Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

May 5, 2020 | י״א באייר תש״פ

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.

Iyar is sponsored by Aviva and Benny Adler in memory of Yosef ben Zvi HaKohen, Dr. Joseph Kahane z"l and Yehuda Aryeh Leib ben Yisachar Dov Barash, Ari Adler z"l.

Shabbat 60

The gemara brings three resolutions to the contradiction between our mishna and the mishna in kelim  regarding a signet ring – is it considered jewelry. With what items is it forbidden by the rabbis for a man to go out with wearing in public. Why did they forbid a hobnailed sandal? It seems to have been to remember a particular incident relating to fear of the enemy. The gemara discusses exactly which type of sandal is forbidden and under what conditions would it be permitted.

בקולב הלך אחר מסמרותיו בסולם הלך אחר שליבותיו בערסא הלך אחר שלשלותיו וחכמים אומרים הכל הולך אחר המעמיד

With a hanging board, follow its nails, upon which the objects hang. With a ladder, follow its rungs. With a large scale, follow its chains and not its baseplates. And the Rabbis say, with regard to all of these vessels, everything follows the support. The legal status of the object is not determined by the component of the vessel most significant in terms of function. It is determined by the component most significant in terms of structure. Therefore, according to Rabbi Neḥemya there is a distinction, even in the halakhot of Shabbat, between a ring with a seal and a ring without a seal, as in his opinion the seal constitutes the primary function of the ring. However, the Rabbis hold with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity that the essential part of the ring is the ring itself, not the seal. Therefore, they permit going out into the public domain on Shabbat even with a ring that has a seal.

רבא אמר לצדדים קתני יש עליה חותם תכשיט דאיש אין עליה חותם תכשיט דאשה

Rava said: This contradiction can be resolved in another manner. The mishna dealing with the halakhot of ritual impurity taught with regard to the two types of rings disjunctively, i.e., referring to different circumstances: A ring that has a seal on it can become ritually impure because it is a man’s ornament; a ring that does not have a seal on it can become ritually impure because it is a woman’s ornament.

רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר טומאה אשבת קרמית טומאה כלי מעשה אמר רחמנא וכלי הוא שבת משום משוי אמר רחמנא אין עליה חותם תכשיט יש עליה חותם משוי:

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said an additional resolution to the contradiction between the mishnayot: Are you raising a contradiction from the halakhot of ritual impurity to the halakhot of Shabbat? The underlying principles of these areas of halakha are totally different. With regard to ritual impurity, the Torah stated: “All vessels with which labor is done” (Numbers 31:51), and a ring with a seal is a vessel and can therefore become ritually impure. However, with regard to Shabbat, the Torah stated that the prohibition is due to the fact that the object is a burden. Therefore, in a case where there is not a seal on it, it is an ornament and may be worn in the public domain. In a case where there is a seal on it, it is a burden and may not be worn.

ולא במחט שאינה נקובה: למאי חזיא אמר רב יוסף הואיל ואשה אוגרת בה שערה

We also learned in the mishna: Nor with a needle that is not perforated. The Gemara asks: For what use is that type of needle suited? Rav Yosef said: Since a woman gathers her hair and pins it to her hairnet with the unperforated needle.

אמר ליה אביי ותהוי כבירית טהורה ותשתרי

Abaye said to him: And if so, let the needle be like a ritually pure garter and consequently be permitted. There is a type of garter, a strap that ensures that a woman’s stockings will not fall, that cannot become ritually impure. A woman is permitted to go out into the public domain wearing it on Shabbat even if it is ornamented. For reasons of modesty, a woman will certainly not remove her garter or display it in the public domain. Similarly, with regard to the needle, the assumption is that a woman will not loosen her hair in the street.

אלא תרגמא רב אדא נרשאה קמיה דרב יוסף הואיל ואשה חולקת בה שערה בשבת למאי חזיא אמר רבא טס של זהב יש לה על ראשה בחול חולקת בה שערה בשבת מניחתה כנגד פדחתה:

Rather, Rav Adda from the city of Naresh explained before Rav Yosef: Since a woman parts her hair with it. The Gemara asks: On Shabbat, when it is prohibited to comb one’s hair, for what use is this needle suited? Rava said: There is a gold plate on the other end of the needle. On a weekday, she uses it to part her hair. On Shabbat, she inserts the needle into her head covering and lays the gold plate against her forehead for ornamental purposes.

