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

Today's Daf Yomi

April 10, 2020 | 讟状讝 讘谞讬住谉 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 35

Today’s shiur is dedicated by Aliza Avshalom in loving memory of her mother, Sara Bellehsen z”l, who lived and loved Torah and for a refuah shleima for all those worldwide who need it. This week’s shiurim are dedicated in celebration of the birthday of Rabbi Fredda Cohen with love from her family.

The opinions of Rabba and Rav Yosef regarding bein hashmashot are flipped regarding the size of a basket that is considered mukze on Shabbat and cannot be carried. Rabba has the larger size for bein hashmashot and the smaller one for the basket. The rabbis provide methods by which one could determine when exactly bein hashmashot starts and ends. They also mention where to go if one wants to see the well of Miriam that provided water for the Jews when they were in the dessert. Since rabbi Yehuda says bein hashmashot begins when the east side begins to redden – does one look for that in the East or in the West? They would blow 6 shofar blasts before Shabbat – first one for the workers in the fields, then for the workers in the city then for lighting candles or to remind people to remove their tefillin and then 3 blasts together to signal the beginning of Shabbat. A more detailed description is brought also from another braita.

转讜讻谉 讝讛 转讜专讙诐 讙诐 诇: 注讘专讬转

转专讬 转讬诇转讬 诪讬诇 诪讗讬 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗讬讻讗 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 驻诇讙讗 讚讚谞拽讗

it means two-thirds of a mil. The Gemara explains: What is the practical difference between them? The practical difference between them is half of one-sixth [danka], i.e., one-twelfth of a mil. Their disputes are consistent, as the duration of twilight according to Rav Yosef is shorter than its duration according to Rabba.

讜讞讬诇讜驻讛 讘讞诇转讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讛 讞诇转讗 讘转 转专讬 讻讜专讬 砖专讬 诇讟诇讟讜诇讛 讜讘转 转诇转讗 讻讜专讬 讗住讜专 诇讟诇讟讜诇讛 讜专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讘转 转诇转讗 讻讜专讬 谞诪讬 砖专讬 讘转 讗专讘注讛 讻讜专讬 讗住讜专

The Gemara comments: And with regard to the legal status of a wicker vessel their dispute is the opposite. In that case, the size of the vessel permitted by Rav Yosef is larger than the size of the vessel permitted by Rabba. As Rabba said with regard to a wicker vessel with a capacity of two kor, one is permitted to move it on Shabbat. And one with a capacity of three kor, one is prohibited to move it on Shabbat. It is much larger than the dimensions of a vessel and one is only permitted to move vessels on Shabbat. And Rav Yosef said: A vessel with a capacity of three kor, one is also permitted to move it, and only one with a capacity of four kor, it is prohibited to move.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讘注讬 诪讬谞讬讛 讚诪专 讘砖注转 诪注砖讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘转 转专讬 讻讜专讬 诇讗 砖专讗 诇讬 讻诪讗谉 讻讛讗讬 转谞讗 讚转谞谉 讻讜讜专转 讛拽砖 讜讻讜讜专转 讛拽谞讬诐 讜讘讜专 住驻讬谞讛 讗诇讻住谞讚专讬转 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讬砖 诇讛诐 砖讜诇讬诐 讜讛谉 诪讞讝讬拽讜转 讗专讘注讬诐 住讗讛 讘诇讞 砖讛谉 讻讜专讬讬诐 讘讬讘砖 讟讛讜专讬诐 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讛讗讬 讙讜讚砖讗 转讬诇转讗 讛讜讬

Abaye said: I raised the dilemma before my Master, Rabba, when it was practical, when I actually needed to know what to do, and he did not permit me to move even a vessel with a capacity of two kor. The Gemara explains: In accordance with whose opinion did Rabba issue his practical halakhic ruling? In accordance with the opinion of this tanna that we learned in the mishna discussing the laws of ritual purity: A round straw barrel, and a round barrel made of reeds, and the cistern of an Alexandrian ship, which is a large vessel placed on a boat and filled with potable water, although these vessels have bottoms, i.e., they are receptacles, since they have a capacity of forty se鈥檃 of liquid, which is the equivalent of two kor of dry goods, they are ritually pure. Even if they come into contact with a source of ritual impurity, they do not become impure. Beyond a certain size, containers are no longer considered vessels and, consequently, cannot become ritually impure. Rabba held: Since with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity a vessel of two kor is not considered a vessel, it may not be moved on Shabbat. With regard to this mishna, Abaye said: Learn from it that the surplus of dry goods in a vessel relative to liquids is one-third of the contents of the vessel. It says in the mishna that a vessel that can hold forty se鈥檃 of liquid holds two kor of dry produce, which is the equivalent of sixty se鈥檃.

讗讘讬讬 讞讝讬讬讛 诇专讘讗 讚拽讗 讚讗讜讬 诇诪注专讘 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讜讛转谞讬讗 讻诇 讝诪谉 砖驻谞讬 诪讝专讞 诪讗讚讬诪讬谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讬 住讘专转 驻谞讬 诪讝专讞 诪诪砖 诇讗 驻谞讬诐 讛诪讗讚讬诪讬谉 讗转 讛诪讝专讞 讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 专讘讗 讞讝讬讬讛 诇讗讘讬讬 讚拽讗 讚讗讜讬 诇诪讝专讞 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讬 住讘专转 驻谞讬 诪讝专讞 诪诪砖 驻谞讬诐 讛诪讗讚讬诪讬谉 讗转 讛诪讝专讞 讜住讬诪谞讬讱 讻讜讜转讗:

The Gemara relates: Abaye saw that Rava was gazing westward on Shabbat eve to determine whether or not the sky was red and whether or not it was twilight. Abaye said to Rava: Wasn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita that twilight is from when the sun sets, as long as the eastern face of the sky is reddened by the light of the sun? Why, then, are you looking westward? Rava said to him: Do you hold that the reference is actually to the eastern face of the sky? No, it is referring to the face of the sky that causes the east to redden, i.e., the west. Some say a different version of that incident. Rava saw that Abaye was gazing eastward. He said to him, do you hold that the reference is to the actual eastern face of the sky? The reference is to the face of the sky that causes the east to redden, i.e., the west. And your mnemonic is a window, as it is on the wall opposite the window that one can see how much sunlight is shining through.

