prohibited, as in that case, he certainly intended to benefit his Jewish acquaintance as well.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 诪注诪讬讚 讗讚诐 讘讛诪转讜 注诇 讙讘讬 注砖讘讬诐 讘砖讘转 讗讘诇 诇讗 注诇 讙讘讬 诪讜拽爪讛 讘砖讘转 讚拽讗讬诐 诇讛 讘讗驻讛 讜讗讝诇讗 讛讬讗 讜讗讻诇讛

The Gemara asks: Is that so? Didn鈥檛 Rav Huna say that Rabbi 岣nina said: One may position his animal over grass on Shabbat, even grass that is growing in the ground, and there is no concern lest he detach the grass and feed the animal; however, he may not position the animal over an item that is set aside on Shabbat, since there is concern lest one lift the item with his hand. The grass that the gentile collects for himself is certainly set aside, so why may the Jew feed it to his animal? The Gemara answers: Indeed, a Jew may not position his animal over the grass that a gentile picked; he may only position it in before the grass at a distance, and the animal goes on its own and eats.

讗诪专 诪专 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 砖讗讬谉 诪讻讬专讜 讗讘诇 诪讻讬专讜 讗住讜专 讛讗 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 诪讻讬专讜 讛讜讛 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 讛讜讛 专讘讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 讘驻谞讬讜 谞专 诇讗讞讚 谞专 诇诪讗讛

We learned above that the Master said: In what case is this statement, that if the gentile acted for himself it is permitted for a Jew to benefit, said? When the gentile does not know him; however, if the gentile knows him, it is prohibited. The Gemara asks: However, in the incident involving Rabban Gamliel and the ship, it is a case where the gentile knows him as they traveled together on the ship. Abaye said: The action was not performed in Rabban Gamliel鈥檚 presence, and since the gentile had not seen him he intended to make it only for himself. Rava said: Even if you say that the gentile made the ramp in his presence, that is irrelevant because a lamp for one is a lamp for one hundred; similarly, with regard to a ramp, once the gentile constructs it for his own use it can be used by others with no further adjustments.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讗诪专 诇讛谉 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讛讜讗讬诇 讜砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬谞讜 注砖讗讜 谞专讚 讘讜 讗讬诪讗 讛讜讗讬诇 讜注砖讗讜 谞专讚 讘讜

The Gemara raises an objection to Rava鈥檚 statement based on the Tosefta: Rabban Gamliel said to them: Since he made it not in our presence, we will disembark on it. Rabban Gamliel made use of the ramp only for this reason, contrary to Rava鈥檚 explanation. The Gemara rejects this: Say the Tosefta in an emended form: Rabban Gamliel said to them: Since he made it, we will disembark on it.

转讗 砖诪注 注讬专 砖讬砖专讗诇 讜讙讜讬诐 讚专讬谉 讘转讜讻讛 讜讛讬转讛 讘讛 诪专讞抓 讛诪专讞爪转 讘砖讘转 讗诐 专讜讘 讙讜讬诐 诪讜转专 诇专讞讜抓 讘讛 诪讬讚 讗诐 专讜讘 讬砖专讗诇 讬诪转讬谉 讘讻讚讬 砖讬讞诪讜 讞诪讬谉 讛转诐 讻讬 诪讞诪诪讬 讗讚注转讗 讚专讜讘讗 诪讞诪诪讬

Come and hear proof from another baraita with regard to the dispute between Abaye and Rava: With regard to a city where both Jews and gentiles live and there was a bathhouse in it in which there is bathing on Shabbat, if the majority of the city鈥檚 residents are gentiles, it is permitted to bathe in the bathhouse immediately after Shabbat because the bathhouse was heated on Shabbat to serve the gentiles. However, if there is a majority of Jews in the city, one waits after Shabbat for a period of time sufficient for them to heat the hot water so as not to benefit from prohibited labor performed on Shabbat. Apparently, even when an action is not performed in the presence of a Jew, there is concern that it may have been performed for the benefit of Jews. The Gemara rejects this proof: There, in the case of the baraita, when they heat the water, they heat it with the majority of the city鈥檚 inhabitants in mind, and the owner of the bathhouse sets the heating schedule to service the majority.