מתני׳ לא יצא האיש בסנדל המסומר ולא ביחיד בזמן שאין ברגלו מכה ולא בתפילין ולא בקמיע בזמן שאינו מן המומחה ולא בשריון ולא בקסדא ולא במגפיים ואם יצא אינו חייב חטאת:

MISHNA: A man may not go out on Shabbat with a spiked sandal, as will be explained in the Gemara. And he may not go out with a single sandal when there is no wound on his foot. And he may neither go out with phylacteries, nor with an amulet when it is not from an expert, but rather it was written by someone who has not established a reputation as an expert in writing amulets that are effective for those who carry them. And he may neither go out with shiryon, nor with a kasda, nor with maggafayim. These terms will be explained in the Gemara. And if he went out into the public domain with any of these, he is not liable to bring a sin-offering.

גמ׳ סנדל המסומר מאי טעמא

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the reason that the Sages prohibited going out with a spiked sandal on Shabbat?

אמר שמואל שלפי הגזרה היו והיו נחבאין במערה ואמרו הנכנס יכנס והיוצא אל יצא

Shmuel said: They were those who eluded the decrees of religious persecution, and after one of the wars they were hiding in a cave. And those hiding said: One who seeks to enter the cave may enter, but one who seeks to leave the cave may not leave. One leaving has no way to determine whether or not the enemy is lying in wait outside the cave. Therefore, leaving could reveal the presence of those hiding in the cave.

נהפך סנדלו של אחד מהן כסבורין הם אחד מהן יצא וראוהו אויבים ועכשו באין עליהן דחקו זה בזה והרגו זה את זה יותר ממה שהרגו בהם אויבים

It happened that the sandal of one of them was reversed, the front of the sandal was in the back, and his footprints appeared like the steps of one leaving the cave. They thought that one of them left and feared that their enemies saw him and were now coming upon them to attack. In their panic, they pushed one another and killed one another in greater numbers than their enemies had killed among them. To commemorate this disaster that resulted from a spiked sandal, they prohibited going out into the public domain with it.

רבי אילעאי בן אלעזר אומר במערה היו יושבין ושמעו קול מעל גבי המערה כסבורין היו שבאו עליהם אויבים דחקו זה בזה והרגו זה את זה יותר ממה שהרגו בהן אויבים

Rabbi Elai ben Elazar says that the reason for the decree was different. Once they were sitting in a cave and heard the sound of a spiked sandal atop the cave. They thought that their enemies had come upon them. They pushed one another and killed one another in greater numbers than their enemies had killed among them.

רמי בר יחזקאל אמר בבית הכנסת היו יושבין ושמעו קול מאחורי בית הכנסת כסבורין היו שבאו עליהם אויבים דחקו זה בזה והרגו זה את זה יותר ממה שהרגו בהן אויבים

Rami bar Yeḥezkel said that the reason for the decree was different. They were sitting in a synagogue and they heard the sound of a spiked sandal from behind the synagogue. They thought that their enemies had come upon them. They pushed one another, and killed one another in greater numbers than their enemies had killed among them.

באותה שעה אמרו אל יצא אדם בסנדל המסומר אי הכי בחול נמי ליתסר מעשה כי הוה בשבת הוה ביום טוב לישתרי אלמה תנן

To commemorate that disaster which occurred due to a spiked sandal, at that time they said: A person may not go out with a spiked sandal. The Gemara asks: If so, on a weekday it should also be prohibited. The Gemara answers: When this incident occurred, it was on Shabbat. Therefore, they issued the decree prohibiting the spiked sandal specifically in parallel circumstances. The Gemara challenges: If so, on a Festival wearing a spiked sandal should be permitted. Why, then, did we learn in the same mishna:

משלחין כלים ביום טוב בין תפורין בין שאינן תפורין אבל לא סנדל המסומר ולא מנעל שאינו תפור (ביום טוב)

One may send garments as a gift on a Festival, whether they are sewn or whether they are not sewn, because any object fit for any use on a Festival may be sent as a gift. However, one may neither send a spiked sandal nor an unsewn shoe on a Festival, since using them is prohibited. Apparently, one may not wear a spiked sandal on a Festival.