专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讗讜诪专 讻讚讬 砖讬讛诇讱 讗讚诐 诪砖转砖拽注 讛讞诪讛 讞爪讬 诪讬诇: 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讛专讜爪讛 诇讬讚注 砖讬注讜专讜 砖诇 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讬谞讬讞 讞诪讛 讘专讗砖 讛讻专诪诇 讜讬专讚 讜讬讟讘讜诇 讘讬诐 讜讬注诇讛 讜讝讛讜 砖讬注讜专讜 砖诇 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛

With regard to that which was taught in the baraita that Rabbi Ne岣mya says: The duration of twilight is the time it takes for a person to walk half a mil after the sun sets. Rabbi 岣nina said: One who wants to know the precise measure of Rabbi Ne岣mya鈥檚 twilight should do the following: Leave the sun at the top of Mount Carmel, as when one is standing on the seashore he can still see the top of Mount Carmel in sunlight, and descend and immerse himself in the sea, and emerge, and that is Rabbi Ne岣mya鈥檚 measure of the duration of twilight.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讛专讜爪讛 诇专讗讜转 讘讗专讛 砖诇 诪专讬诐 讬注诇讛 诇专讗砖 讛讻专诪诇 讜讬爪驻讛 讜讬专讗讛 讻诪讬谉 讻讘专讛 讘讬诐 讜讝讜 讛讬讗 讘讗专讛 砖诇 诪专讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 诪注讬谉 讛诪讬讟诇讟诇 讟讛讜专 讜讝讛讜 讘讗专讛 砖诇 诪专讬诐:

Because of its similarity to Rabbi 岣nina鈥檚 statement, the Gemara cites that which Rabbi 岣yya said: One who wants to see Miriam鈥檚 well, which accompanied the Jewish people throughout their sojourn in the desert, should do the following: He should climb to the top of Mount Carmel and look out, and he will see a rock that looks like a sieve in the sea, and that is Miriam鈥檚 well. Rav said: A spring that is portable, i.e., that moves from place to place, is ritually pure and is regarded as an actual spring and not as drawn water. And what is a movable spring? It is Miriam鈥檚 well.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讻讛谞讬诐 讟讜讘诇讬谉 讘讜 诇诪讗谉 讗讬诇讬诪讗 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 住驻拽讗 讛讜讗 讗诇讗 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诇专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讟讜讘诇讬谉 讘讜

Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: During Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 twilight, ritually impure priests who want to immerse themselves during the day to become ritually pure, so that sunset will follow immersion and they will be permitted to eat teruma, can still immerse themselves during that period. According to this opinion, twilight is still considered to be day. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that true? If you say that it is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 own opinion, his opinion cited above is that twilight is a period of uncertainty. Therefore, one who immerses at that time may not eat teruma until after the sunset of the following day. Rather, the reference is to twilight of Rabbi Yehuda, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. Priests can immerse then, as Rabbi Yosei considers that time to still be day, and sunset will follow.

驻砖讬讟讗 诪讛讜 讚转讬诪讗 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 诪讬砖讱 砖讬讬讱 讘讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚砖诇讬诐 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讛讚专 诪转讞讬诇 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬

The Gemara asks: It is obvious that according to Rabbi Yosei they are immersing themselves during the day. The Gemara answers: Lest you say that the twilight of Rabbi Yosei is subsumed within and takes place at the end of the twilight of Rabbi Yehuda. When the twilight of Rabbi Yehuda ends, Rabbi Yosei鈥檚 twilight is also over. It is already night, sunset of that day has already passed, and there is no sunset to enable them to eat teruma. Therefore, he teaches us that Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 twilight ends, and only thereafter does Rabbi Yosei鈥檚 twilight begin.

讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诇注谞讬谉 砖讘转 讜讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬 诇注谞讬谉 转专讜诪讛 讘砖诇诪讗 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诇注谞讬谉 砖讘转 诇讞讜诪专讗 讗讘诇 诇注谞讬谉 转专讜诪讛 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗讬诇讬诪讗 诇讟讘讬诇讛 住驻拽讗 讛讬讗

Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the matter of Shabbat, and the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei with regard to the matter of teruma. The Gemara asks: Granted, concerning the statement that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the matter of Shabbat, as like all other cases of uncertainty, the ruling is stringent with regard to Torah prohibitions. However, with regard to teruma, what is the case under discussion? If you say that it is referring to the matter of immersion, immersion is also a case of uncertainty with regard to a Torah law. Why would the ruling be more lenient in that case than in the case of Shabbat?