转讗 砖诪注 谞专 讛讚诇讜拽 讘诪住讬讘讛 讗诐 专讜讘 讙讜讬诐 诪讜转专 诇讛砖转诪砖 诇讗讜专讛 讗诐 专讜讘 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 诪讞爪讛 注诇 诪讞爪讛 讗住讜专 讛转诐 谞诪讬 讻讬 诪讚诇拽讬

Come and hear a proof from the following baraita: With regard to a lamp kindled at a banquet in which several people are participating, if the majority of those present are gentiles it is permitted for a Jew to utilize its light, and if the majority of those present are Jews it is prohibited, as in that case, the lamp was certainly lit for the Jews鈥 benefit. If those present are half Jews and half gentiles, it is prohibited. Since they are participating in the same banquet, the gentile certainly knows the Jew. Why, then, is it permitted for a Jew to utilize the light of the lamp even when the majority of those present are gentiles? The Gemara rejects this proof: There, too, when they kindle the lamp,

讗讚注转讗 讚专讜讘讗 诪讚诇拽讬

they kindle it with the majority of the those present at the banquet in mind. When the majority of those present are gentiles, it is permitted.

砖诪讜讗诇 讗讬拽诇注 诇讘讬 讗讘讬谉 转讜专谉 讗转讗 讛讛讜讗 讙讜讬 讗讚诇讬拽 砖专讙讗 讗讛讚专讬谞讛讜 砖诪讜讗诇 诇讗驻讬讛 讻讬讜谉 讚讞讝讗 讚讗讬讬转讬 砖讟专 讜拽讗 拽专讬 讗诪专 讗讚注转讗 讚谞驻砖讬讛 讛讜讗 讚讗讚诇讬拽 讗讛讚专讬谞讛讜 讗讬讛讜 诇讗驻讬讛 讙讘讬 砖专讙讗:

The Gemara relates that Shmuel happened to come to the house of Avin Toran. A certain gentile came and kindled a lamp. Shmuel turned his face back away from the lamp in order to avoid benefitting from the light. When Shmuel saw that the gentile brought a document and was reading it, he said: He kindled it with his own benefit in mind. He turned his face back toward the lamp.

讛讚专谉 注诇讱 讻诇 讻转讘讬

 

诪转谞讬壮 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 讜讚诇转讜转讬讛谉 注诪讛谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖谞转驻专拽讜 讘砖讘转 砖讗讬谞谉 讚讜诪讬谉 诇讚诇转讜转 讛讘讬转 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谞谉 诪谉 讛诪讜讻谉

MISHNA: All vessels may be moved on Shabbat, and their doors, which are part of these vessels, along with them, even if they were dismantled on Shabbat, as the doors of these vessels are unlike the doors of the house. It is prohibited to make use of the doors of a house on Shabbat, even if they were removed from the entrance, because they are not prepared from before Shabbat.

谞讜讟诇 讗讚诐 拽讜专谞住 诇驻爪注 讘讜 讗转 讛讗讙讜讝讬谉 拽专讚讜诐 诇讞转讜讱 讘讜 讗转 讛讚讘讬诇讛 诪讙讬专讛 诇讙讜专 讘讛 讗转 讛讙讘讬谞讛 诪讙专讬驻讛 诇讙专讜祝 讘讛 讗转 讛讙专讜讙专讜转

Likewise a person may move a mallet, which is generally used for labor prohibited on Shabbat, to crack nuts with it. Likewise, one may move an axe, a tool generally used to chop wood, to cut a cake of figs with it. So too, one may move a saw to cut cheese with it. Similarly, one may move a spade to scoop dried figs with it.

讗转 讛专讞转 讜讗转 讛诪诇讙讝 诇转转 注诇讬讜 诇拽讟谉 讗转 讛讻讜砖 讜讗转 讛讻专讻专 诇转讞讜讘 讘讜 诪讞讟 砖诇 讬讚 诇讬讟讜诇 讘讜 讗转 讛拽讜抓 讜砖诇 住拽讗讬诐 诇驻转讜讞 讘讜 讗转 讛讚诇转

One may also move a winnowing shovel and a pitchfork, both of which are designated for use with crops in a barn, to place food on it for a child. One is likewise permitted to take a reed or a shuttle from a spindle, ordinarily used for weaving, in order to insert it into food like a fork. One is permitted to move an ordinary hand needle used for sewing clothes to extract a thorn with it, and one may move a sack maker鈥檚 needle to open the door with it.

讙诪壮 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖谞转驻专拽讜 讘砖讘转 讜诇讗 诪讬讘注讬讗 讘讞讜诇

GEMARA: The mishna states: All vessels may be moved, and even if they were dismantled on Shabbat. Should we learn from here that there is only a question with regard to vessels which were dismantled on Shabbat, and that there is no need to mention vessels detached during the week, as it is certainly permitted to carry them on Shabbat?

