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

Today's Daf Yomi

July 7, 2020 | 讟状讜 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 123

Can one carry a utensil that is generally used for forbidden purposes for some permitted purpose? Raba thinks one can and Abaye brings some sources that seem to contradict. One Raba attributes to Rabbi Nechemia who has a stringent definition of muktze and the other Raba puts in the category of items that are more expensive and one is more particular about its use and therefore wouldn’t use it for other purposes other than its main use. There are four different explanations regarding what type of mallet is the one mentioned in the mishna. If a vegetable is buried in the ground, can one remove it and not be concerned about moving the dirt, which is muktze? On what does it depend? If a needle gets ruined and the eye of the needle is no longer there, is it muktze? Are the laws the same for purity/impurity? Other items are discussed regarding whether they are muktze on Shabbat and whether they can become impure. Rabbi Yosi says that all items can be moved on Shabbat other than those that are muktze because of their high value. The gemara discusses what items fall into that category. The gemara then discusses the development over time of the prohibition of muktze and how the laws got more lenient as time went on. There is a debate among Rava and Abaye how to understand what the law was at each stage. In the time of Nechemia was when they first instituted laws of muktze. Why?

讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讗讬住讜专 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 诪讜转专

Using an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, for the purpose of utilizing the object itself to perform a permitted action, is permitted.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 讗讘讬讬 诇专讘讛 诪讚讜讻讛 讗诐 讬砖 讘讛 砖讜诐 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谉 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 讗讜转讛

Abaye raised an objection to the opinion of Rabba from the Tosefta: A mortar, if it still has garlic in it, one may move it on Shabbat, and if not, one may not move it. Apparently, under no circumstances may a mortar be used, even for an action that is generally permitted on Shabbat, because the mortar鈥檚 primary function is prohibited.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讗 诪谞讬 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讛讬讗 讚讗诪专 讗讬谉 讻诇讬 谞讬讟诇 讗诇讗 诇爪讜专讱 转砖诪讬砖讜

Rabba said to him: In accordance with whose opinion is this baraita? It is the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, who says: A vessel may not be moved on Shabbat except for the purpose of its designated use.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 (讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讬谉 谞讜讟诇讬谉 讗转 讛注诇讬 诇拽爪讘 注诇讬讜 讘砖专 讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 诪转讬专讬谉) 讜砖讜讬谉 砖讗诐 拽爪讘 注诇讬讜 讘砖专 砖讗住讜专 诇讟诇讟诇讜

Abaye raised another objection to Rabba鈥檚 opinion. We learned in a mishna that Beit Shammai say: One may not take a large pestle from a mortar, which is typically used for a prohibited action, in order to cut meat on it for the purpose of a Festival. And Beit Hillel permit doing so due to the mitzva of rejoicing on the Festival. And everyone agrees that if one cut meat on it for the purpose of the Festival, that it is then prohibited to move it because there is no further need for it on the Festival. Apparently, it is prohibited to use an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, even to perform a permitted action.

住讘专 诇砖谞讜讬讬 诇讬讛 讻专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讻讬讜谉 讚砖诪注讛 诇讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讞讬谞谞讗 讘专 砖诇诪讬讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讛讻诇 诪讜讚讬诐 讘住讬讻讬 讝讬讬专讬 讜诪讝讜专讬 讚讻讬讜谉 讚拽驻讬讚 注诇讬讬讛讜 诪讬讬讞讚 诇讛讜 诪拽讜诐 讛讗 谞诪讬 诪讬讬讞讚 诇讛讜 诪拽讜诐

Initially, Rabba thought to respond to Abaye鈥檚 objection by saying that this mishna, too, is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, that a vessel may only be moved on Shabbat for the purpose of its designated use. However, he changed his mind once he heard that which Rav 岣nana bar Shelemya said in the name of Rav: Everyone agrees in the case of launderers鈥 pins, presses, and clothing rods (Arukh), that since one is particular about them to ensure that they remain intact, he designates a place for them and does not move them for other purposes. Therefore, everyone agrees that it is prohibited to move them. Here, too, the mortar and pestle are specifically designated for a particular use and one designates a place for them; therefore, it is prohibited to move them.

讗讬转诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 拽讜专谞住 砖诇 讝讛讘讬诐 砖谞讬谞讜 专讘 砖诪谉 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 拽讜专谞住 砖诇 讘砖诪讬诐 砖谞讬谞讜

It was stated that there was another amoraic dispute on this topic. Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: It was with regard to the hammer of goldsmiths that we learned it may be used to crack nuts. Although the goldsmith is particular about ensuring that the hammer remains smooth and avoids using it for any purpose other than its particular use, nevertheless, it was allowed to be used for other permitted actions. Rav Shemen bar Abba said: It was with regard to the hammer of spice merchants that we learned it may be used to crack nuts.

诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讚讘砖诪讬诐 讻诇 砖讻谉 讚讝讛讘讬诐 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 砖诇 讝讛讘讬诐 讗讘诇 讚讘砖诪讬诐 拽驻讬讚 注诇讬讬讛讜:

The Gemara explains: The one who said it is permitted to crack nuts on Shabbat using the hammer of spice merchants, all the more so that it is permitted to use a hammer typically used by goldsmiths. However, the one who said that it is only permitted to use a hammer used by goldsmiths, but with regard to the hammer of spice merchants, the merchant is particular about it and would not allow it to be used for cracking nuts. Use for other purposes would cause the hammer to absorb foreign smells, which would ruin the spices.

讜讗转 讛讻讜砖 讜讗转 讛讻专讻专 讻讜壮: 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 驻讙讛 砖讟诪谞讛 讘转讘谉 讜讞专专讛 砖讟诪谞讛 讘讙讞诇讬诐 讗诐 诪讙讜诇讛 诪拽爪转讛 诪讜转专 诇讟诇讟诇讛 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗住讜专 诇讟诇讟诇讛

And we learned in the mishna: one may move a reed or a shuttle [karkar] in order to stick it into food. The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to an unripe fig that one buried in straw to accelerate its ripening, and likewise with regard to a cake that one buried in coals in order to heat it, if part of it is exposed, it is permitted to move it on Shabbat. And if not, and it was completely covered, it is prohibited to move it lest one come to carry straw or coals, which are set-aside, along with it. It is prohibited for one to move set-aside objects or to cause them to be moved.