讗诇讗 诇讗讻讬诇转 转专讜诪讛 讚诇讗 讗讻诇讬 讻讛谞讬诐 转专讜诪讛 注讚 讚砖诇讬诐 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬

Rather, it must be that the reference is with regard to eating teruma. Priests may not eat teruma until twilight is completed, which according to Rabbi Yosei鈥檚 opinion is slightly later than it is according to Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 opinion.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讻讜讻讘 讗讞讚 讬讜诐 砖谞讬诐 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 砖诇砖讛 诇讬诇讛 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讻讜讻讘 讗讞讚 讬讜诐 砖谞讬诐 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 砖诇砖讛 诇讬诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 诇讗 讻讜讻讘讬诐 讙讚讜诇讬诐 讛谞专讗讬谉 讘讬讜诐 讜诇讗 讻讜讻讘讬诐 拽讟谞讬诐 砖讗讬谉 谞专讗讬谉 讗诇讗 讘诇讬诇讛 讗诇讗 讘讬谞讜谞讬诐

With regard to the period of twilight, Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: When one can see one star in the evening sky, it is still day; two stars, twilight; three stars, night. That was also taught in a baraita: When one can see one star in the evening sky, it is still day; two stars, twilight; three stars, night. Rabbi Yosei said: This is neither referring to large stars that are visible even during the day, nor to small stars that are visible only late at night. Rather, it is referring to medium-sized stars.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讝讘讬讚讗 讛注讜砖讛 诪诇讗讻讛 讘砖谞讬 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转 诪诪讛 谞驻砖讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诇砖诪注讬讛 讗转讜谉 讚诇讗 拽讬诐 诇讻讜 讘砖讬注讜专讗 讚专讘谞谉 讗讚砖讬诪砖讗 讗专讬砖 讚讬拽诇讬 讗转诇讜 砖专讙讗 讘讬讜诐 讛诪注讜谞谉 诪讗讬 讘诪转讗 讞讝讬 转专谞讙讜诇讗 讘讚讘专讗 注讜专讘讬 讗讬 谞诪讬 讗讚讗谞讬:

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Zevida, said: One who performs a prohibited labor during two twilights, one between Friday and Shabbat and one between Shabbat and the conclusion of Shabbat on Saturday night, is liable to bring a sin-offering for performing a prohibited labor on Shabbat whichever way you look at it. Whether we say that twilight is day or night, certainly one of those labors was performed on Shabbat. Rava said to his servant: You, who are not expert in the measures of the Sages, when the sun is at the top of the palm trees, light the Shabbat lights. His servant asked him: What should we do on a cloudy day, when the sun is not visible at the top of the trees? Rava said to him: In the city, watch the roosters because as evening approaches they sit on their beams. In a field, watch the ravens because they return to their nests as evening approaches. Alternatively, you can watch the plants [adanei] that turn westward in the evening. When they begin to turn westward evening is approaching.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 砖砖 转拽讬注讜转 转讜拽注讬谉 注专讘 砖讘转 专讗砖讜谞讛 诇讛讘讟讬诇 讗转 讛注诐 诪诪诇讗讻讛 砖讘砖讚讜转 砖谞讬讛 诇讛讘讟讬诇 注讬专 讜讞谞讜讬讜转 砖诇讬砖讬转 诇讛讚诇讬拽 讗转 讛谞专 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 谞转谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛谞砖讬讗 讗讜诪专 砖诇讬砖讬转 诇讞诇讜抓 转驻讬诇讬谉 讜砖讜讛讛 讻讚讬 爪诇讬讬转 讚讙 拽讟谉 讗讜 讻讚讬 诇讛讚讘讬拽 驻转 讘转谞讜专 讜转讜拽注 讜诪专讬注 讜转讜拽注 讜砖讜讘转

The Sages taught in a baraita: They sound six blasts on Shabbat eve to announce that Shabbat is approaching. The Gemara details what each blast signifies. The first blast is in order to stop the people from work in the fields. The second blast is to stop those who are working in the city, and to inform the proprietors to close the stores. The third is to inform them to light the Shabbat light; that is the statement of Rabbi Natan. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The third blast is to inform those who don phylacteries throughout the day to remove their phylacteries, as one does not don phylacteries on Shabbat. And he pauses after the third blast for the length of time it takes to fry a small fish or to stick bread to the sides of the oven. One who forgot to do so and needs those foods for Shabbat may do so then. And he sounds a tekia, and sounds a terua, and sounds a tekia, and he accepts Shabbat. It is then that Shabbat begins in every sense.

讗诪专 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 诪讛 谞注砖讛 诇讛诐 诇讘讘诇讬讬诐 砖转讜拽注讬谉 讜诪专讬注讬谉 讜砖讜讘转讬谉 诪转讜讱 诪专讬注讬谉 转讜拽注讬谉 讜诪专讬注讬谉 讛讜讜 诇讛讜 讞诪砖讛 讗诇讗 砖转讜拽注讬谉 讜讞讜讝专讬谉 讜转讜拽注讬谉 讜诪专讬注讬谉 讜砖讜讘转讬谉 诪转讜讱 诪专讬注讬谉 诪谞讛讙 讗讘讜转讬讛谉 讘讬讚讬讛谉

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: What shall we do to the Babylonian Jews? They stray from the custom, as they sound a tekia and a terua, and they accept Shabbat during the terua, i.e., upon hearing the blast of the terua. The Gemara asks about this: Do the Babylonians really sound only a tekia and a terua and no more blasts? If so, there are only five blasts and not six, as it was taught in the baraita. Rather, the correct version is: They sound a tekia, and they again sound a tekia, and then they sound a terua, and they accept Shabbat during the terua. They do so because they continue the custom of their fathers that was handed down to them.

诪转谞讬 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诇专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专讬讛 砖谞讬讛 诇讛讚诇讬拽 讗转 讛谞专 讻诪讗谉 诇讗 讻专讘讬 谞转谉 讜诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛谞砖讬讗 讗诇讗 砖诇讬砖讬转 诇讛讚诇讬拽 讗转 讛谞专 讻诪讗谉 讻专讘讬 谞转谉

Rav Yehuda taught to Rav Yitz岣k, his son: The second blast that is sounded before Shabbat is to inform people to light the light. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion did he say this? It is neither in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Natan nor in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rather, certainly he told him that the third blast is in order to inform people to light the light, and in accordance with whose opinion did he say this? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Natan.