讗讚专讘讛 讘砖讘转 诪讜讻谞讬谉 注诇 讙讘讬 讗讘讬讛谉 讘讞讜诇 讗讬谉 诪讜讻谞讬谉 注诇 讙讘讬 讗讘讬讛谉

On the contrary, if they were dismantled on Shabbat it can be said that the parts of the vessel were prepared for use at the onset of Shabbat, due to their being attached to their original vessels from which they were removed. However, if they were detached during the week, at the onset of Shabbat they would not have been prepared for use, due to their being detached from their original vessels from which they were removed.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 讜讚诇转讜转讬讛谉 注诪讛谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖谞转驻专拽讜 讘讞讜诇 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转

Abaye said that this is what the mishna is saying: All vessels may be moved on Shabbat along with their doors. And even if they came apart during the week, they may be moved on Shabbat.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讚诇转 砖诇 砖讬讚讛 讜砖诇 转讬讘讛 讜砖诇 诪讙讚诇 谞讜讟诇讬谉 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪讞讝讬专讬谉 讜砖诇 诇讜诇 砖诇 转专谞讙讜诇讬诐 诇讗 谞讜讟诇讬谉 讜诇讗 诪讞讝讬专讬谉

The Sages taught: With regard to the door of a chest, or of a box, or of a closet, one may remove them from their hinges on Shabbat, but he may not restore them to their original places. And with regard to the door of a chicken coop, one may neither move it nor restore it to its place.

讘砖诇诪讗 砖诇 诇讜诇 砖诇 转专谞讙讜诇讬诐 拽住讘专 讻讬讜谉 讚诪讞讘专讬 讘讗专注讗 讬砖 讘谞讬谉 讘拽专拽注 讬砖 住转讬专讛 讘拽专拽注 讗诇讗 砖诇 砖讬讚讛 讜砖诇 转讬讘讛 讜砖诇 诪讙讚诇 诪讗讬 拽住讘专

Granted, in the case of a chicken coop the tanna holds: Since the coop is attached to the ground, there is a prohibition against building on the ground and there is a prohibition against dismantling on the ground. Consequently, when one dismantles or restores the door he has performed the prohibited labor of building. However, in the case of the door of a chest, or a box, or a closet, what does he hold?

讗讬 拽住讘专 讬砖 讘谞讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讬砖 住转讬专讛 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讗讬 讗讬谉 住转讬专讛 讘讻诇讬诐 讗讬谉 讘谞讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐

If the tanna holds that there is a prohibition against building with regard to vessels, then there is also a prohibition against dismantling with regard to vessels and it should be prohibited to remove the door. And if there is no prohibition against dismantling with regard to vessels and it is permitted to remove the door, then there should also be no prohibition against building with regard to vessels. Why, then, is it prohibited to restore a door to its original place?

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 诇注讜诇诐 拽住讘专 讬砖 讘谞讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讬砖 住转讬专讛 讘讻诇讬诐 讜砖谞讬讟诇讜 拽讗诪专

Abaye said: Actually, he holds that there is a prohibition against building with regard to vessels and there is also a prohibition against dismantling with regard to vessels. To resolve the difficulty, emend the text. Rather than saying: One may remove them, it is saying: The doors of a chest, or a box, or a closet that were already removed may not be restored.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 [砖转讬 转砖讜讘讜转 讘讚讘专] 讞讚讗 讚谞讬讟诇讬谉 拽转谞讬 讜注讜讚 诪讗讬 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪讞讝讬专讬谉 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 拽住讘专 讗讬谉 讘谞讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讗讬谉 住转讬专讛 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讙讝讬专讛 砖诪讗 讬转拽注:

Rava said to him: There are two possible responses with which your statement can be rejected. One is that it is taught in the baraita: One may remove them, ab initio. And furthermore, what is the meaning of: But one may not restore them? According to your emendation, what is the meaning of the word, but, in this context? Rather, Rava said: The tanna holds that there is no prohibition against building with regard to vessels and there is no prohibition against dismantling with regard to vessels, and so why did the tanna rule one may not restore the door? It is due to a decree lest one fix it firmly in place in the manner of a full-fledged prohibited labor, completing the production process of a vessel.