专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘谉 转讚讗讬 讗讜诪专 转讜讞讘讬谉 讘讻讜砖 讗讜 讘讻专讻专 讜讛谉 诪谞注专讜转 诪讗讬诇讬讛诐 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘谉 转讚讗讬

Rabbi Elazar ben Tadai says: One may insert a reed or a shuttle into an unripe fig or a cake that is buried in coals to remove it from its place, and the straw and the coals are shaken off on their own. Rav Na岣an says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben Tadai.

诇诪讬诪专讗 讚住讘专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讟诇讟讜诇 诪谉 讛爪讚 诇讗 砖诪讬讛 讟诇讟讜诇 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛讗讬 驻讜讙诇讗 诪诇诪注诇讛 诇诪讟讛 砖专讬 诪诪讟讛 诇诪注诇讛 讗住讬专 讛讚专 讘讬讛 专讘 谞讞诪谉 诪讛讛讬讗:

The Gemara asks: Is that to say that Rav Na岣an holds: Moving an object in an atypical manner is not considered to be a bona fide act of moving and is permitted on Shabbat? Didn鈥檛 Rav Na岣an say: This radish that was buried in the dirt to protect it, if it was inserted from the top to bottom, i.e., the wider part of the radish is closer to the surface and the narrower part is farther, it is permitted to remove it from the dirt. If it was inserted from bottom to top, and the wider part was farther from the surface, it is prohibited because he thereby moves the dirt. Apparently, Rav Na岣an prohibits moving set-aside items even if one does so in an atypical manner. The Gemara answers: Rav Na岣an reversed his opinion with regard to that halakha of the radish.

诪讞讟 砖诇 讬讚 诇讬讟讜诇 讘讛 讻讜壮: 砖诇讞 诇讬讛 专讘讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讛 诇专讘 讬讜住祝 讬诇诪讚谞讜 专讘讬谞讜 诪讞讟 砖谞讬讟诇 讞专专讛 讗讜 注讜拽爪讛 诪讛讜

We learned in the mishna: One is permitted to take an ordinary hand needle used for sewing clothes to extract a thorn with it. Rava, son of Rabba, sent the following question to Rav Yosef: Let our teacher teach us: With regard to a needle whose eye or point was removed, what is its legal status, i.e., is moving it on Shabbat permitted?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 转谞讬转讜讛 诪讞讟 砖诇 讬讚 诇讬讟讜诇 讘讛 讗转 讛拽讜抓 讜讻讬 诪讛 讗讬讻驻转 诇讬讛 诇拽讜抓 讘讬谉 谞拽讜讘讛 诇讘讬谉 砖讗讬谞讛 谞拽讜讘讛

Rav Yosef said to him: You already learned the answer to that question in the mishna: One is permitted to take an ordinary hand needle used for sewing clothes to extract a thorn with it. And what does the thorn that is stuck in his flesh care whether the needle has an eye or whether it does not have an eye? Since the needle is suited for that purpose, it is permitted to move it.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 诪讞讟 砖谞讬讟诇 讞专专讛 讗讜 注讜拽爪讛 讟讛讜专讛

Rava, son of Rabba, raised an objection to Rav Yosef from that which we learned in a mishna: A ritually impure needle whose eye or point was removed becomes ritually pure, because its status as a vessel is negated. Since it is no longer considered a vessel, why would it be permitted to move it?

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讟讜诪讗讛 讗砖讘转 拽专诪讬转 讟讜诪讗讛 讻诇讬 诪注砖讛 讘注讬谞谉 诇注谞讬谉 砖讘转 诪讬讚讬 讚讞讝讬 讘注讬谞谉 讜讛讗 谞诪讬 讞讝讬讗 诇诪砖拽诇讗 讘讛 拽讜抓

Abaye said: Are you raising a contradiction from the halakhot of ritual impurity to the halakhot of Shabbat? With regard to ritual impurity, we require a functional utensil for it to become ritually impure or to retain impurity, and anything which is not functional is ritually pure. However, with regard to Shabbat we require something that is fit for use, and this too is fit to extract a thorn with it, and therefore, its legal status is that of a utensil and moving it is permitted.

讗诪专 专讘讗 诪讗谉 讚拽诪讜转讬讘 砖驻讬专 拽诪讜转讬讘 诪讚诇注谞讬谉 讟讜诪讗讛 诇讗讜 诪谞讗 讛讜讗 诇注谞讬谉 砖讘转 谞诪讬 诇讗讜 诪谞讗 讛讜讗

Rava said: The one who raises the objection, raises the objection well. From the fact that with regard to ritual impurity it is not considered a utensil, with regard to Shabbat, it is also not considered a utensil, and if it is not a utensil it may not be moved on Shabbat.

诪讬转讬讘讬 诪讞讟 讘讬谉 谞拽讜讘讛 讘讬谉 砖讗讬谞讛 谞拽讜讘讛 诪讜转专 诇讟诇讟诇讛 讘砖讘转 讜诇讗 讗诪专讜 谞拽讜讘讛 讗诇讗 诇注谞讬谉 讟讜诪讗讛 讘诇讘讚

The Gemara raises an objection to the opinion of Rava based on what was taught in a baraita: A needle, whether it is perforated or whether it is not perforated, it is permitted to move it on Shabbat. And they said that the status of a perforated needle is different only with regard to ritual impurity alone.

转专讙诪讗 讗讘讬讬 讗诇讬讘讗 讚专讘讗 讘讙讜诇诪讬 注住拽讬谞谉 讝讬诪谞讬谉 讚诪讬诪诇讱 注诇讬讬讛讜 讜诪砖讜讬 诇讛讜 诪谞讗 讗讘诇 讛讬讻讗 讚谞讬讟诇 讞专专讛 讗讜 注讜拽爪讛 讗讚诐 讝讜专拽讛 诇讘讬谉 讙专讜讟讗讜转

Abaye interpreted it according to the opinion of Rava: In this mishna, we are dealing with unfinished needles. Sometimes one decides to render them a utensil for other purposes without perforating them. However, in a case where its eye or its point was removed from the finished needle, its status as a vessel was negated, since a person throws it among the junk [gerutaot].