转谞讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 砖砖 转拽讬注讜转 转讜拽注讬谉 注专讘 砖讘转 讛转讞讬诇 诇转拽讜注 转拽讬注讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 谞诪谞注讜 讛注讜诪讚讬诐 讘砖讚讛 诪诇注讚讜专 讜诪诇讞专讜砖 讜诪诇注砖讜转 讻诇 诪诇讗讻讛 砖讘砖讚讜转 讜讗讬谉 讛拽专讜讘讬谉 专砖讗讬谉 诇讬讻谞住 注讚 砖讬讘讜讗讜 专讞讜拽讬谉 讜讬讻谞住讜 讻讜诇诐 讻讗讞讚 讜注讚讬讬谉 讞谞讜讬讜转 驻转讜讞讜转 讜转专讬住讬谉 诪讜谞讞讬谉 讛转讞讬诇 诇转拽讜注 转拽讬注讛 砖谞讬讛 谞住转诇拽讜 讛转专讬住讬谉 讜谞谞注诇讜 讛讞谞讜讬讜转 讜注讚讬讬谉 讞诪讬谉 诪讜谞讞讬谉 注诇 讙讘讬 讻讬专讛 讜拽讚讬专讜转 诪讜谞讞讜转 注诇 讙讘讬 讻讬专讛 讛转讞讬诇 诇转拽讜注 转拽讬注讛 砖诇讬砖讬转 住讬诇拽 讛诪住诇拽 讜讛讟诪讬谉 讛诪讟诪讬谉 讜讛讚诇讬拽 讛诪讚诇讬拽 讜砖讜讛讛 讻讚讬 爪诇讬讬转 讚讙 拽讟谉 讗讜 讻讚讬 诇讛讚讘讬拽 驻转 讘转谞讜专 讜转讜拽注 讜诪专讬注 讜转讜拽注 讜砖讜讘转

On a similar note, the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught in greater detail: Six blasts are sounded on Shabbat eve. When one begins sounding the first tekia, the people standing and working in the fields refrained from hoeing, and from plowing and from performing all labor in the fields. And those workers who work close to the city are not permitted to enter the city until those who work farther away come, so that they will all enter together. Otherwise, people would suspect that the workers who came later continued to work after the blast. And still, at this time, the stores in the city are open and the shutters of the stores, upon which the storekeepers would arrange their merchandise in front of the stores, remain in place. When he began sounding the second blast, the shutters were removed from where they were placed and the stores were locked and in the homes, however, hot water was still cooking on the stove and pots remained in place on the stove. When he began sounding the third blast, the one charged with removing food from the stove removed it, and the one charged with insulating hot water for Shabbat so that it would not cool off insulated it, and the one charged with kindling the Shabbat lights lit. And the one sounding the shofar pauses for the amount of time it takes to fry a small fish or to stick bread to the sides of the oven, and he sounds a tekia, and sounds a terua, and sounds a tekia, and accepts Shabbat.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 (讘专) 讞谞讬谞讗 砖诪注转讬 砖讗诐 讘讗 诇讛讚诇讬拽 讗讞专 砖砖 转拽讬注讜转 诪讚诇讬拽 砖讛专讬 谞转谞讜 讞讻诪讬诐 砖讬注讜专 诇讞讝谉 讛讻谞住转 诇讛讜诇讬讱 砖讜驻专讜 诇讘讬转讜 讗诪专 诇讜 讗诐 讻谉 谞转转 讚讘专讬讱 诇砖讬注讜专讬谉 讗诇讗 诪拽讜诐 爪谞讜注 讬砖 诇讜 诇讞讝谉 讛讻谞住转 讘专讗砖 讙讙讜 砖砖诐 诪谞讬讞 砖讜驻专讜 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 诇讗 讗转 讛砖讜驻专 讜诇讗 讗转 讛讞爪讜爪专讜转

Rabbi Yosei bar 岣nina, said: I heard that a person who was pressed for time and comes to light Shabbat lights after six blasts may light without concern, as even the moment of the sixth blast is not yet Shabbat. Proof for this is that the Sages provided the sexton of the synagogue a period of time to take his shofar, which he used to sound the blasts on a tall roof in the middle of the city, to his house. Clearly, during that interval it is not yet Shabbat. He said to him: If so, then you have rendered your statement subject to circumstances, and it would not apply uniformly to all. Shabbat would start at a different time in each place based on the distance between the site where the shofar is sounded and the home of the sexton. Rather, Shabbat began immediately after the final blast with no pause in between. The sexton had a concealed place on top of his roof, where he would sound the shofar, in which he would place his shofar because the consensus is that one may move neither the shofar nor the trumpets on Shabbat.

讜讛转谞讬讗 砖讜驻专 诪讬讟诇讟诇 讜讞爪讜爪专讜转 讗讬谞诐 诪讬讟诇讟诇讬谉 讗诪专 专讘 (讬讜住讬) 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 讘讬讞讬讚 讻讗谉 讘爪讘讜专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讜讘讬讞讬讚 诇诪讗讬 讞讝讬 讛讜讗讬诇 讜专讗讜讬 诇讙诪注 讘讜 诪讬诐

The Gemara asks with regard to this last halakha: Wasn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita that the shofar may be moved on Shabbat, and the trumpets may not be moved? Rav Yosei said: This is not difficult, as one could say that here, where moving a shofar was permitted, it is referring to a shofar belonging to an individual. Because it has a use even on Shabbat, it may be moved. There, where moving a shofar was prohibited, it is referring to a shofar that belongs to a community. Because it has no use on Shabbat, it is, therefore, considered set-aside [muktze]. Abaye said to him: And in the case of an individual, for what permitted action is a shofar fit to be used on Shabbat? It is fit for use since it is suitable to give water with it