בשבת מאי טעמא דאיכא כינופיא ביום טוב נמי איכא כינופיא תענית צבור איכא כינופיא ליתסר מעשה כי הוה בכינופיא דאיסורא הכא כינופיא דהתירא הוה

The Gemara explains: What is the reason that the Sages prohibited wearing a spiked sandal on Shabbat? It is because there is an assemblage of people. On a Festival too, there is an assemblage of people. The Gemara asks: On a communal fast day, there is an assemblage of people; wearing a spiked sandal should be prohibited then, as well. The Gemara answers: When this incident occurred, it was on a day when there was an assemblage of prohibition, i.e., a day on which performing labor is prohibited. Here, a fast day, is a day when there is an assemblage of permission, a day on which performing labor is permitted, and the two are not comparable. However, extending the scope of commemorative decrees to apply to comparable situations, e.g., from Shabbat to the Festivals, is acceptable.

ואפילו לרבי חנינא בן עקיבא דאמר לא אסרו אלא בירדן ובספינה וכמעשה שהיה הני מילי ירדן דשאני משאר נהרות אבל יום טוב ושבת כי הדדי נינהו דתנן אין בין יום טוב לשבת אלא אוכל נפש בלבד

And this is true even according to the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Akiva, who said in the following case that a decree issued due to a specific set of circumstances is applied only to those specific circumstances. The ashes of the red heifer were once transported across the Jordan River in a boat. A source of ritual impurity was discovered at the bottom of the boat. The Sages sought to issue a decree prohibiting transport of the ashes of the red heifer over any body of water, sea or river, over a bridge, or in a boat. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Akiva said that decrees that are issued due to a specific event apply only to precisely those circumstances. Therefore, he said: They only prohibited transporting the ashes of a red heifer in the Jordan River and in a boat, and like the incident that occurred. However, even according to this approach, which limits restriction, that applies only to the Jordan River and not to other rivers. This is because it is different from other rivers in several respects, e.g., width and depth. However, a Festival and Shabbat are similar to one another, as it was taught in the mishna: The halakhic difference between a Festival and Shabbat is only with regard to preparation of food.

אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל לא שנו אלא לחזק אבל לנוי מותר וכמה לנוי רבי יוחנן אמר חמש בזה וחמש בזה ורבי חנינא אמר שבע בזה ושבע בזה

Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The Sages taught that a spiked sandal is prohibited only when the nails were placed in the sandal to strengthen its form; however, if they were placed in the sandal for beauty, it is permitted. The Gemara asks: And with how many nails is it considered to be for beauty? Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Five on this sandal and five on that one. And Rabbi Ḥanina said: Seven on this one and seven on that one.

אמר ליה רבי יוחנן לרב שמן בר אבא אסברא לך לדידי שתים מכאן ושתים מכאן ואחת בתרסיותיו לרבי חנינא שלש מכאן ושלש מכאן ואחת בתרסיותיו

Rabbi Yoḥanan said to Rav Shemen bar Abba: I will explain it to you: According to my opinion, when inserting nails for beauty, two are inserted from here, its outer side, one near the toes and one near the heel, and two are inserted from there, its inner side, one near the toes and one near the heel, and one is inserted on its straps; and for Rabbi Ḥanina, three from here, and three from there, and one on its straps.

מיתיבי סנדל הנוטה עושה לו שבע דברי רבי נתן ורבי מתיר בשלש עשרה

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: For an uneven sandal, whose soles are not straight, one makes seven nails on the bottom to straighten it, and it is then permitted for use on Shabbat; that is the statement of Rabbi Natan. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits straightening the sandal with thirteen nails.

בשלמא לרבי חנינא הוא דאמר כרבי נתן אלא רבי יוחנן דאמר כמאן הוא דאמר כרבי נהוראי דתניא רבי נהוראי אומר חמש מותר ושבע אסור

The Gemara notes: Granted, according to Rabbi Ḥanina, there is no problem, as he stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Natan. However, Rabbi Yoḥanan, in accordance with whose opinion did he state his opinion? Neither of the tanna’im agrees with his opinion. The Gemara answers: He stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Nehorai, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Nehorai says: With five nails inserted into the sole, it is permitted to go out into the public domain on Shabbat; and with seven nails, it is prohibited to go out into the public domain on Shabbat.