讗住讜讘讬 讬谞讜拽讗 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗住讬专 讜专讘 砖砖转 砖专讬 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 诪谞讗 讗诪讬谞讗 诇讛 讚转谞谉 讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉

With regard to the matter of aligning the limbs of an infant on Shabbat when it is necessary to do so, Rav Na岣an prohibits doing so on Shabbat, due to concern that it is similar to the prohibited labor of completing the production process of a vessel, and Rav Sheshet permits doing so. Rav Na岣an says: From where do I say that this is the halakha? As we learned in a mishna: One may not make

讗驻讬拽讟讜讬讝讬谉 讘砖讘转 讜专讘 砖砖转 讛转诐 诇讗讜 讗讜专讞讬讛 讛讻讗 讗讜专讞讬讛

afiktoizin, a drug to induce vomiting, on Shabbat. Apparently, actions associated with treating the body on Shabbat are prohibited. And Rav Sheshet explains: There, with regard to a drug to induce vomiting, drinking it for any reason other than medicinal purposes is atypical. Here, aligning the limbs of an infant is typical conduct not undertaken solely for medicinal purposes.

讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 诪谞讗 讗诪讬谞讗 诇讛 讚转谞谉 诪讞讟 砖诇 讬讚 诇讬讟讜诇 讘讛 讗转 讛拽讜抓 讜专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛转诐 驻拽讬讚 讛讻讗 诇讗 驻拽讬讚:

Rav Sheshet said: From where do I say that this is the halakha? As we learned in the mishna: One is permitted to take an ordinary hand needle used for sewing clothes to extract a thorn with it. Apparently, some curative actions are permitted and there is no concern that they are similar to completing the production process of a vessel. And Rav Na岣an objects: That is no proof, as there, the thorn is merely deposited in the skin and it is not an organic part of the body. Removing a foreign object from the body effects no fundamental change in the body. Here, in the case of aligning the limbs, it is not merely tending to a foreign object deposited in the body; rather it involves effecting a fundamental change in the body itself, which is both a curative act and one similar to completing the production process.

诪转谞讬壮 拽谞讛 砖诇 讝讬转讬诐 讗诐 讬砖 拽砖专 讘专讗砖讜 诪拽讘诇 讟讜诪讗讛 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谉 诪拽讘诇 讟讜诪讗讛 讘讬谉 讻讱 讜讘讬谉 讻讱 谞讬讟诇 讘砖讘转:

MISHNA: A reed that is used for turning olives in a bundle, if there is a cork-like knot at the top of it, it can become ritually impure as a vessel, and if not, it cannot become ritually impure, because it is not a vessel. In either case, it may be moved on Shabbat for use in a permitted action.

讙诪壮 讗诪讗讬 驻砖讜讟讬 讻诇讬 注抓 讛讜讗 讜驻砖讜讟讬 讻诇讬 注抓 讗讬谞谉 诪拽讘诇讬谉 讟讜诪讗讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚讜诪讬讗 讚砖拽 讘注讬谞谉 转谞讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讘砖注讛 砖诪讛驻讱 讘讝讬转讬诐 讛讜驻讻讜 讜专讜讗讛 讘讜:

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: Why would this reed become impure? It is in the category of flat wooden vessels without a receptacle, and the governing principle in that case is: Flat wooden vessels do not become ritually impure. What is the reason for this? We require an object similar to a sack. The halakhot of ritual impurity are derived from the sack mentioned in the Torah as an example of an item that can become ritually impure. If it lacks a receptacle, it is unlike that sack and it cannot become ritually impure. To explain this halakha, the Gemara cites that which was taught in a baraita in the name of Rabbi Ne岣mya: At the time that one turns over the olives with the reed, he turns over the reed and sees inside it. There is a small cavity at the end of the reed near the knot. He looks there to ascertain whether it has filled with oil, which would indicate that the olives are ready to be placed in the olive press. That cavity is a type of small receptacle, which renders the reed fit to become ritually impure.

诪转谞讬壮 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讞讜抓 诪谉 讛诪住专 讛讙讚讜诇 讜讬转讚 砖诇 诪讞专讬砖讛:

MISHNA: Rabbi Yosei says: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat except for a large saw and the blade of a plow. Since they must be sharp and ready for use and there is concern that they might be damaged, one sets them aside from his consciousness and they may not be used for any other purpose.

讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛讗讬 讗讜讻诇讗 讚拽爪专讬 讻讬转讚 砖诇 诪讞专讬砖讛 讚诪讬讗

GEMARA: Rav Na岣an says: A launderer鈥檚 sprinkler is considered to be like the blade of a plow. Moving it is prohibited on Shabbat because one sets it aside from use out of concern that it might be damaged.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讞专讘讗 讚讗讜砖讻驻讬 讜住讻讬谞讗 讚讗砖讻讘转讗 讜讞爪讬谞讗 讚谞讙专讬 讻讬转讚 砖诇 诪讞专讬砖讛 讚诪讬

Abaye says: A shoemaker鈥檚 knife, and a butcher鈥檚 knife, and a carpenter鈥檚 drawknife are considered to be like the blade of a plow, because their owners set them aside from use out of concern that they might be damaged.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讘专讗砖讜谞讛 讛讬讜 讗讜诪专讬诐 砖诇砖讛 讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 诪拽爪讜注 砖诇 讚讘讬诇讛 讜讝讜讛诪讗 诇讬住讟专谉 砖诇 拽讚专讛 讜住讻讬谉 拽讟谞讛 砖注诇 讙讘讬 砖诇讞谉 讛转讬专讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 注讚 砖讗诪专讜 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 讞讜抓 诪谉 诪住专 讛讙讚讜诇 讜讬转讚 砖诇 诪讞专讬砖讛

The Sages taught in the Tosefta: Initially, they would say that only three utensils may be moved on Shabbat: A knife for cutting a cake of dried figs, and a combined spoon and fork (ge鈥檕nim) to clean the filth [zuhama listeran] of a pot, and a small knife that is on the table. Each of these items is required for eating and may be used, and it had been prohibited to move any other utensil. However, over the generations, when the Rabbis saw that Jewish people were vigilant in observing the prohibitions of Shabbat, they permitted, and then they permitted again, and then they permitted again, until they said in the last mishna: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat except for a large saw and the blade of a plow.

诪讗讬 讛转讬专讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜

The Gemara asks: What are the stages described in the Tosefta: They permitted, and then they permitted, and then they permitted?