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

Weaving Wisdom

Rabbis, Archaeologist and Linguists

In the Daf Yomi, we see many interesting discussions about ancient vessels and other types of furnishings and tools.聽 An...
daf yomi One week at a time (1)

Shabbat 33-37- Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCb2NcsYM50 We will review topics on Daf 33-37 including types of cooking and ovens.聽 We will then learn...
talking talmud_square

Shabbat 36: We Don’t Always Know What the Words Mean – and the Gemara Agrees

Shofar, aravot, and the name of Babylonia - definitions in the absence of the Temple and losing the nuances of...
talking talmud_square

Shabbat 35: The First Pre-Shabbat Siren

Erev Shabbat preparation, beginning with the 6 shofar blasts announcing the coming day. And the 5 shofar blasts of the...

Shabbat 35

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Shabbat 35

转专讬 转讬诇转讬 诪讬诇 诪讗讬 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗讬讻讗 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 驻诇讙讗 讚讚谞拽讗

it means two-thirds of a mil. The Gemara explains: What is the practical difference between them? The practical difference between them is half of one-sixth [danka], i.e., one-twelfth of a mil. Their disputes are consistent, as the duration of twilight according to Rav Yosef is shorter than its duration according to Rabba.

讜讞讬诇讜驻讛 讘讞诇转讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讛 讞诇转讗 讘转 转专讬 讻讜专讬 砖专讬 诇讟诇讟讜诇讛 讜讘转 转诇转讗 讻讜专讬 讗住讜专 诇讟诇讟讜诇讛 讜专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讘转 转诇转讗 讻讜专讬 谞诪讬 砖专讬 讘转 讗专讘注讛 讻讜专讬 讗住讜专

The Gemara comments: And with regard to the legal status of a wicker vessel their dispute is the opposite. In that case, the size of the vessel permitted by Rav Yosef is larger than the size of the vessel permitted by Rabba. As Rabba said with regard to a wicker vessel with a capacity of two kor, one is permitted to move it on Shabbat. And one with a capacity of three kor, one is prohibited to move it on Shabbat. It is much larger than the dimensions of a vessel and one is only permitted to move vessels on Shabbat. And Rav Yosef said: A vessel with a capacity of three kor, one is also permitted to move it, and only one with a capacity of four kor, it is prohibited to move.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讘注讬 诪讬谞讬讛 讚诪专 讘砖注转 诪注砖讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘转 转专讬 讻讜专讬 诇讗 砖专讗 诇讬 讻诪讗谉 讻讛讗讬 转谞讗 讚转谞谉 讻讜讜专转 讛拽砖 讜讻讜讜专转 讛拽谞讬诐 讜讘讜专 住驻讬谞讛 讗诇讻住谞讚专讬转 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讬砖 诇讛诐 砖讜诇讬诐 讜讛谉 诪讞讝讬拽讜转 讗专讘注讬诐 住讗讛 讘诇讞 砖讛谉 讻讜专讬讬诐 讘讬讘砖 讟讛讜专讬诐 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讛讗讬 讙讜讚砖讗 转讬诇转讗 讛讜讬

Abaye said: I raised the dilemma before my Master, Rabba, when it was practical, when I actually needed to know what to do, and he did not permit me to move even a vessel with a capacity of two kor. The Gemara explains: In accordance with whose opinion did Rabba issue his practical halakhic ruling? In accordance with the opinion of this tanna that we learned in the mishna discussing the laws of ritual purity: A round straw barrel, and a round barrel made of reeds, and the cistern of an Alexandrian ship, which is a large vessel placed on a boat and filled with potable water, although these vessels have bottoms, i.e., they are receptacles, since they have a capacity of forty se鈥檃 of liquid, which is the equivalent of two kor of dry goods, they are ritually pure. Even if they come into contact with a source of ritual impurity, they do not become impure. Beyond a certain size, containers are no longer considered vessels and, consequently, cannot become ritually impure. Rabba held: Since with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity a vessel of two kor is not considered a vessel, it may not be moved on Shabbat. With regard to this mishna, Abaye said: Learn from it that the surplus of dry goods in a vessel relative to liquids is one-third of the contents of the vessel. It says in the mishna that a vessel that can hold forty se鈥檃 of liquid holds two kor of dry produce, which is the equivalent of sixty se鈥檃.

讗讘讬讬 讞讝讬讬讛 诇专讘讗 讚拽讗 讚讗讜讬 诇诪注专讘 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讜讛转谞讬讗 讻诇 讝诪谉 砖驻谞讬 诪讝专讞 诪讗讚讬诪讬谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讬 住讘专转 驻谞讬 诪讝专讞 诪诪砖 诇讗 驻谞讬诐 讛诪讗讚讬诪讬谉 讗转 讛诪讝专讞 讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 专讘讗 讞讝讬讬讛 诇讗讘讬讬 讚拽讗 讚讗讜讬 诇诪讝专讞 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讬 住讘专转 驻谞讬 诪讝专讞 诪诪砖 驻谞讬诐 讛诪讗讚讬诪讬谉 讗转 讛诪讝专讞 讜住讬诪谞讬讱 讻讜讜转讗:

The Gemara relates: Abaye saw that Rava was gazing westward on Shabbat eve to determine whether or not the sky was red and whether or not it was twilight. Abaye said to Rava: Wasn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita that twilight is from when the sun sets, as long as the eastern face of the sky is reddened by the light of the sun? Why, then, are you looking westward? Rava said to him: Do you hold that the reference is actually to the eastern face of the sky? No, it is referring to the face of the sky that causes the east to redden, i.e., the west. Some say a different version of that incident. Rava saw that Abaye was gazing eastward. He said to him, do you hold that the reference is to the actual eastern face of the sky? The reference is to the face of the sky that causes the east to redden, i.e., the west. And your mnemonic is a window, as it is on the wall opposite the window that one can see how much sunlight is shining through.