אמר ליה איפה לרבה בר בר חנה אתון תלמידי רבי יוחנן עבידו כרבי יוחנן אנן נעביד כרבי חנינא

The Sage, Ifa, said to Rabba bar bar Ḥana: You, who are students of Rabbi Yoḥanan, act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan. We will act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina.

בעא מיניה רב הונא מרב אשי חמש מהו אמר ליה אפילו שבע מתר תשע מאי אמר ליה אפילו שמונה אסור

Rav Huna raised a dilemma before Rav Ashi: With a sandal that has five nails inserted into the sole, what is the halakha with regard to going out into the public domain? He said to him: Even with seven nails it is permitted. He asked further: With nine, what is the halakha? He said to him: Even with eight it is prohibited.

בעא מיניה ההוא רצענא מרבי אמי תפרו מבפנים מהו אמר ליה מותר ולא ידענא מאי טעמא

That shoemaker raised a dilemma before Rabbi Ami: If one sewed the sole and attached it to the sandal from within, what is the halakha? May he go out into the public domain after inserting nails into it? Rabbi Ami said to him: It is permitted, and I do not know the reason.

אמר רב אשי ולא ידע מר מאי טעמא כיון דתפרו מבפנים הוי ליה מנעל בסנדל גזרו ביה רבנן במנעל לא גזרו ביה רבנן

Rav Ashi said: And does the Master not know the reason? It is obvious. Since he sewed it from within, it is no longer a sandal, it is a shoe. With regard to a sandal, the Sages issued a decree; with regard to a shoe, the Sages did not issue a decree.

בעא מיניה רבי אבא בר זבדא מרבי אבא בר אבינא עשאו כמין כלבוס מהו אמר ליה מותר איתמר נמי אמר רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא עשאו כמין כלבוס מותר

Rabbi Abba bar Zavda raised a dilemma before Rabbi Abba bar Avina: If he shaped the nail like tongs [kelavus] by bending a nail with two sharp ends and sticking both ends into the sandal, what is the halakha? May he go out into the public domain with it on Shabbat? He said to him: It is permitted. It was also stated that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: If he shaped it like tongs it is permitted.

אמר רב ששת חיפהו כלו במסמרות כדי שלא תהא קרקע אוכלתו מותר

Rav Sheshet said: If he covered the entire sole in nails, so that contact with the ground will not wear it away, it is permitted to go out with that sandal on Shabbat, since it is no longer the spiked sandal with regard to which they issued a decree.

תניא כוותיה דרב ששת לא יצא האיש בסנדל המסומר ולא יטייל מבית לבית אפלו ממטה למטה אבל מטלטלין אותו לכסות בו את הכלי ולסמוך בו כרעי המטה ורבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון אוסר נשרו רב ממסמרותיו ונשתייר בו ארבע או חמש מותר ורבי מתיר עד שבע חיפהו בעור מלמטה וקבע לו מסמרות מלמעלה מותר עשאו כמין כלבוס או כמין טס או כמין יתד או שחיפהו כולו במסמרות כדי שלא תהא קרקע אוכלתו מותר

It was taught in the Tosefta in accordance with the opinion of Rav Sheshet: A man may not go out with a spiked sandal, and may not walk with it even from house to house within his courtyard, and may not even walk from bed to bed within his house. However, since the decree was issued with regard to circumstances identical to a specific incident, it only applies to wearing the sandal. Therefore, one may carry the sandal to cover a vessel with it and to support the legs of the bed with it. And Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, prohibits using it for other purposes as well. If most of its nails fell out, and four or five remain in it, it is permitted to go out with it. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits going out into the public domain with the sandal, even if up to seven nails remain in it. If he covered it with leather from beneath the wood frame of the sandal and inserted nails into it from above, it is permitted. If he made the nail like a tong, or made one end flat like a platter [tas], or sharpened it like a peg, or covered it entirely with nails so that contact with the ground will not wear it away, it is permitted to go out with it.

הא גופה קשיא אמרת נשרו רב מסמרותיו אף על גב דנשתיירו ביה טובא והדר תני ארבע או חמש אין טפי לא

The Gemara analyzes the Tosefta cited in support of Rav Sheshet’s opinion. This Tosefta itself is difficult, as it is self-contradictory. On the one hand you said: If most of its nails fell out it is permitted; apparently, that is the halakha even though many nails remain in the sole. And, however, subsequently it was taught in the Tosefta, without specifying the number of nails that were there from the outset: With four or five nails, yes, going out is permitted; however, with more nails, no, it is prohibited.