谞讜讟诇 讗讚诐 拽讜专谞住 讻讜壮: 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 拽讜专谞住 砖诇 讗讙讜讝讬谉 诇驻爪注 讘讜 讗转 讛讗讙讜讝讬谉 讗讘诇 砖诇 谞驻讞讬谉 诇讗

The mishna states: A person may take a mallet on Shabbat in order to crack nuts with it. Rav Yehuda said: The type of hammer in this case is a hammer designated for nuts to crack nuts with it, but blacksmiths鈥 hammers, no, they may not be used.

拽住讘专 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讗讬住讜专 讗驻讬诇讜 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 讗住讜专

That tanna holds that using an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, even for the purpose of utilizing the object itself to perform a permitted action, is prohibited.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讛 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 住讬驻讗 讚拽转谞讬 讜讗转 讛专讞转 讜讗转 讛诪诇讙讝 诇转转 注诇讬讜 诇拽讟谉 专讞转 讜诪诇讙讝 诪讬 诪讬讬讞讚讬 诇讬讛 诇拽讟谉 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讛 拽讜专谞住 砖诇 谞驻讞讬谉 诇驻爪注 讘讜 讛讗讙讜讝讬谉

Rabba said to him: But if what you say is so, how do you reconcile this with the latter clause of the mishna in which it is taught: And a winnowing shovel or a pitchfork in order to place food for a child on it; are a winnowing shovel and a pitchfork designated for use by a child? Rather, Rabba said: The mishna should be interpreted as follows: One may use a blacksmiths鈥 hammer on Shabbat to crack nuts with it.

拽住讘专

The tanna holds:

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 117-123

This week we will review Daf 117-123. We will discover what things we are allowed to save from a fire,...
talking talmud_square

Shabbat 122: Light One Candle

Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi - a man of great wealth, and why that matters. Even the non-Jews wouldn't think of starting...

Shabbat 122

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Shabbat 122

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讻讗讜转谉 砖诇 讘讬转 讗讘讬讱

Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said to him: They are like those from your father鈥檚 house, which are large (Tosafot).

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 拽专讜谞讜转 砖诇 讘讬转 专讘讬 诪讜转专 诇讟诇讟诇谉 讘砖讘转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讘谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘讗讚诐 讗讞讚 讗讜 讘砖谞讬 讘谞讬 讗讚诐 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讻讗讜转谉 砖诇 讘讬转 讗讘讬讱

And Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said that Rabbi 岣nina said: The sedan chairs of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi may be moved on Shabbat. Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Abba bar Kahana: Are you referring to sedan chairs that can be moved by one person or those that can be only moved by two people? He said to him: They are like those from your father鈥檚 house.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讛转讬专 诇讛诐 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 诇讘讬转 专讘讬 诇砖转讜转 讬讬谉 讘拽专讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讜讬 讘讞讜转诐 讗讞讚 讜诇讗 讬讚注谞讗 讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讚住讘专 诇讛 讻专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讬 诪砖讜诐 讗讬诪转讗 讚讘讬 谞砖讬讗讛:

And Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Rabbi 岣nina permitted the members of the household of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi to drink wine transported in a gentile鈥檚 wagons even though the wine was sealed only with one seal. He was not concerned that perhaps the gentile may have opened the barrel and poured wine libations to idolatry from it or touched it, which would prohibit drinking it. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana adds: And I do not know if that is because Rabbi 岣nina holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who permits drinking wine from a gentile that was protected by a single seal, or if it was because the gentile would not dare to open these specific casks due fear of the household of the Nasi, but in general Rabbi 岣nina prohibited drinking wine protected by a single seal.

诪转谞讬壮 讙讜讬 砖讛讚诇讬拽 讗转 讛谞专 诪砖转诪砖 诇讗讜专讜 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗诐 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 诪讬诇讗 诪讬诐 诇讛砖拽讜转 讘讛诪转讜 诪砖拽讛 讗讞专讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗诐 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 注砖讛 讙讜讬 讻讘砖 诇讬专讚 讘讜 讬讜专讚 讗讞专讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗诐 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 诪注砖讛 讘专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜讝拽谞讬诐 砖讛讬讜 讘讗讬谉 讘住驻讬谞讛 讜注砖讛 讙讜讬 讻讘砖 诇讬专讚 讘讜 讜讬专讚讜 讘讜 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜讝拽谞讬诐:

MISHNA: If a gentile kindled a lamp on Shabbat for his own purposes, a Jew also uses its light; and if the gentile kindled it for a Jew, the Sages prohibited to utilize its light. Similarly, if a gentile drew water from a well in the public domain to give his animal to drink, a Jew gives his own animal to drink after him from the same water; and if he drew the water initially for the benefit of a Jew, it is prohibited for a Jew to give his animal to drink from that water. Similarly, if a gentile made a ramp on Shabbat to disembark from a ship, a Jew disembarks after him; and if he made the ramp for a Jew, it is prohibited. There was an incident in which Rabban Gamliel and the Elders were traveling on a ship and a gentile made a ramp on Shabbat in order to disembark from the ship on it; and Rabban Gamliel and the Elders disembarked on it as well.