专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讗讜诪专 讻讚讬 砖讬讛诇讱 讗讚诐 诪砖转砖拽注 讛讞诪讛 讞爪讬 诪讬诇: 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讛专讜爪讛 诇讬讚注 砖讬注讜专讜 砖诇 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讬谞讬讞 讞诪讛 讘专讗砖 讛讻专诪诇 讜讬专讚 讜讬讟讘讜诇 讘讬诐 讜讬注诇讛 讜讝讛讜 砖讬注讜专讜 砖诇 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛

With regard to that which was taught in the baraita that Rabbi Ne岣mya says: The duration of twilight is the time it takes for a person to walk half a mil after the sun sets. Rabbi 岣nina said: One who wants to know the precise measure of Rabbi Ne岣mya鈥檚 twilight should do the following: Leave the sun at the top of Mount Carmel, as when one is standing on the seashore he can still see the top of Mount Carmel in sunlight, and descend and immerse himself in the sea, and emerge, and that is Rabbi Ne岣mya鈥檚 measure of the duration of twilight.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讛专讜爪讛 诇专讗讜转 讘讗专讛 砖诇 诪专讬诐 讬注诇讛 诇专讗砖 讛讻专诪诇 讜讬爪驻讛 讜讬专讗讛 讻诪讬谉 讻讘专讛 讘讬诐 讜讝讜 讛讬讗 讘讗专讛 砖诇 诪专讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 诪注讬谉 讛诪讬讟诇讟诇 讟讛讜专 讜讝讛讜 讘讗专讛 砖诇 诪专讬诐:

Because of its similarity to Rabbi 岣nina鈥檚 statement, the Gemara cites that which Rabbi 岣yya said: One who wants to see Miriam鈥檚 well, which accompanied the Jewish people throughout their sojourn in the desert, should do the following: He should climb to the top of Mount Carmel and look out, and he will see a rock that looks like a sieve in the sea, and that is Miriam鈥檚 well. Rav said: A spring that is portable, i.e., that moves from place to place, is ritually pure and is regarded as an actual spring and not as drawn water. And what is a movable spring? It is Miriam鈥檚 well.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讻讛谞讬诐 讟讜讘诇讬谉 讘讜 诇诪讗谉 讗讬诇讬诪讗 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 住驻拽讗 讛讜讗 讗诇讗 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诇专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讟讜讘诇讬谉 讘讜

Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: During Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 twilight, ritually impure priests who want to immerse themselves during the day to become ritually pure, so that sunset will follow immersion and they will be permitted to eat teruma, can still immerse themselves during that period. According to this opinion, twilight is still considered to be day. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that true? If you say that it is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 own opinion, his opinion cited above is that twilight is a period of uncertainty. Therefore, one who immerses at that time may not eat teruma until after the sunset of the following day. Rather, the reference is to twilight of Rabbi Yehuda, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. Priests can immerse then, as Rabbi Yosei considers that time to still be day, and sunset will follow.

驻砖讬讟讗 诪讛讜 讚转讬诪讗 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬 诪讬砖讱 砖讬讬讱 讘讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚砖诇讬诐 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讛讚专 诪转讞讬诇 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬

The Gemara asks: It is obvious that according to Rabbi Yosei they are immersing themselves during the day. The Gemara answers: Lest you say that the twilight of Rabbi Yosei is subsumed within and takes place at the end of the twilight of Rabbi Yehuda. When the twilight of Rabbi Yehuda ends, Rabbi Yosei鈥檚 twilight is also over. It is already night, sunset of that day has already passed, and there is no sunset to enable them to eat teruma. Therefore, he teaches us that Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 twilight ends, and only thereafter does Rabbi Yosei鈥檚 twilight begin.

讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诇注谞讬谉 砖讘转 讜讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬 诇注谞讬谉 转专讜诪讛 讘砖诇诪讗 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诇注谞讬谉 砖讘转 诇讞讜诪专讗 讗讘诇 诇注谞讬谉 转专讜诪讛 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗讬诇讬诪讗 诇讟讘讬诇讛 住驻拽讗 讛讬讗

Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the matter of Shabbat, and the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei with regard to the matter of teruma. The Gemara asks: Granted, concerning the statement that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the matter of Shabbat, as like all other cases of uncertainty, the ruling is stringent with regard to Torah prohibitions. However, with regard to teruma, what is the case under discussion? If you say that it is referring to the matter of immersion, immersion is also a case of uncertainty with regard to a Torah law. Why would the ruling be more lenient in that case than in the case of Shabbat?