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛转讬专讜 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讛讬转专 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讛讬转专 诇爪讜专讱 诪拽讜诪讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讗讬住讜专 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 讗讬谉 诇爪讜专讱 诪拽讜诪讜 诇讗 讜注讚讬讬谉 讘讬讚讜 讗讞转 讗讬谉 讘砖转讬 讬讚讬讜 诇讗 注讚 砖讗诪专讜 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖转讬 讬讚讬诐

Abaye says: Initially, they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a permitted use, for the purpose of utilizing the object itself to perform a permitted action. And then they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a permitted use, for the purpose of sitting in or utilizing its place. And then they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, for the purpose of utilizing the object itself to perform a permitted action, yes; however, for the purpose of utilizing its place, no. And still, utensils that can be held in one of his hands, yes, they may be moved; however, utensils that can only be held in his two hands, no, they may not be moved, in order to signify that there is a prohibition to move certain items. This prohibition remained intact until they said: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat, and even those that can only be held in both hands.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诪讻讚讬 讛转讬专讜 拽转谞讬 诪讛 诇讬 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 诪讛 诇讬 诇爪讜专讱 诪拽讜诪讜 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 讛转讬专讜 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讛讬转专 讘讬谉 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 讜讘讬谉 诇爪讜专讱 诪拽讜诪讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 诪讞诪讛 诇爪诇 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讗讬住讜专 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 讜诇爪讜专讱 诪拽讜诪讜 讗讬谉 诪讞诪讛 诇爪诇 诇讗 讜注讚讬讬谉 讘讗讚诐 讗讞讚 讗讬谉 讘砖谞讬 讘谞讬 讗讚诐 诇讗 注讚 砖讗诪专讜 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖谞讬 讘谞讬 讗讚诐

Rava said to him: After all, it was taught in the Tosefta: They permitted, what difference is there to me if it is for the purpose of utilizing the object itself, and what difference is there to me if it is for the purpose of utilizing its place; why introduce distinctions that are not explicitly stated in the Tosefta? Rather, Rava said that it should be explained as follows: Initially, they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a permitted use, both for the purpose of utilizing the object itself and for the purpose of sitting in or utilizing its place. And then they permitted moving that object from the sun into the shade. And then they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, both for the purpose of utilizing the object itself and for the purpose of sitting in or utilizing its place, yes; however, moving that object from the sun into the shade, no, they did not permit it. And still, utensils that can be carried by one person, yes, they may be moved; however, utensils that can only be carried by two people, no, they may not be moved. This prohibition remained intact until they said: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat, and even those that can only be carried by two people.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 讗讘讬讬 诪讚讜讻讛 讗诐 讬砖 讘讛 砖讜诐 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谉 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 讛讻讗 讘诪讗讬 注住拽讬谞谉 诪讞诪讛 诇爪诇 讗讬转讬讘讬讛 讜砖讜讬谉 砖讗诐 拽爪讘 注诇讬讜 讘砖专 砖讗住讜专 诇讟诇讟诇讜 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 诪讞诪讛 诇爪诇

Abaye raised a challenge to Rava鈥檚 opinion from that which was taught: With regard to a mortar, if it has garlic in it, one may move it on Shabbat, and if not, one may not move it on Shabbat. According to Rava鈥檚 opinion that all utensils may be moved, why is it prohibited to move the mortar? Rava responded: With what we are dealing here? We are dealing with a case of moving the mortar from the sun to the shade. Abaye raised a challenge to Rava鈥檚 opinion from that which was taught: Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel agree that if one cut meat on it for the purpose of a Festival that it is then prohibited to move it because there is no further need for it on the Festival. According to Rava鈥檚 opinion, all utensils may be moved. He answered him: Here, too, we are dealing with a case of moving the mortar from the sun to the shade.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘讬诪讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讘谉 讞讻诇讬讛 谞砖谞讬转 诪砖谞讛 讝讜 讚讻转讬讘 讘讬诪讬诐 讛讛诪讛 专讗讬转讬 讘讬讛讜讚讛 讚讜专讻讬诐 讙转讜转 讘砖讘转 讜诪讘讬讗讬诐 讛注专讬诪讜转

Rabbi 岣nina said: This mishna was taught in the days of Nehemiah, son of Hacaliah, a period when many stringent decrees were issued with regard to Shabbat prohibitions, as it is written: 鈥淚n those days I saw in Judea some treading winepresses on Shabbat and bringing in heaps of grain and lading donkeys with them; as also wine, grapes, figs, and all manner of burdens which are brought into Jerusalem on the Shabbat day. I forewarned them on that day when they sold food鈥 (Nehemiah 13:15). Since the people treated the sanctity of Shabbat with disdain, Nehemiah instituted many stringencies with regard to all the halakhot of Shabbat in order to educate the people to observe Shabbat.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 拽谞讬谉 讜诪拽诇讜转 讙诇讜住讟专讗 讜诪讚讜讻讛 讻讜诇谉 拽讜讚诐 讛转专转 讻诇讬诐 谞砖谞讜

Rabbi Elazar said: The mishnayot that deal with the topics of rods, poles, the thick end [gelostera] of the bolt in a door lock, and a mortar were all taught before permission to move utensils on Shabbat was adopted. At that time, moving most utensils was still prohibited and only a small number of utensils whose primary function was for a permitted use were permitted to be moved. The Gemara cites the relevant mishnayot.

拽谞讬谉 讚转谞谉 诇讗 住讬讚讜专 讛拽谞讬谉 讜诇讗 谞讟讬诇转谉 讚讜讞讛 讗转 讛砖讘转

Rods: Golden rods were placed between the loaves of showbread in the Temple to support the loaves and to aerate them. At that time, moving the rods was prohibited because they were considered to be set-aside, as we learned in a mishna: Neither arranging the rods nor moving them overrides the prohibition of set-aside on Shabbat.

诪拽诇讜转 讚转谞谉 诪拽诇讜转 讚拽讬谉 讞诇拽讬谉 讛讬讜 砖诐 讜诪谞讬讞讜 注诇 讻转驻讜 讜注诇 讻转祝 讞讘讬专讜 讜转讜诇讛 讜诪驻砖讬讟 (讗诪专) 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗专讘注讛 注砖专 砖讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖讘转 诪谞讬讞

And the source for the matter of poles is as we learned in a mishna: There were thin, smooth poles in the Temple, and every Passover eve one places the pole on his shoulder and on the shoulder of another, and suspends the Paschal lamb on it and flays its hide. And Rabbi Elazar said: With regard to the fourteenth of Nisan, the day that the Paschal lamb is sacrificed, that occurred on Shabbat, they would not use the poles, as a conspicuous reminder that it was Shabbat. Instead, one places

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 123: The Extreme Origins of Muktzah

The mishnah on daf 122 explains that every item is permissible to move on Shabbat - and provides permitted activities...
flashback

Shabbat : A Sanctuary Through Time

Our daf today ( Shabbat 123) discusses a situation where the halacha changed over time. At first many items were...