讙诪壮 讜爪专讬讻讗 讚讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 谞专 诪砖讜诐 讚谞专 诇讗讞讚 谞专 诇诪讗讛 讗讘诇 诪讬诐 诇讬讙讝专 讚讬诇诪讗 讗转讬 诇讗驻讜砖讬 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讜讻讘砖 诇诪讛 诇讬 诪注砖讛 讚专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜讝拽谞讬诐 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

GEMARA: The Gemara comments: And it was necessary to teach this halakha in all these cases. As, had it taught us only the halakha with regard to a lamp, I would have said that this is the halakha because the light of a lamp for one is the light of a lamp for one hundred people. There is no need to kindle multiple lamps for multiple people; the light of one candle suffices for many. Therefore, it is permitted to use the light of a lamp kindled by a gentile. However, with regard to water, there is room to issue a decree against benefitting from the gentile鈥檚 efforts, lest one come to increase the amount of water he draws for a Jew, even without stating that intention. The Gemara asks: And why do I need the mishna to mention that it is permitted to use the ramp? The Gemara answers: It taught us the case of the ramp to cite the incident involving Rabban Gamliel and the Elders to indicate that they followed this ruling in practice.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讙讜讬 砖诇讬拽讟 注砖讘讬诐 诪讗讻讬诇 讗讞专讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗诐 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 诪讬诇讗 诪讬诐 诇讛砖拽讜转 讘讛诪转讜 诪砖拽讛 讗讞专讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗诐 讘砖讘讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 砖讗讬谉 诪讻讬专讜 讗讘诇 诪讻讬专讜 讗住讜专

The Sages taught: If a gentile collected grass on Shabbat for himself, in order to feed his animal, a Jew may feed his own animal after him, and if he collected it for the benefit of a Jew, it is prohibited. If he drew water to give his animal to drink, a Jew may give water to his own animal to drink after him, and if he drew it for the benefit of a Jew it is prohibited. In what case is this statement, that if the gentile acted for himself it is permitted for a Jew to benefit, said? When the gentile does not know him; however, if the gentile knows him, it is prohibited, as in that case, he certainly intended to benefit his Jewish acquaintance as well.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 诪注诪讬讚 讗讚诐 讘讛诪转讜 注诇 讙讘讬 注砖讘讬诐 讘砖讘转 讗讘诇 诇讗 注诇 讙讘讬 诪讜拽爪讛 讘砖讘转 讚拽讗讬诐 诇讛 讘讗驻讛 讜讗讝诇讗 讛讬讗 讜讗讻诇讛

The Gemara asks: Is that so? Didn鈥檛 Rav Huna say that Rabbi 岣nina said: One may position his animal over grass on Shabbat, even grass that is growing in the ground, and there is no concern lest he detach the grass and feed the animal; however, he may not position the animal over an item that is set aside on Shabbat, since there is concern lest one lift the item with his hand. The grass that the gentile collects for himself is certainly set aside, so why may the Jew feed it to his animal? The Gemara answers: Indeed, a Jew may not position his animal over the grass that a gentile picked; he may only position it in before the grass at a distance, and the animal goes on its own and eats.