讗诇讗 诇讗讻讬诇转 转专讜诪讛 讚诇讗 讗讻诇讬 讻讛谞讬诐 转专讜诪讛 注讚 讚砖诇讬诐 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讚专讘讬 讬讜住讬

Rather, it must be that the reference is with regard to eating teruma. Priests may not eat teruma until twilight is completed, which according to Rabbi Yosei鈥檚 opinion is slightly later than it is according to Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 opinion.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讻讜讻讘 讗讞讚 讬讜诐 砖谞讬诐 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 砖诇砖讛 诇讬诇讛 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讻讜讻讘 讗讞讚 讬讜诐 砖谞讬诐 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 砖诇砖讛 诇讬诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 诇讗 讻讜讻讘讬诐 讙讚讜诇讬诐 讛谞专讗讬谉 讘讬讜诐 讜诇讗 讻讜讻讘讬诐 拽讟谞讬诐 砖讗讬谉 谞专讗讬谉 讗诇讗 讘诇讬诇讛 讗诇讗 讘讬谞讜谞讬诐

With regard to the period of twilight, Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: When one can see one star in the evening sky, it is still day; two stars, twilight; three stars, night. That was also taught in a baraita: When one can see one star in the evening sky, it is still day; two stars, twilight; three stars, night. Rabbi Yosei said: This is neither referring to large stars that are visible even during the day, nor to small stars that are visible only late at night. Rather, it is referring to medium-sized stars.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讝讘讬讚讗 讛注讜砖讛 诪诇讗讻讛 讘砖谞讬 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讞讬讬讘 讞讟讗转 诪诪讛 谞驻砖讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诇砖诪注讬讛 讗转讜谉 讚诇讗 拽讬诐 诇讻讜 讘砖讬注讜专讗 讚专讘谞谉 讗讚砖讬诪砖讗 讗专讬砖 讚讬拽诇讬 讗转诇讜 砖专讙讗 讘讬讜诐 讛诪注讜谞谉 诪讗讬 讘诪转讗 讞讝讬 转专谞讙讜诇讗 讘讚讘专讗 注讜专讘讬 讗讬 谞诪讬 讗讚讗谞讬:

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Zevida, said: One who performs a prohibited labor during two twilights, one between Friday and Shabbat and one between Shabbat and the conclusion of Shabbat on Saturday night, is liable to bring a sin-offering for performing a prohibited labor on Shabbat whichever way you look at it. Whether we say that twilight is day or night, certainly one of those labors was performed on Shabbat. Rava said to his servant: You, who are not expert in the measures of the Sages, when the sun is at the top of the palm trees, light the Shabbat lights. His servant asked him: What should we do on a cloudy day, when the sun is not visible at the top of the trees? Rava said to him: In the city, watch the roosters because as evening approaches they sit on their beams. In a field, watch the ravens because they return to their nests as evening approaches. Alternatively, you can watch the plants [adanei] that turn westward in the evening. When they begin to turn westward evening is approaching.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 砖砖 转拽讬注讜转 转讜拽注讬谉 注专讘 砖讘转 专讗砖讜谞讛 诇讛讘讟讬诇 讗转 讛注诐 诪诪诇讗讻讛 砖讘砖讚讜转 砖谞讬讛 诇讛讘讟讬诇 注讬专 讜讞谞讜讬讜转 砖诇讬砖讬转 诇讛讚诇讬拽 讗转 讛谞专 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 谞转谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛谞砖讬讗 讗讜诪专 砖诇讬砖讬转 诇讞诇讜抓 转驻讬诇讬谉 讜砖讜讛讛 讻讚讬 爪诇讬讬转 讚讙 拽讟谉 讗讜 讻讚讬 诇讛讚讘讬拽 驻转 讘转谞讜专 讜转讜拽注 讜诪专讬注 讜转讜拽注 讜砖讜讘转

The Sages taught in a baraita: They sound six blasts on Shabbat eve to announce that Shabbat is approaching. The Gemara details what each blast signifies. The first blast is in order to stop the people from work in the fields. The second blast is to stop those who are working in the city, and to inform the proprietors to close the stores. The third is to inform them to light the Shabbat light; that is the statement of Rabbi Natan. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The third blast is to inform those who don phylacteries throughout the day to remove their phylacteries, as one does not don phylacteries on Shabbat. And he pauses after the third blast for the length of time it takes to fry a small fish or to stick bread to the sides of the oven. One who forgot to do so and needs those foods for Shabbat may do so then. And he sounds a tekia, and sounds a terua, and sounds a tekia, and he accepts Shabbat. It is then that Shabbat begins in every sense.

讗诪专 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 诪讛 谞注砖讛 诇讛诐 诇讘讘诇讬讬诐 砖转讜拽注讬谉 讜诪专讬注讬谉 讜砖讜讘转讬谉 诪转讜讱 诪专讬注讬谉 转讜拽注讬谉 讜诪专讬注讬谉 讛讜讜 诇讛讜 讞诪砖讛 讗诇讗 砖转讜拽注讬谉 讜讞讜讝专讬谉 讜转讜拽注讬谉 讜诪专讬注讬谉 讜砖讜讘转讬谉 诪转讜讱 诪专讬注讬谉 诪谞讛讙 讗讘讜转讬讛谉 讘讬讚讬讛谉

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: What shall we do to the Babylonian Jews? They stray from the custom, as they sound a tekia and a terua, and they accept Shabbat during the terua, i.e., upon hearing the blast of the terua. The Gemara asks about this: Do the Babylonians really sound only a tekia and a terua and no more blasts? If so, there are only five blasts and not six, as it was taught in the baraita. Rather, the correct version is: They sound a tekia, and they again sound a tekia, and then they sound a terua, and they accept Shabbat during the terua. They do so because they continue the custom of their fathers that was handed down to them.

诪转谞讬 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诇专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专讬讛 砖谞讬讛 诇讛讚诇讬拽 讗转 讛谞专 讻诪讗谉 诇讗 讻专讘讬 谞转谉 讜诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛谞砖讬讗 讗诇讗 砖诇讬砖讬转 诇讛讚诇讬拽 讗转 讛谞专 讻诪讗谉 讻专讘讬 谞转谉

Rav Yehuda taught to Rav Yitz岣k, his son: The second blast that is sounded before Shabbat is to inform people to light the light. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion did he say this? It is neither in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Natan nor in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rather, certainly he told him that the third blast is in order to inform people to light the light, and in accordance with whose opinion did he say this? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Natan.