אמר רב ששת לא קשיא כאן שנגממו כאן שנעקרו:

Rav Sheshet said: This is not difficult, and it can be resolved as follows: Here, where it was permitted to go out wearing the sandal if the majority of nails fell out, it is referring to a case where they were broken, i.e., the heads of the nails were broken off while most of the nail remained embedded in the sole. In that case, it is clearly evident that most of the nails fell out. Here, where it was permitted only if four or five nails remain, it is referring to a case where they were totally removed and only the nails that remain in the shoe are visible.

ארבע או חמש מותר: השתא חמש שרי ארבע מיבעיא אמר רב חסדא ארבע מסנדל קטן וחמש מסנדל גדול:

The Gemara continues its detailed analysis of the Tosefta: It was taught that if most of the nails in the sandal came out and only four or five nails remain, it is permitted to go out wearing it. The Gemara asks: Now, if it was mentioned that when five nails remain, going out is permitted, is it necessary to mention four? Rav Ḥisda said that the Tosefta means: If four nails remain from the nails in a small sandal, and if five nails remain from the nails in a large sandal, going out is permitted.

ורבי מתיר עד שבע: והתניא רבי מתיר עד שלש עשרה נוטה שאני

It was taught in the Tosefta: And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits up to seven. The Gemara asks: Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that for a sandal with an uneven sole, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits up to thirteen? The Gemara answers: An uneven sole is different. Since the nails are inserted for the purpose of straightening the sole, it does not have the legal status of a spiked sandal.

השתא דאתית להכי לרבי יוחנן נמי לא קשיא נוטה שאני

The Gemara notes: Now that you have arrived at this new explanation that a sandal with an uneven sole has a different legal status, for Rabbi Yoḥanan, who stated, contrary to the opinions of the tanna’im in this baraita, that the number of nails permitted in each sandal is five, this baraita is also not difficult. He could explain that a sandal with an uneven sole is different and requires additional nails. However, in the case of a sandal with an even sole, even the other tanna’im would not permit that many.

אמר רב מתנה ואמרי לה אמר רב אחדבוי בר מתנה אמר רב מתנה אין הלכה כרבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון פשיטא יחיד ורבים הלכה כרבים מהו דתימא מסתברא טעמא דרבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון בהא קא משמע לן

Rav Mattana said, and some say Rav Aḥadvoi bar Mattana said that Rav Mattana said: The halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, who completely prohibited moving a spiked sandal. The Gemara asks: That is obvious. Isn’t there a halakhic principle that in a dispute between an individual and the many, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of the many? The Gemara answers: Lest you say that the rationale for the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, is more reasonable in this case, and therefore the halakha should be ruled in accordance with his opinion. Rav Mattana teaches us that that is not the halakha.

אמר רבי חייא אי לאו דקרו לי בבלאי שרי איסורי שרינא ביה טובא וכמה בפומבדיתא אמרין עשרין וארבע בסורא אמרין עשרין ותרתין אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק וסימניך עד דאתא מפומבדיתא לסורא חסר תרתי:

Rabbi Ḥiyya said: If not for the fact that they would call me: Babylonian who permits prohibitions, I would permit the insertion of many nails into a spiked sandal. The Gemara asks: And how many nails would he have permitted? In Pumbedita they said: Twenty-four nails. In Sura they said: Twenty-two. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: And this is your mnemonic to remember which opinion was stated in Sura and which opinion was stated in Pumbedita: Until Rabbi Ḥiyya came from Pumbedita to Sura he lost two nails from his shoe. Since the route that Rabbi Ḥiyya took from Pumbedita to Eretz Yisrael passed through Sura, one could say: Due to the rigors of the journey, two nails fell from the sandal of Rabbi Ḥiyya between Pumbedita and Sura.

ולא ביחיד בזמן שאין ברגלו מכה:

It was taught in the mishna: And he may not go out with a single sandal when there is no wound on his foot.

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.