Shabbat 123

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Shabbat 123

讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讗讬住讜专 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 诪讜转专

Using an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, for the purpose of utilizing the object itself to perform a permitted action, is permitted.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 讗讘讬讬 诇专讘讛 诪讚讜讻讛 讗诐 讬砖 讘讛 砖讜诐 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谉 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 讗讜转讛

Abaye raised an objection to the opinion of Rabba from the Tosefta: A mortar, if it still has garlic in it, one may move it on Shabbat, and if not, one may not move it. Apparently, under no circumstances may a mortar be used, even for an action that is generally permitted on Shabbat, because the mortar鈥檚 primary function is prohibited.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讗 诪谞讬 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讛讬讗 讚讗诪专 讗讬谉 讻诇讬 谞讬讟诇 讗诇讗 诇爪讜专讱 转砖诪讬砖讜

Rabba said to him: In accordance with whose opinion is this baraita? It is the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, who says: A vessel may not be moved on Shabbat except for the purpose of its designated use.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 (讘讬转 砖诪讗讬 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讬谉 谞讜讟诇讬谉 讗转 讛注诇讬 诇拽爪讘 注诇讬讜 讘砖专 讜讘讬转 讛诇诇 诪转讬专讬谉) 讜砖讜讬谉 砖讗诐 拽爪讘 注诇讬讜 讘砖专 砖讗住讜专 诇讟诇讟诇讜

Abaye raised another objection to Rabba鈥檚 opinion. We learned in a mishna that Beit Shammai say: One may not take a large pestle from a mortar, which is typically used for a prohibited action, in order to cut meat on it for the purpose of a Festival. And Beit Hillel permit doing so due to the mitzva of rejoicing on the Festival. And everyone agrees that if one cut meat on it for the purpose of the Festival, that it is then prohibited to move it because there is no further need for it on the Festival. Apparently, it is prohibited to use an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, even to perform a permitted action.

住讘专 诇砖谞讜讬讬 诇讬讛 讻专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讻讬讜谉 讚砖诪注讛 诇讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讞讬谞谞讗 讘专 砖诇诪讬讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讛讻诇 诪讜讚讬诐 讘住讬讻讬 讝讬讬专讬 讜诪讝讜专讬 讚讻讬讜谉 讚拽驻讬讚 注诇讬讬讛讜 诪讬讬讞讚 诇讛讜 诪拽讜诐 讛讗 谞诪讬 诪讬讬讞讚 诇讛讜 诪拽讜诐

Initially, Rabba thought to respond to Abaye鈥檚 objection by saying that this mishna, too, is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ne岣mya, that a vessel may only be moved on Shabbat for the purpose of its designated use. However, he changed his mind once he heard that which Rav 岣nana bar Shelemya said in the name of Rav: Everyone agrees in the case of launderers鈥 pins, presses, and clothing rods (Arukh), that since one is particular about them to ensure that they remain intact, he designates a place for them and does not move them for other purposes. Therefore, everyone agrees that it is prohibited to move them. Here, too, the mortar and pestle are specifically designated for a particular use and one designates a place for them; therefore, it is prohibited to move them.

讗讬转诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 拽讜专谞住 砖诇 讝讛讘讬诐 砖谞讬谞讜 专讘 砖诪谉 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 拽讜专谞住 砖诇 讘砖诪讬诐 砖谞讬谞讜

It was stated that there was another amoraic dispute on this topic. Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: It was with regard to the hammer of goldsmiths that we learned it may be used to crack nuts. Although the goldsmith is particular about ensuring that the hammer remains smooth and avoids using it for any purpose other than its particular use, nevertheless, it was allowed to be used for other permitted actions. Rav Shemen bar Abba said: It was with regard to the hammer of spice merchants that we learned it may be used to crack nuts.

诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讚讘砖诪讬诐 讻诇 砖讻谉 讚讝讛讘讬诐 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 砖诇 讝讛讘讬诐 讗讘诇 讚讘砖诪讬诐 拽驻讬讚 注诇讬讬讛讜:

The Gemara explains: The one who said it is permitted to crack nuts on Shabbat using the hammer of spice merchants, all the more so that it is permitted to use a hammer typically used by goldsmiths. However, the one who said that it is only permitted to use a hammer used by goldsmiths, but with regard to the hammer of spice merchants, the merchant is particular about it and would not allow it to be used for cracking nuts. Use for other purposes would cause the hammer to absorb foreign smells, which would ruin the spices.

讜讗转 讛讻讜砖 讜讗转 讛讻专讻专 讻讜壮: 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 驻讙讛 砖讟诪谞讛 讘转讘谉 讜讞专专讛 砖讟诪谞讛 讘讙讞诇讬诐 讗诐 诪讙讜诇讛 诪拽爪转讛 诪讜转专 诇讟诇讟诇讛 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗住讜专 诇讟诇讟诇讛

And we learned in the mishna: one may move a reed or a shuttle [karkar] in order to stick it into food. The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to an unripe fig that one buried in straw to accelerate its ripening, and likewise with regard to a cake that one buried in coals in order to heat it, if part of it is exposed, it is permitted to move it on Shabbat. And if not, and it was completely covered, it is prohibited to move it lest one come to carry straw or coals, which are set-aside, along with it. It is prohibited for one to move set-aside objects or to cause them to be moved.

专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘谉 转讚讗讬 讗讜诪专 转讜讞讘讬谉 讘讻讜砖 讗讜 讘讻专讻专 讜讛谉 诪谞注专讜转 诪讗讬诇讬讛诐 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讘谉 转讚讗讬

Rabbi Elazar ben Tadai says: One may insert a reed or a shuttle into an unripe fig or a cake that is buried in coals to remove it from its place, and the straw and the coals are shaken off on their own. Rav Na岣an says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben Tadai.