转谞讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 砖砖 转拽讬注讜转 转讜拽注讬谉 注专讘 砖讘转 讛转讞讬诇 诇转拽讜注 转拽讬注讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 谞诪谞注讜 讛注讜诪讚讬诐 讘砖讚讛 诪诇注讚讜专 讜诪诇讞专讜砖 讜诪诇注砖讜转 讻诇 诪诇讗讻讛 砖讘砖讚讜转 讜讗讬谉 讛拽专讜讘讬谉 专砖讗讬谉 诇讬讻谞住 注讚 砖讬讘讜讗讜 专讞讜拽讬谉 讜讬讻谞住讜 讻讜诇诐 讻讗讞讚 讜注讚讬讬谉 讞谞讜讬讜转 驻转讜讞讜转 讜转专讬住讬谉 诪讜谞讞讬谉 讛转讞讬诇 诇转拽讜注 转拽讬注讛 砖谞讬讛 谞住转诇拽讜 讛转专讬住讬谉 讜谞谞注诇讜 讛讞谞讜讬讜转 讜注讚讬讬谉 讞诪讬谉 诪讜谞讞讬谉 注诇 讙讘讬 讻讬专讛 讜拽讚讬专讜转 诪讜谞讞讜转 注诇 讙讘讬 讻讬专讛 讛转讞讬诇 诇转拽讜注 转拽讬注讛 砖诇讬砖讬转 住讬诇拽 讛诪住诇拽 讜讛讟诪讬谉 讛诪讟诪讬谉 讜讛讚诇讬拽 讛诪讚诇讬拽 讜砖讜讛讛 讻讚讬 爪诇讬讬转 讚讙 拽讟谉 讗讜 讻讚讬 诇讛讚讘讬拽 驻转 讘转谞讜专 讜转讜拽注 讜诪专讬注 讜转讜拽注 讜砖讜讘转

On a similar note, the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught in greater detail: Six blasts are sounded on Shabbat eve. When one begins sounding the first tekia, the people standing and working in the fields refrained from hoeing, and from plowing and from performing all labor in the fields. And those workers who work close to the city are not permitted to enter the city until those who work farther away come, so that they will all enter together. Otherwise, people would suspect that the workers who came later continued to work after the blast. And still, at this time, the stores in the city are open and the shutters of the stores, upon which the storekeepers would arrange their merchandise in front of the stores, remain in place. When he began sounding the second blast, the shutters were removed from where they were placed and the stores were locked and in the homes, however, hot water was still cooking on the stove and pots remained in place on the stove. When he began sounding the third blast, the one charged with removing food from the stove removed it, and the one charged with insulating hot water for Shabbat so that it would not cool off insulated it, and the one charged with kindling the Shabbat lights lit. And the one sounding the shofar pauses for the amount of time it takes to fry a small fish or to stick bread to the sides of the oven, and he sounds a tekia, and sounds a terua, and sounds a tekia, and accepts Shabbat.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 (讘专) 讞谞讬谞讗 砖诪注转讬 砖讗诐 讘讗 诇讛讚诇讬拽 讗讞专 砖砖 转拽讬注讜转 诪讚诇讬拽 砖讛专讬 谞转谞讜 讞讻诪讬诐 砖讬注讜专 诇讞讝谉 讛讻谞住转 诇讛讜诇讬讱 砖讜驻专讜 诇讘讬转讜 讗诪专 诇讜 讗诐 讻谉 谞转转 讚讘专讬讱 诇砖讬注讜专讬谉 讗诇讗 诪拽讜诐 爪谞讜注 讬砖 诇讜 诇讞讝谉 讛讻谞住转 讘专讗砖 讙讙讜 砖砖诐 诪谞讬讞 砖讜驻专讜 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉 诇讗 讗转 讛砖讜驻专 讜诇讗 讗转 讛讞爪讜爪专讜转

Rabbi Yosei bar 岣nina, said: I heard that a person who was pressed for time and comes to light Shabbat lights after six blasts may light without concern, as even the moment of the sixth blast is not yet Shabbat. Proof for this is that the Sages provided the sexton of the synagogue a period of time to take his shofar, which he used to sound the blasts on a tall roof in the middle of the city, to his house. Clearly, during that interval it is not yet Shabbat. He said to him: If so, then you have rendered your statement subject to circumstances, and it would not apply uniformly to all. Shabbat would start at a different time in each place based on the distance between the site where the shofar is sounded and the home of the sexton. Rather, Shabbat began immediately after the final blast with no pause in between. The sexton had a concealed place on top of his roof, where he would sound the shofar, in which he would place his shofar because the consensus is that one may move neither the shofar nor the trumpets on Shabbat.

讜讛转谞讬讗 砖讜驻专 诪讬讟诇讟诇 讜讞爪讜爪专讜转 讗讬谞诐 诪讬讟诇讟诇讬谉 讗诪专 专讘 (讬讜住讬) 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 讘讬讞讬讚 讻讗谉 讘爪讘讜专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讜讘讬讞讬讚 诇诪讗讬 讞讝讬 讛讜讗讬诇 讜专讗讜讬 诇讙诪注 讘讜 诪讬诐

The Gemara asks with regard to this last halakha: Wasn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita that the shofar may be moved on Shabbat, and the trumpets may not be moved? Rav Yosei said: This is not difficult, as one could say that here, where moving a shofar was permitted, it is referring to a shofar belonging to an individual. Because it has a use even on Shabbat, it may be moved. There, where moving a shofar was prohibited, it is referring to a shofar that belongs to a community. Because it has no use on Shabbat, it is, therefore, considered set-aside [muktze]. Abaye said to him: And in the case of an individual, for what permitted action is a shofar fit to be used on Shabbat? It is fit for use since it is suitable to give water with it

Scroll To Top