Iyar is sponsored by Aviva and Benny Adler in memory of Yosef ben Zvi HaKohen, Dr. Joseph Kahane z"l and Yehuda Aryeh Leib ben Yisachar Dov Barash, Ari Adler z"l.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Copy of Back to school.._

Back to School

My children spent this past weekend preparing to return to school after nearly two months at home. As they tried...
1

The Power of Jewelry in Chapter Six

The juxtaposition of two sugyot on daf 62: is striking. On one hand, the daf goes into a historical (gory)...
daf yomi One week at a time (1)

Shabbat 55-60 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time

We will review Daf 55-60 this week. After finishing the 5th chapter, we will start the 6th chapter and discuss...
talking talmud_square

Shabbat 60: The Story of the Nailed Sandal

Parallel structuring, on what a man cannot wear out on Shabbat. The hobnailed sandal and the reason it was prohibited...

Shabbat 60

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Shabbat 60

בקולב הלך אחר מסמרותיו בסולם הלך אחר שליבותיו בערסא הלך אחר שלשלותיו וחכמים אומרים הכל הולך אחר המעמיד

With a hanging board, follow its nails, upon which the objects hang. With a ladder, follow its rungs. With a large scale, follow its chains and not its baseplates. And the Rabbis say, with regard to all of these vessels, everything follows the support. The legal status of the object is not determined by the component of the vessel most significant in terms of function. It is determined by the component most significant in terms of structure. Therefore, according to Rabbi Neḥemya there is a distinction, even in the halakhot of Shabbat, between a ring with a seal and a ring without a seal, as in his opinion the seal constitutes the primary function of the ring. However, the Rabbis hold with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity that the essential part of the ring is the ring itself, not the seal. Therefore, they permit going out into the public domain on Shabbat even with a ring that has a seal.

רבא אמר לצדדים קתני יש עליה חותם תכשיט דאיש אין עליה חותם תכשיט דאשה

Rava said: This contradiction can be resolved in another manner. The mishna dealing with the halakhot of ritual impurity taught with regard to the two types of rings disjunctively, i.e., referring to different circumstances: A ring that has a seal on it can become ritually impure because it is a man’s ornament; a ring that does not have a seal on it can become ritually impure because it is a woman’s ornament.

רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר טומאה אשבת קרמית טומאה כלי מעשה אמר רחמנא וכלי הוא שבת משום משוי אמר רחמנא אין עליה חותם תכשיט יש עליה חותם משוי:

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said an additional resolution to the contradiction between the mishnayot: Are you raising a contradiction from the halakhot of ritual impurity to the halakhot of Shabbat? The underlying principles of these areas of halakha are totally different. With regard to ritual impurity, the Torah stated: “All vessels with which labor is done” (Numbers 31:51), and a ring with a seal is a vessel and can therefore become ritually impure. However, with regard to Shabbat, the Torah stated that the prohibition is due to the fact that the object is a burden. Therefore, in a case where there is not a seal on it, it is an ornament and may be worn in the public domain. In a case where there is a seal on it, it is a burden and may not be worn.

ולא במחט שאינה נקובה: למאי חזיא אמר רב יוסף הואיל ואשה אוגרת בה שערה

We also learned in the mishna: Nor with a needle that is not perforated. The Gemara asks: For what use is that type of needle suited? Rav Yosef said: Since a woman gathers her hair and pins it to her hairnet with the unperforated needle.

אמר ליה אביי ותהוי כבירית טהורה ותשתרי

Abaye said to him: And if so, let the needle be like a ritually pure garter and consequently be permitted. There is a type of garter, a strap that ensures that a woman’s stockings will not fall, that cannot become ritually impure. A woman is permitted to go out into the public domain wearing it on Shabbat even if it is ornamented. For reasons of modesty, a woman will certainly not remove her garter or display it in the public domain. Similarly, with regard to the needle, the assumption is that a woman will not loosen her hair in the street.

אלא תרגמא רב אדא נרשאה קמיה דרב יוסף הואיל ואשה חולקת בה שערה בשבת למאי חזיא אמר רבא טס של זהב יש לה על ראשה בחול חולקת בה שערה בשבת מניחתה כנגד פדחתה:

Rather, Rav Adda from the city of Naresh explained before Rav Yosef: Since a woman parts her hair with it. The Gemara asks: On Shabbat, when it is prohibited to comb one’s hair, for what use is this needle suited? Rava said: There is a gold plate on the other end of the needle. On a weekday, she uses it to part her hair. On Shabbat, she inserts the needle into her head covering and lays the gold plate against her forehead for ornamental purposes.