讗诪专 诪专 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 砖讗讬谉 诪讻讬专讜 讗讘诇 诪讻讬专讜 讗住讜专 讛讗 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 诪讻讬专讜 讛讜讛 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 讛讜讛 专讘讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 讘驻谞讬讜 谞专 诇讗讞讚 谞专 诇诪讗讛

We learned above that the Master said: In what case is this statement, that if the gentile acted for himself it is permitted for a Jew to benefit, said? When the gentile does not know him; however, if the gentile knows him, it is prohibited. The Gemara asks: However, in the incident involving Rabban Gamliel and the ship, it is a case where the gentile knows him as they traveled together on the ship. Abaye said: The action was not performed in Rabban Gamliel鈥檚 presence, and since the gentile had not seen him he intended to make it only for himself. Rava said: Even if you say that the gentile made the ramp in his presence, that is irrelevant because a lamp for one is a lamp for one hundred; similarly, with regard to a ramp, once the gentile constructs it for his own use it can be used by others with no further adjustments.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讗诪专 诇讛谉 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讛讜讗讬诇 讜砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬谞讜 注砖讗讜 谞专讚 讘讜 讗讬诪讗 讛讜讗讬诇 讜注砖讗讜 谞专讚 讘讜

The Gemara raises an objection to Rava鈥檚 statement based on the Tosefta: Rabban Gamliel said to them: Since he made it not in our presence, we will disembark on it. Rabban Gamliel made use of the ramp only for this reason, contrary to Rava鈥檚 explanation. The Gemara rejects this: Say the Tosefta in an emended form: Rabban Gamliel said to them: Since he made it, we will disembark on it.

转讗 砖诪注 注讬专 砖讬砖专讗诇 讜讙讜讬诐 讚专讬谉 讘转讜讻讛 讜讛讬转讛 讘讛 诪专讞抓 讛诪专讞爪转 讘砖讘转 讗诐 专讜讘 讙讜讬诐 诪讜转专 诇专讞讜抓 讘讛 诪讬讚 讗诐 专讜讘 讬砖专讗诇 讬诪转讬谉 讘讻讚讬 砖讬讞诪讜 讞诪讬谉 讛转诐 讻讬 诪讞诪诪讬 讗讚注转讗 讚专讜讘讗 诪讞诪诪讬

Come and hear proof from another baraita with regard to the dispute between Abaye and Rava: With regard to a city where both Jews and gentiles live and there was a bathhouse in it in which there is bathing on Shabbat, if the majority of the city鈥檚 residents are gentiles, it is permitted to bathe in the bathhouse immediately after Shabbat because the bathhouse was heated on Shabbat to serve the gentiles. However, if there is a majority of Jews in the city, one waits after Shabbat for a period of time sufficient for them to heat the hot water so as not to benefit from prohibited labor performed on Shabbat. Apparently, even when an action is not performed in the presence of a Jew, there is concern that it may have been performed for the benefit of Jews. The Gemara rejects this proof: There, in the case of the baraita, when they heat the water, they heat it with the majority of the city鈥檚 inhabitants in mind, and the owner of the bathhouse sets the heating schedule to service the majority.

转讗 砖诪注 谞专 讛讚诇讜拽 讘诪住讬讘讛 讗诐 专讜讘 讙讜讬诐 诪讜转专 诇讛砖转诪砖 诇讗讜专讛 讗诐 专讜讘 讬砖专讗诇 讗住讜专 诪讞爪讛 注诇 诪讞爪讛 讗住讜专 讛转诐 谞诪讬 讻讬 诪讚诇拽讬

Come and hear a proof from the following baraita: With regard to a lamp kindled at a banquet in which several people are participating, if the majority of those present are gentiles it is permitted for a Jew to utilize its light, and if the majority of those present are Jews it is prohibited, as in that case, the lamp was certainly lit for the Jews鈥 benefit. If those present are half Jews and half gentiles, it is prohibited. Since they are participating in the same banquet, the gentile certainly knows the Jew. Why, then, is it permitted for a Jew to utilize the light of the lamp even when the majority of those present are gentiles? The Gemara rejects this proof: There, too, when they kindle the lamp,

讗讚注转讗 讚专讜讘讗 诪讚诇拽讬

they kindle it with the majority of the those present at the banquet in mind. When the majority of those present are gentiles, it is permitted.

砖诪讜讗诇 讗讬拽诇注 诇讘讬 讗讘讬谉 转讜专谉 讗转讗 讛讛讜讗 讙讜讬 讗讚诇讬拽 砖专讙讗 讗讛讚专讬谞讛讜 砖诪讜讗诇 诇讗驻讬讛 讻讬讜谉 讚讞讝讗 讚讗讬讬转讬 砖讟专 讜拽讗 拽专讬 讗诪专 讗讚注转讗 讚谞驻砖讬讛 讛讜讗 讚讗讚诇讬拽 讗讛讚专讬谞讛讜 讗讬讛讜 诇讗驻讬讛 讙讘讬 砖专讙讗:

The Gemara relates that Shmuel happened to come to the house of Avin Toran. A certain gentile came and kindled a lamp. Shmuel turned his face back away from the lamp in order to avoid benefitting from the light. When Shmuel saw that the gentile brought a document and was reading it, he said: He kindled it with his own benefit in mind. He turned his face back toward the lamp.

