Shabbat 126

בין קשור בין שאינו קשור והוא שמתוקן

Both if it is tied and if it is not tied it is permitted, and that is only if it is prepared for this purpose beforehand.

אמר ליה רבי ירמיה ולימא מר בין תלוי ובין שאינו תלוי והוא שקשור דאמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן כמחלוקת כאן כך מחלוקת בנגר הנגרר דתנן נגר הנגרר נועלין בו במקדש אבל לא במדינה והמונח כאן וכאן אסור רבי יהודה אומר המונח במקדש והנגרר במדינה

Rabbi Yirmeya said to Rabbi Abba: And let the Master say it in this way: Both if it is hanging and if it is not hanging, and that is only if it is tied, as Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Like the dispute here with regard to the window shutter, so too is the dispute with regard to a bolt that was dragged, which refers to a pole that was stuck through a hole in the door and into the ground in order to hold the door in place. As we learned in a mishna: With regard to a bolt that is dragged, which is not a part of the door itself but is attached to it and is dragged on the ground, one locks with it in the Temple on Shabbat, because the rabbinic decrees are not in effect in the Temple, but not in the rest of the country outside the Temple. And a bolt that is placed alongside the door and not attached, here, in the Temple, and there, outside the Temple, it is prohibited to lock with it on Shabbat. Rabbi Yehuda says: One that was placed is permitted in the Temple and one that is dragged is permitted even in the rest of the country.

ותניא איזהו נגר הנגרר שנועלין בו במקדש אבל לא במדינה כל שקשור ותלוי וראשו מגיע לארץ רבי יהודה אומר זה אף במדינה מותר אלא איזהו שבמדינה אסור כל שאינו לא קשור ולא תלוי ושומטו ומניחו בקרן זוית

And it was taught in a baraita: What is a bolt that is dragged that one locks with it in the Temple but not in the rest of the country? Any bolt that is tied and hangs from the door and one of its edges reaches the ground. Rabbi Yehuda says: That is permitted even in the rest of the country. Rather, what is prohibited in the rest of the country? Any bolt that is neither tied nor hung, and one removes it from the door and places it in a corner.

ואמר רבי יהושע בר אבא משמיה דעולא מאן תנא נגר הנגרר רבי אליעזר היא

And Rabbi Yehoshua bar Abba said in the name of Ulla: Who is the tanna who taught the halakha of a bolt that is dragged? The tanna is Rabbi Eliezer, whose opinion in this case is identical to his opinion in the mishna with regard to the window shutter. It is certainly referring to a shutter that is attached. If it is not attached, Rabbi Eliezer holds that it is prohibited for use even in the Temple.

אמר ליה אנא דאמרי כי האי תנא דתניא קנה שהתקינו בעל הבית להיות פותח ונועל בו בזמן שקשור ותלוי בפתח פותח ונועל בו אין קשור ותלוי אין פותח ונועל בו רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר מתוקן אף על פי שאינו קשור

Rabbi Abba said to Rabbi Yirmeya: It is I who say that this case is in accordance with the opinion of this tanna, as it was taught in the Tosefta: With regard to a reed that the homeowner installed to open and lock the door with it like a bolt, when it is tied and hanging in the entrance, one may open and lock the door with it on Shabbat, and when it is not tied and hanging, one may not open and lock the door with it. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: If it was prepared for that use, it is permitted to use it even if it is not tied. There is an opinion that holds that a bolt need not be attached, and preparation is sufficient to permit its use.

אמר רב יהודה בר שילת אמר רב אסי אמר רבי יוחנן הלכה כרבן שמעון בן גמליאל

Rav Yehuda bar Sheilat said that Rav Asi said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha in this case is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.

ומי אמר רבי יוחנן הכי והתנן כל כסויי הכלים

The Gemara asks: Did Rabbi Yoḥanan really say this? Didn’t we learn in the mishna: All covers of vessels

שיש להם בית אחיזה ניטלין בשבת ואמר רב יהודה בר שילא אמר רב אסי אמר רבי יוחנן והוא שיש תורת כלי עליהן

that have a handle may be moved on Shabbat. And Rav Yehuda bar Sheila said that Rav Asi said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And that is specifically when the status of a vessel applies to them, i.e., when the cover itself is suited for use as a vessel. This is contrary to the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who holds that preparation alone is sufficient.

וכי תימא הכא נמי דאיכא תורת כלי עליו ומי בעי רבן שמעון בן גמליאל תורת כלי עליו והתניא חריות של דקל שגדרן לשם עצים ונמלך עליהן לישיבה צריך לקשר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר אין צריך לקשר

And if you say: Here, too, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel is referring to a case where the status of a vessel applies to the reed, does Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel require that the status of a vessel apply to it? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: With regard to hard branches of a palm tree that one cut for firewood or for construction and then he reconsidered their designation and decided to use them for sitting, he must tie the branches together on Shabbat eve so that they will not be set-aside. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: He need not tie them together, and nevertheless, it is permitted to move them. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel does not require that one render it a vessel. Thought is sufficient.

רבי יוחנן סבירא ליה כוותיה בחדא ופליג עליה בחדא

The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yoḥanan holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel in one matter and disagrees with him in one matter.

דרש רבי יצחק נפחא אפתחא דריש גלותא הלכה כרבי אליעזר מתיב רב עמרם ומדבריהם למדנו שפוקקין ומודדין וקושרין בשבת

Rabbi Yitzḥak taught at the entrance of the house of the Exilarch: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer in the matter of a window shutter. Rav Amram raised an objection from that we learned explicitly in a mishna: And from their statements and their actions, we derived that one may seal a window, and measure, and tie a knot on Shabbat. Apparently, one may shutter the window under any circumstances, not only when the shutter was prepared for use, as Rabbi Eliezer said.