מתני׳ לא יצא האיש בסנדל המסומר ולא ביחיד בזמן שאין ברגלו מכה ולא בתפילין ולא בקמיע בזמן שאינו מן המומחה ולא בשריון ולא בקסדא ולא במגפיים ואם יצא אינו חייב חטאת:

MISHNA: A man may not go out on Shabbat with a spiked sandal, as will be explained in the Gemara. And he may not go out with a single sandal when there is no wound on his foot. And he may neither go out with phylacteries, nor with an amulet when it is not from an expert, but rather it was written by someone who has not established a reputation as an expert in writing amulets that are effective for those who carry them. And he may neither go out with shiryon, nor with a kasda, nor with maggafayim. These terms will be explained in the Gemara. And if he went out into the public domain with any of these, he is not liable to bring a sin-offering.

גמ׳ סנדל המסומר מאי טעמא

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the reason that the Sages prohibited going out with a spiked sandal on Shabbat?

אמר שמואל שלפי הגזרה היו והיו נחבאין במערה ואמרו הנכנס יכנס והיוצא אל יצא

Shmuel said: They were those who eluded the decrees of religious persecution, and after one of the wars they were hiding in a cave. And those hiding said: One who seeks to enter the cave may enter, but one who seeks to leave the cave may not leave. One leaving has no way to determine whether or not the enemy is lying in wait outside the cave. Therefore, leaving could reveal the presence of those hiding in the cave.

נהפך סנדלו של אחד מהן כסבורין הם אחד מהן יצא וראוהו אויבים ועכשו באין עליהן דחקו זה בזה והרגו זה את זה יותר ממה שהרגו בהם אויבים

It happened that the sandal of one of them was reversed, the front of the sandal was in the back, and his footprints appeared like the steps of one leaving the cave. They thought that one of them left and feared that their enemies saw him and were now coming upon them to attack. In their panic, they pushed one another and killed one another in greater numbers than their enemies had killed among them. To commemorate this disaster that resulted from a spiked sandal, they prohibited going out into the public domain with it.

רבי אילעאי בן אלעזר אומר במערה היו יושבין ושמעו קול מעל גבי המערה כסבורין היו שבאו עליהם אויבים דחקו זה בזה והרגו זה את זה יותר ממה שהרגו בהן אויבים

Rabbi Elai ben Elazar says that the reason for the decree was different. Once they were sitting in a cave and heard the sound of a spiked sandal atop the cave. They thought that their enemies had come upon them. They pushed one another and killed one another in greater numbers than their enemies had killed among them.

רמי בר יחזקאל אמר בבית הכנסת היו יושבין ושמעו קול מאחורי בית הכנסת כסבורין היו שבאו עליהם אויבים דחקו זה בזה והרגו זה את זה יותר ממה שהרגו בהן אויבים

Rami bar Yeḥezkel said that the reason for the decree was different. They were sitting in a synagogue and they heard the sound of a spiked sandal from behind the synagogue. They thought that their enemies had come upon them. They pushed one another, and killed one another in greater numbers than their enemies had killed among them.

באותה שעה אמרו אל יצא אדם בסנדל המסומר אי הכי בחול נמי ליתסר מעשה כי הוה בשבת הוה ביום טוב לישתרי אלמה תנן

To commemorate that disaster which occurred due to a spiked sandal, at that time they said: A person may not go out with a spiked sandal. The Gemara asks: If so, on a weekday it should also be prohibited. The Gemara answers: When this incident occurred, it was on Shabbat. Therefore, they issued the decree prohibiting the spiked sandal specifically in parallel circumstances. The Gemara challenges: If so, on a Festival wearing a spiked sandal should be permitted. Why, then, did we learn in the same mishna:

משלחין כלים ביום טוב בין תפורין בין שאינן תפורין אבל לא סנדל המסומר ולא מנעל שאינו תפור (ביום טוב)

One may send garments as a gift on a Festival, whether they are sewn or whether they are not sewn, because any object fit for any use on a Festival may be sent as a gift. However, one may neither send a spiked sandal nor an unsewn shoe on a Festival, since using them is prohibited. Apparently, one may not wear a spiked sandal on a Festival.