讛讚专谉 注诇讱 讻诇 讻转讘讬

 

诪转谞讬壮 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 讜讚诇转讜转讬讛谉 注诪讛谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖谞转驻专拽讜 讘砖讘转 砖讗讬谞谉 讚讜诪讬谉 诇讚诇转讜转 讛讘讬转 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谞谉 诪谉 讛诪讜讻谉

MISHNA: All vessels may be moved on Shabbat, and their doors, which are part of these vessels, along with them, even if they were dismantled on Shabbat, as the doors of these vessels are unlike the doors of the house. It is prohibited to make use of the doors of a house on Shabbat, even if they were removed from the entrance, because they are not prepared from before Shabbat.

谞讜讟诇 讗讚诐 拽讜专谞住 诇驻爪注 讘讜 讗转 讛讗讙讜讝讬谉 拽专讚讜诐 诇讞转讜讱 讘讜 讗转 讛讚讘讬诇讛 诪讙讬专讛 诇讙讜专 讘讛 讗转 讛讙讘讬谞讛 诪讙专讬驻讛 诇讙专讜祝 讘讛 讗转 讛讙专讜讙专讜转

Likewise a person may move a mallet, which is generally used for labor prohibited on Shabbat, to crack nuts with it. Likewise, one may move an axe, a tool generally used to chop wood, to cut a cake of figs with it. So too, one may move a saw to cut cheese with it. Similarly, one may move a spade to scoop dried figs with it.

讗转 讛专讞转 讜讗转 讛诪诇讙讝 诇转转 注诇讬讜 诇拽讟谉 讗转 讛讻讜砖 讜讗转 讛讻专讻专 诇转讞讜讘 讘讜 诪讞讟 砖诇 讬讚 诇讬讟讜诇 讘讜 讗转 讛拽讜抓 讜砖诇 住拽讗讬诐 诇驻转讜讞 讘讜 讗转 讛讚诇转

One may also move a winnowing shovel and a pitchfork, both of which are designated for use with crops in a barn, to place food on it for a child. One is likewise permitted to take a reed or a shuttle from a spindle, ordinarily used for weaving, in order to insert it into food like a fork. One is permitted to move an ordinary hand needle used for sewing clothes to extract a thorn with it, and one may move a sack maker鈥檚 needle to open the door with it.

讙诪壮 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖谞转驻专拽讜 讘砖讘转 讜诇讗 诪讬讘注讬讗 讘讞讜诇

GEMARA: The mishna states: All vessels may be moved, and even if they were dismantled on Shabbat. Should we learn from here that there is only a question with regard to vessels which were dismantled on Shabbat, and that there is no need to mention vessels detached during the week, as it is certainly permitted to carry them on Shabbat?

讗讚专讘讛 讘砖讘转 诪讜讻谞讬谉 注诇 讙讘讬 讗讘讬讛谉 讘讞讜诇 讗讬谉 诪讜讻谞讬谉 注诇 讙讘讬 讗讘讬讛谉

On the contrary, if they were dismantled on Shabbat it can be said that the parts of the vessel were prepared for use at the onset of Shabbat, due to their being attached to their original vessels from which they were removed. However, if they were detached during the week, at the onset of Shabbat they would not have been prepared for use, due to their being detached from their original vessels from which they were removed.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 讜讚诇转讜转讬讛谉 注诪讛谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖谞转驻专拽讜 讘讞讜诇 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转

Abaye said that this is what the mishna is saying: All vessels may be moved on Shabbat along with their doors. And even if they came apart during the week, they may be moved on Shabbat.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讚诇转 砖诇 砖讬讚讛 讜砖诇 转讬讘讛 讜砖诇 诪讙讚诇 谞讜讟诇讬谉 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪讞讝讬专讬谉 讜砖诇 诇讜诇 砖诇 转专谞讙讜诇讬诐 诇讗 谞讜讟诇讬谉 讜诇讗 诪讞讝讬专讬谉

The Sages taught: With regard to the door of a chest, or of a box, or of a closet, one may remove them from their hinges on Shabbat, but he may not restore them to their original places. And with regard to the door of a chicken coop, one may neither move it nor restore it to its place.