אמר ליה [אביי] מאי דעתיך משום דקתני סתמא נגר הנגרר נמי סתמא היא ואפילו הכי מעשה רב:

Abaye said to Rav Amram: What is your opinion, that the proof is decisive because it was taught in the mishna unattributed and the halakha is in accordance with an unattributed mishna? The mishna with regard to a bolt that is dragged is also an unattributed mishna. The halakha should be in accordance with that mishna as well. The Gemara concludes: And even so, an action is greater. Even though the two mishnayot are of equal weight, since one of them not only cites an unattributed opinion but also relates an incident where the Sages shuttered a window, that source is decisive.

מתני׳ (כל) כיסוי הכלים שיש להם בית אחיזה ניטלין בשבת אמר רבי יוסי במה דברים אמורים בכיסוי קרקעות אבל בכיסוי הכלים בין כך ובין כך ניטלין בשבת:

MISHNA: All covers of vessels that have a handle may be moved on Shabbat. Rabbi Yosei said: In what case is this statement said? In the case of a cover for the ground, i.e., the cover of a pit; however, with regard to covers of vessels, both in this case and in that case, even if they do not have handles, they may be moved on Shabbat.

גמ׳ אמר רב יהודה בר שילא אמר רבי אסי אמר רבי יוחנן והוא שיש תורת כלי עליהן דכולי עלמא כסוי קרקעות אם יש להן בית אחיזה אין אי לא לא כסוי הכלים אף על גב דאין להם בית אחיזה

GEMARA: Rav Yehuda bar Sheila said that Rabbi Asi said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And this applies specifically when the status of a vessel applies to them and they are suited for some use. The Gemara adds: Everyone holds that with regard to a cover for the ground, if it has a handle, yes, it is permitted to move it, and if not, no, it is prohibited to move it; with regard to a cover of a vessel, even if it does not have a handle, it is permitted to move it.

כי פליגי בכלים דחברינהו בארעא מר סבר גזרינן ומר סבר לא גזרינן

When they disagree in the mishna, it is with regard to vessels that one attached to the ground. This Sage, the first tanna, holds that we issue a decree according to which it is prohibited to move the cover of a vessel attached to the ground due to the concern that one will move a cover for the ground itself, and that Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that we do not issue a decree.

לישנא אחרינא כי פליגי בכיסוי תנור מר מדמי ליה לכיסוי קרקע ומר מדמי ליה לכיסוי כלים:

Another version of this statement: When they disagree in the mishna, it is with regard to the cover of an oven; this Sage likens it to a cover for the ground, and this Sage likens it to a cover of a vessel.

הדרן עלך כל הכלים

מתני׳ מפנין אפילו ארבע וחמש קופות של תבן ושל תבואה מפני האורחים ומפני בטול בית המדרש אבל לא את האוצר

MISHNA: On Shabbat, one may move even four or five baskets of straw and baskets of produce, due to the guests, who require that place to sit, and due to suspension of Torah study in the study hall, where space is required to seat the students. However, one may not move these items to create space in the storeroom.

מפנין תרומה טהורה ודמאי ומעשר ראשון שניטלה תרומתו ומעשר שני והקדש שנפדו והתורמוס היבש מפני שהוא מאכל לעזים

One may move ritually pure teruma, although it may only be eaten by a priest; and doubtfully tithed produce [demai], which may not be eaten until tithes are separated from it due to concern that an am ha’aretz did not separate its tithes; and first tithe whose teruma of the tithe has already been taken and given to priests; and second tithe and consecrated items that were redeemed; and even dry lupine, which is not fit for consumption by a person, because it is goat food.

אבל לא את הטבל ולא את מעשר [ראשון] שלא נטלה תרומתו ולא את מעשר שני והקדש שלא נפדו ולא את הלוף ולא את החרדל רבי שמעון בן גמליאל מתיר בלוף מפני שהוא מאכל עורבין

However, one may neither move untithed produce, nor first tithe whose teruma has not been taken, nor second tithe and consecrated items that were not redeemed, nor raw arum and raw mustard, as all of these items are not fit for consumption and are therefore set aside. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel permits moving in the case of arum because it is food for ravens.

חבילי קש וחבילי עצים וחבילי זרדים אם התקינן למאכל בהמה מטלטלין אותן ואם לאו אין מטלטלין אותן

With regard to bundles of straw, and bundles of wood, and bundles of twigs, if one prepared them on Shabbat eve for animal food, one may move them. And if not, one may not move them.

גמ׳ השתא חמש מפנין ארבע מיבעיא

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: Now that the mishna stated that one may move five baskets, is mentioning four baskets necessary?

אמר רב חסדא ארבע מחמש (איכא דאמרי ארבע מאוצר קטן) וחמש מאוצר גדול

Rav Ḥisda said: The mishna means that one may move four out of five baskets, but not all of them. Some say: It is permitted to move four baskets from a small storeroom and five baskets from a large storeroom.

ומאי אבל לא את האוצר שלא יתחיל באוצר תחלה ומני רבי יהודה היא דאית ליה מוקצה

The Gemara asks: And what then is the meaning of: However, one may not move these items to create space in the storeroom? It means that one may not use the storeroom for the first time. If he has never taken supplies from this storeroom, he may not begin moving baskets from it. And whose opinion is cited in this mishna? It is the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who is of the opinion that this constitutes a prohibition of set-aside. The contents of a storeroom that was never used are set-aside.

ושמואל אמר ארבע וחמש

And Shmuel says: The difficulty in the mishna should be explained as a figure of speech: Four and five,