诇诪讬诪专讗 讚住讘专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讟诇讟讜诇 诪谉 讛爪讚 诇讗 砖诪讬讛 讟诇讟讜诇 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛讗讬 驻讜讙诇讗 诪诇诪注诇讛 诇诪讟讛 砖专讬 诪诪讟讛 诇诪注诇讛 讗住讬专 讛讚专 讘讬讛 专讘 谞讞诪谉 诪讛讛讬讗:

The Gemara asks: Is that to say that Rav Na岣an holds: Moving an object in an atypical manner is not considered to be a bona fide act of moving and is permitted on Shabbat? Didn鈥檛 Rav Na岣an say: This radish that was buried in the dirt to protect it, if it was inserted from the top to bottom, i.e., the wider part of the radish is closer to the surface and the narrower part is farther, it is permitted to remove it from the dirt. If it was inserted from bottom to top, and the wider part was farther from the surface, it is prohibited because he thereby moves the dirt. Apparently, Rav Na岣an prohibits moving set-aside items even if one does so in an atypical manner. The Gemara answers: Rav Na岣an reversed his opinion with regard to that halakha of the radish.

诪讞讟 砖诇 讬讚 诇讬讟讜诇 讘讛 讻讜壮: 砖诇讞 诇讬讛 专讘讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讛 诇专讘 讬讜住祝 讬诇诪讚谞讜 专讘讬谞讜 诪讞讟 砖谞讬讟诇 讞专专讛 讗讜 注讜拽爪讛 诪讛讜

We learned in the mishna: One is permitted to take an ordinary hand needle used for sewing clothes to extract a thorn with it. Rava, son of Rabba, sent the following question to Rav Yosef: Let our teacher teach us: With regard to a needle whose eye or point was removed, what is its legal status, i.e., is moving it on Shabbat permitted?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 转谞讬转讜讛 诪讞讟 砖诇 讬讚 诇讬讟讜诇 讘讛 讗转 讛拽讜抓 讜讻讬 诪讛 讗讬讻驻转 诇讬讛 诇拽讜抓 讘讬谉 谞拽讜讘讛 诇讘讬谉 砖讗讬谞讛 谞拽讜讘讛

Rav Yosef said to him: You already learned the answer to that question in the mishna: One is permitted to take an ordinary hand needle used for sewing clothes to extract a thorn with it. And what does the thorn that is stuck in his flesh care whether the needle has an eye or whether it does not have an eye? Since the needle is suited for that purpose, it is permitted to move it.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 诪讞讟 砖谞讬讟诇 讞专专讛 讗讜 注讜拽爪讛 讟讛讜专讛

Rava, son of Rabba, raised an objection to Rav Yosef from that which we learned in a mishna: A ritually impure needle whose eye or point was removed becomes ritually pure, because its status as a vessel is negated. Since it is no longer considered a vessel, why would it be permitted to move it?

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讟讜诪讗讛 讗砖讘转 拽专诪讬转 讟讜诪讗讛 讻诇讬 诪注砖讛 讘注讬谞谉 诇注谞讬谉 砖讘转 诪讬讚讬 讚讞讝讬 讘注讬谞谉 讜讛讗 谞诪讬 讞讝讬讗 诇诪砖拽诇讗 讘讛 拽讜抓

Abaye said: Are you raising a contradiction from the halakhot of ritual impurity to the halakhot of Shabbat? With regard to ritual impurity, we require a functional utensil for it to become ritually impure or to retain impurity, and anything which is not functional is ritually pure. However, with regard to Shabbat we require something that is fit for use, and this too is fit to extract a thorn with it, and therefore, its legal status is that of a utensil and moving it is permitted.

讗诪专 专讘讗 诪讗谉 讚拽诪讜转讬讘 砖驻讬专 拽诪讜转讬讘 诪讚诇注谞讬谉 讟讜诪讗讛 诇讗讜 诪谞讗 讛讜讗 诇注谞讬谉 砖讘转 谞诪讬 诇讗讜 诪谞讗 讛讜讗

Rava said: The one who raises the objection, raises the objection well. From the fact that with regard to ritual impurity it is not considered a utensil, with regard to Shabbat, it is also not considered a utensil, and if it is not a utensil it may not be moved on Shabbat.

诪讬转讬讘讬 诪讞讟 讘讬谉 谞拽讜讘讛 讘讬谉 砖讗讬谞讛 谞拽讜讘讛 诪讜转专 诇讟诇讟诇讛 讘砖讘转 讜诇讗 讗诪专讜 谞拽讜讘讛 讗诇讗 诇注谞讬谉 讟讜诪讗讛 讘诇讘讚

The Gemara raises an objection to the opinion of Rava based on what was taught in a baraita: A needle, whether it is perforated or whether it is not perforated, it is permitted to move it on Shabbat. And they said that the status of a perforated needle is different only with regard to ritual impurity alone.

转专讙诪讗 讗讘讬讬 讗诇讬讘讗 讚专讘讗 讘讙讜诇诪讬 注住拽讬谞谉 讝讬诪谞讬谉 讚诪讬诪诇讱 注诇讬讬讛讜 讜诪砖讜讬 诇讛讜 诪谞讗 讗讘诇 讛讬讻讗 讚谞讬讟诇 讞专专讛 讗讜 注讜拽爪讛 讗讚诐 讝讜专拽讛 诇讘讬谉 讙专讜讟讗讜转

Abaye interpreted it according to the opinion of Rava: In this mishna, we are dealing with unfinished needles. Sometimes one decides to render them a utensil for other purposes without perforating them. However, in a case where its eye or its point was removed from the finished needle, its status as a vessel was negated, since a person throws it among the junk [gerutaot].

讗住讜讘讬 讬谞讜拽讗 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗住讬专 讜专讘 砖砖转 砖专讬 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 诪谞讗 讗诪讬谞讗 诇讛 讚转谞谉 讗讬谉 注讜砖讬谉

With regard to the matter of aligning the limbs of an infant on Shabbat when it is necessary to do so, Rav Na岣an prohibits doing so on Shabbat, due to concern that it is similar to the prohibited labor of completing the production process of a vessel, and Rav Sheshet permits doing so. Rav Na岣an says: From where do I say that this is the halakha? As we learned in a mishna: One may not make

讗驻讬拽讟讜讬讝讬谉 讘砖讘转 讜专讘 砖砖转 讛转诐 诇讗讜 讗讜专讞讬讛 讛讻讗 讗讜专讞讬讛

afiktoizin, a drug to induce vomiting, on Shabbat. Apparently, actions associated with treating the body on Shabbat are prohibited. And Rav Sheshet explains: There, with regard to a drug to induce vomiting, drinking it for any reason other than medicinal purposes is atypical. Here, aligning the limbs of an infant is typical conduct not undertaken solely for medicinal purposes.

讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 诪谞讗 讗诪讬谞讗 诇讛 讚转谞谉 诪讞讟 砖诇 讬讚 诇讬讟讜诇 讘讛 讗转 讛拽讜抓 讜专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛转诐 驻拽讬讚 讛讻讗 诇讗 驻拽讬讚:

Rav Sheshet said: From where do I say that this is the halakha? As we learned in the mishna: One is permitted to take an ordinary hand needle used for sewing clothes to extract a thorn with it. Apparently, some curative actions are permitted and there is no concern that they are similar to completing the production process of a vessel. And Rav Na岣an objects: That is no proof, as there, the thorn is merely deposited in the skin and it is not an organic part of the body. Removing a foreign object from the body effects no fundamental change in the body. Here, in the case of aligning the limbs, it is not merely tending to a foreign object deposited in the body; rather it involves effecting a fundamental change in the body itself, which is both a curative act and one similar to completing the production process.

诪转谞讬壮 拽谞讛 砖诇 讝讬转讬诐 讗诐 讬砖 拽砖专 讘专讗砖讜 诪拽讘诇 讟讜诪讗讛 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谉 诪拽讘诇 讟讜诪讗讛 讘讬谉 讻讱 讜讘讬谉 讻讱 谞讬讟诇 讘砖讘转:

MISHNA: A reed that is used for turning olives in a bundle, if there is a cork-like knot at the top of it, it can become ritually impure as a vessel, and if not, it cannot become ritually impure, because it is not a vessel. In either case, it may be moved on Shabbat for use in a permitted action.

讙诪壮 讗诪讗讬 驻砖讜讟讬 讻诇讬 注抓 讛讜讗 讜驻砖讜讟讬 讻诇讬 注抓 讗讬谞谉 诪拽讘诇讬谉 讟讜诪讗讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚讜诪讬讗 讚砖拽 讘注讬谞谉 转谞讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讘砖注讛 砖诪讛驻讱 讘讝讬转讬诐 讛讜驻讻讜 讜专讜讗讛 讘讜:

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: Why would this reed become impure? It is in the category of flat wooden vessels without a receptacle, and the governing principle in that case is: Flat wooden vessels do not become ritually impure. What is the reason for this? We require an object similar to a sack. The halakhot of ritual impurity are derived from the sack mentioned in the Torah as an example of an item that can become ritually impure. If it lacks a receptacle, it is unlike that sack and it cannot become ritually impure. To explain this halakha, the Gemara cites that which was taught in a baraita in the name of Rabbi Ne岣mya: At the time that one turns over the olives with the reed, he turns over the reed and sees inside it. There is a small cavity at the end of the reed near the knot. He looks there to ascertain whether it has filled with oil, which would indicate that the olives are ready to be placed in the olive press. That cavity is a type of small receptacle, which renders the reed fit to become ritually impure.

诪转谞讬壮 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讞讜抓 诪谉 讛诪住专 讛讙讚讜诇 讜讬转讚 砖诇 诪讞专讬砖讛:

MISHNA: Rabbi Yosei says: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat except for a large saw and the blade of a plow. Since they must be sharp and ready for use and there is concern that they might be damaged, one sets them aside from his consciousness and they may not be used for any other purpose.

讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛讗讬 讗讜讻诇讗 讚拽爪专讬 讻讬转讚 砖诇 诪讞专讬砖讛 讚诪讬讗

GEMARA: Rav Na岣an says: A launderer鈥檚 sprinkler is considered to be like the blade of a plow. Moving it is prohibited on Shabbat because one sets it aside from use out of concern that it might be damaged.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讞专讘讗 讚讗讜砖讻驻讬 讜住讻讬谞讗 讚讗砖讻讘转讗 讜讞爪讬谞讗 讚谞讙专讬 讻讬转讚 砖诇 诪讞专讬砖讛 讚诪讬

Abaye says: A shoemaker鈥檚 knife, and a butcher鈥檚 knife, and a carpenter鈥檚 drawknife are considered to be like the blade of a plow, because their owners set them aside from use out of concern that they might be damaged.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讘专讗砖讜谞讛 讛讬讜 讗讜诪专讬诐 砖诇砖讛 讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 诪拽爪讜注 砖诇 讚讘讬诇讛 讜讝讜讛诪讗 诇讬住讟专谉 砖诇 拽讚专讛 讜住讻讬谉 拽讟谞讛 砖注诇 讙讘讬 砖诇讞谉 讛转讬专讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 注讚 砖讗诪专讜 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 讞讜抓 诪谉 诪住专 讛讙讚讜诇 讜讬转讚 砖诇 诪讞专讬砖讛

The Sages taught in the Tosefta: Initially, they would say that only three utensils may be moved on Shabbat: A knife for cutting a cake of dried figs, and a combined spoon and fork (ge鈥檕nim) to clean the filth [zuhama listeran] of a pot, and a small knife that is on the table. Each of these items is required for eating and may be used, and it had been prohibited to move any other utensil. However, over the generations, when the Rabbis saw that Jewish people were vigilant in observing the prohibitions of Shabbat, they permitted, and then they permitted again, and then they permitted again, until they said in the last mishna: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat except for a large saw and the blade of a plow.

诪讗讬 讛转讬专讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜

The Gemara asks: What are the stages described in the Tosefta: They permitted, and then they permitted, and then they permitted?