讘砖诇诪讗 砖诇 诇讜诇 砖诇 转专谞讙讜诇讬诐 拽住讘专 讻讬讜谉 讚诪讞讘专讬 讘讗专注讗 讬砖 讘谞讬谉 讘拽专拽注 讬砖 住转讬专讛 讘拽专拽注 讗诇讗 砖诇 砖讬讚讛 讜砖诇 转讬讘讛 讜砖诇 诪讙讚诇 诪讗讬 拽住讘专

Granted, in the case of a chicken coop the tanna holds: Since the coop is attached to the ground, there is a prohibition against building on the ground and there is a prohibition against dismantling on the ground. Consequently, when one dismantles or restores the door he has performed the prohibited labor of building. However, in the case of the door of a chest, or a box, or a closet, what does he hold?

讗讬 拽住讘专 讬砖 讘谞讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讬砖 住转讬专讛 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讗讬 讗讬谉 住转讬专讛 讘讻诇讬诐 讗讬谉 讘谞讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐

If the tanna holds that there is a prohibition against building with regard to vessels, then there is also a prohibition against dismantling with regard to vessels and it should be prohibited to remove the door. And if there is no prohibition against dismantling with regard to vessels and it is permitted to remove the door, then there should also be no prohibition against building with regard to vessels. Why, then, is it prohibited to restore a door to its original place?

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 诇注讜诇诐 拽住讘专 讬砖 讘谞讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讬砖 住转讬专讛 讘讻诇讬诐 讜砖谞讬讟诇讜 拽讗诪专

Abaye said: Actually, he holds that there is a prohibition against building with regard to vessels and there is also a prohibition against dismantling with regard to vessels. To resolve the difficulty, emend the text. Rather than saying: One may remove them, it is saying: The doors of a chest, or a box, or a closet that were already removed may not be restored.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 [砖转讬 转砖讜讘讜转 讘讚讘专] 讞讚讗 讚谞讬讟诇讬谉 拽转谞讬 讜注讜讚 诪讗讬 讗讘诇 诇讗 诪讞讝讬专讬谉 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 拽住讘专 讗讬谉 讘谞讬谉 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讗讬谉 住转讬专讛 讘讻诇讬诐 讜讙讝讬专讛 砖诪讗 讬转拽注:

Rava said to him: There are two possible responses with which your statement can be rejected. One is that it is taught in the baraita: One may remove them, ab initio. And furthermore, what is the meaning of: But one may not restore them? According to your emendation, what is the meaning of the word, but, in this context? Rather, Rava said: The tanna holds that there is no prohibition against building with regard to vessels and there is no prohibition against dismantling with regard to vessels, and so why did the tanna rule one may not restore the door? It is due to a decree lest one fix it firmly in place in the manner of a full-fledged prohibited labor, completing the production process of a vessel.

谞讜讟诇 讗讚诐 拽讜专谞住 讻讜壮: 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 拽讜专谞住 砖诇 讗讙讜讝讬谉 诇驻爪注 讘讜 讗转 讛讗讙讜讝讬谉 讗讘诇 砖诇 谞驻讞讬谉 诇讗

The mishna states: A person may take a mallet on Shabbat in order to crack nuts with it. Rav Yehuda said: The type of hammer in this case is a hammer designated for nuts to crack nuts with it, but blacksmiths鈥 hammers, no, they may not be used.

拽住讘专 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讗讬住讜专 讗驻讬诇讜 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 讗住讜专

That tanna holds that using an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, even for the purpose of utilizing the object itself to perform a permitted action, is prohibited.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讛 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 住讬驻讗 讚拽转谞讬 讜讗转 讛专讞转 讜讗转 讛诪诇讙讝 诇转转 注诇讬讜 诇拽讟谉 专讞转 讜诪诇讙讝 诪讬 诪讬讬讞讚讬 诇讬讛 诇拽讟谉 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讛 拽讜专谞住 砖诇 谞驻讞讬谉 诇驻爪注 讘讜 讛讗讙讜讝讬谉

Rabba said to him: But if what you say is so, how do you reconcile this with the latter clause of the mishna in which it is taught: And a winnowing shovel or a pitchfork in order to place food for a child on it; are a winnowing shovel and a pitchfork designated for use by a child? Rather, Rabba said: The mishna should be interpreted as follows: One may use a blacksmiths鈥 hammer on Shabbat to crack nuts with it.

拽住讘专

The tanna holds:

Scroll To Top