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛转讬专讜 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讛讬转专 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讛讬转专 诇爪讜专讱 诪拽讜诪讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讗讬住讜专 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 讗讬谉 诇爪讜专讱 诪拽讜诪讜 诇讗 讜注讚讬讬谉 讘讬讚讜 讗讞转 讗讬谉 讘砖转讬 讬讚讬讜 诇讗 注讚 砖讗诪专讜 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖转讬 讬讚讬诐

Abaye says: Initially, they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a permitted use, for the purpose of utilizing the object itself to perform a permitted action. And then they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a permitted use, for the purpose of sitting in or utilizing its place. And then they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, for the purpose of utilizing the object itself to perform a permitted action, yes; however, for the purpose of utilizing its place, no. And still, utensils that can be held in one of his hands, yes, they may be moved; however, utensils that can only be held in his two hands, no, they may not be moved, in order to signify that there is a prohibition to move certain items. This prohibition remained intact until they said: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat, and even those that can only be held in both hands.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诪讻讚讬 讛转讬专讜 拽转谞讬 诪讛 诇讬 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 诪讛 诇讬 诇爪讜专讱 诪拽讜诪讜 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 讛转讬专讜 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讛讬转专 讘讬谉 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 讜讘讬谉 诇爪讜专讱 诪拽讜诪讜 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 诪讞诪讛 诇爪诇 讜讞讝专讜 讜讛转讬专讜 讚讘专 砖诪诇讗讻转讜 诇讗讬住讜专 诇爪讜专讱 讙讜驻讜 讜诇爪讜专讱 诪拽讜诪讜 讗讬谉 诪讞诪讛 诇爪诇 诇讗 讜注讚讬讬谉 讘讗讚诐 讗讞讚 讗讬谉 讘砖谞讬 讘谞讬 讗讚诐 诇讗 注讚 砖讗诪专讜 讻诇 讛讻诇讬诐 谞讬讟诇讬谉 讘砖讘转 讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖谞讬 讘谞讬 讗讚诐

Rava said to him: After all, it was taught in the Tosefta: They permitted, what difference is there to me if it is for the purpose of utilizing the object itself, and what difference is there to me if it is for the purpose of utilizing its place; why introduce distinctions that are not explicitly stated in the Tosefta? Rather, Rava said that it should be explained as follows: Initially, they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a permitted use, both for the purpose of utilizing the object itself and for the purpose of sitting in or utilizing its place. And then they permitted moving that object from the sun into the shade. And then they permitted moving an object whose primary function is for a prohibited use, both for the purpose of utilizing the object itself and for the purpose of sitting in or utilizing its place, yes; however, moving that object from the sun into the shade, no, they did not permit it. And still, utensils that can be carried by one person, yes, they may be moved; however, utensils that can only be carried by two people, no, they may not be moved. This prohibition remained intact until they said: All utensils may be moved on Shabbat, and even those that can only be carried by two people.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 讗讘讬讬 诪讚讜讻讛 讗诐 讬砖 讘讛 砖讜诐 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谉 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 讛讻讗 讘诪讗讬 注住拽讬谞谉 诪讞诪讛 诇爪诇 讗讬转讬讘讬讛 讜砖讜讬谉 砖讗诐 拽爪讘 注诇讬讜 讘砖专 砖讗住讜专 诇讟诇讟诇讜 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 诪讞诪讛 诇爪诇

Abaye raised a challenge to Rava鈥檚 opinion from that which was taught: With regard to a mortar, if it has garlic in it, one may move it on Shabbat, and if not, one may not move it on Shabbat. According to Rava鈥檚 opinion that all utensils may be moved, why is it prohibited to move the mortar? Rava responded: With what we are dealing here? We are dealing with a case of moving the mortar from the sun to the shade. Abaye raised a challenge to Rava鈥檚 opinion from that which was taught: Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel agree that if one cut meat on it for the purpose of a Festival that it is then prohibited to move it because there is no further need for it on the Festival. According to Rava鈥檚 opinion, all utensils may be moved. He answered him: Here, too, we are dealing with a case of moving the mortar from the sun to the shade.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘讬诪讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讘谉 讞讻诇讬讛 谞砖谞讬转 诪砖谞讛 讝讜 讚讻转讬讘 讘讬诪讬诐 讛讛诪讛 专讗讬转讬 讘讬讛讜讚讛 讚讜专讻讬诐 讙转讜转 讘砖讘转 讜诪讘讬讗讬诐 讛注专讬诪讜转

Rabbi 岣nina said: This mishna was taught in the days of Nehemiah, son of Hacaliah, a period when many stringent decrees were issued with regard to Shabbat prohibitions, as it is written: 鈥淚n those days I saw in Judea some treading winepresses on Shabbat and bringing in heaps of grain and lading donkeys with them; as also wine, grapes, figs, and all manner of burdens which are brought into Jerusalem on the Shabbat day. I forewarned them on that day when they sold food鈥 (Nehemiah 13:15). Since the people treated the sanctity of Shabbat with disdain, Nehemiah instituted many stringencies with regard to all the halakhot of Shabbat in order to educate the people to observe Shabbat.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 拽谞讬谉 讜诪拽诇讜转 讙诇讜住讟专讗 讜诪讚讜讻讛 讻讜诇谉 拽讜讚诐 讛转专转 讻诇讬诐 谞砖谞讜

Rabbi Elazar said: The mishnayot that deal with the topics of rods, poles, the thick end [gelostera] of the bolt in a door lock, and a mortar were all taught before permission to move utensils on Shabbat was adopted. At that time, moving most utensils was still prohibited and only a small number of utensils whose primary function was for a permitted use were permitted to be moved. The Gemara cites the relevant mishnayot.

拽谞讬谉 讚转谞谉 诇讗 住讬讚讜专 讛拽谞讬谉 讜诇讗 谞讟讬诇转谉 讚讜讞讛 讗转 讛砖讘转

Rods: Golden rods were placed between the loaves of showbread in the Temple to support the loaves and to aerate them. At that time, moving the rods was prohibited because they were considered to be set-aside, as we learned in a mishna: Neither arranging the rods nor moving them overrides the prohibition of set-aside on Shabbat.

诪拽诇讜转 讚转谞谉 诪拽诇讜转 讚拽讬谉 讞诇拽讬谉 讛讬讜 砖诐 讜诪谞讬讞讜 注诇 讻转驻讜 讜注诇 讻转祝 讞讘讬专讜 讜转讜诇讛 讜诪驻砖讬讟 (讗诪专) 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗专讘注讛 注砖专 砖讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖讘转 诪谞讬讞

And the source for the matter of poles is as we learned in a mishna: There were thin, smooth poles in the Temple, and every Passover eve one places the pole on his shoulder and on the shoulder of another, and suspends the Paschal lamb on it and flays its hide. And Rabbi Elazar said: With regard to the fourteenth of Nisan, the day that the Paschal lamb is sacrificed, that occurred on Shabbat, they would not use the poles, as a conspicuous reminder that it was Shabbat. Instead, one places

Scroll To Top