בשבת מאי טעמא דאיכא כינופיא ביום טוב נמי איכא כינופיא תענית צבור איכא כינופיא ליתסר מעשה כי הוה בכינופיא דאיסורא הכא כינופיא דהתירא הוה

The Gemara explains: What is the reason that the Sages prohibited wearing a spiked sandal on Shabbat? It is because there is an assemblage of people. On a Festival too, there is an assemblage of people. The Gemara asks: On a communal fast day, there is an assemblage of people; wearing a spiked sandal should be prohibited then, as well. The Gemara answers: When this incident occurred, it was on a day when there was an assemblage of prohibition, i.e., a day on which performing labor is prohibited. Here, a fast day, is a day when there is an assemblage of permission, a day on which performing labor is permitted, and the two are not comparable. However, extending the scope of commemorative decrees to apply to comparable situations, e.g., from Shabbat to the Festivals, is acceptable.

ואפילו לרבי חנינא בן עקיבא דאמר לא אסרו אלא בירדן ובספינה וכמעשה שהיה הני מילי ירדן דשאני משאר נהרות אבל יום טוב ושבת כי הדדי נינהו דתנן אין בין יום טוב לשבת אלא אוכל נפש בלבד

And this is true even according to the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Akiva, who said in the following case that a decree issued due to a specific set of circumstances is applied only to those specific circumstances. The ashes of the red heifer were once transported across the Jordan River in a boat. A source of ritual impurity was discovered at the bottom of the boat. The Sages sought to issue a decree prohibiting transport of the ashes of the red heifer over any body of water, sea or river, over a bridge, or in a boat. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Akiva said that decrees that are issued due to a specific event apply only to precisely those circumstances. Therefore, he said: They only prohibited transporting the ashes of a red heifer in the Jordan River and in a boat, and like the incident that occurred. However, even according to this approach, which limits restriction, that applies only to the Jordan River and not to other rivers. This is because it is different from other rivers in several respects, e.g., width and depth. However, a Festival and Shabbat are similar to one another, as it was taught in the mishna: The halakhic difference between a Festival and Shabbat is only with regard to preparation of food.

אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל לא שנו אלא לחזק אבל לנוי מותר וכמה לנוי רבי יוחנן אמר חמש בזה וחמש בזה ורבי חנינא אמר שבע בזה ושבע בזה

Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The Sages taught that a spiked sandal is prohibited only when the nails were placed in the sandal to strengthen its form; however, if they were placed in the sandal for beauty, it is permitted. The Gemara asks: And with how many nails is it considered to be for beauty? Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Five on this sandal and five on that one. And Rabbi Ḥanina said: Seven on this one and seven on that one.

אמר ליה רבי יוחנן לרב שמן בר אבא אסברא לך לדידי שתים מכאן ושתים מכאן ואחת בתרסיותיו לרבי חנינא שלש מכאן ושלש מכאן ואחת בתרסיותיו

Rabbi Yoḥanan said to Rav Shemen bar Abba: I will explain it to you: According to my opinion, when inserting nails for beauty, two are inserted from here, its outer side, one near the toes and one near the heel, and two are inserted from there, its inner side, one near the toes and one near the heel, and one is inserted on its straps; and for Rabbi Ḥanina, three from here, and three from there, and one on its straps.

מיתיבי סנדל הנוטה עושה לו שבע דברי רבי נתן ורבי מתיר בשלש עשרה

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: For an uneven sandal, whose soles are not straight, one makes seven nails on the bottom to straighten it, and it is then permitted for use on Shabbat; that is the statement of Rabbi Natan. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits straightening the sandal with thirteen nails.

בשלמא לרבי חנינא הוא דאמר כרבי נתן אלא רבי יוחנן דאמר כמאן הוא דאמר כרבי נהוראי דתניא רבי נהוראי אומר חמש מותר ושבע אסור

The Gemara notes: Granted, according to Rabbi Ḥanina, there is no problem, as he stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Natan. However, Rabbi Yoḥanan, in accordance with whose opinion did he state his opinion? Neither of the tanna’im agrees with his opinion. The Gemara answers: He stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Nehorai, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Nehorai says: With five nails inserted into the sole, it is permitted to go out into the public domain on Shabbat; and with seven nails, it is prohibited to go out into the public domain on Shabbat.

אמר ליה איפה לרבה בר בר חנה אתון תלמידי רבי יוחנן עבידו כרבי יוחנן אנן נעביד כרבי חנינא

The Sage, Ifa, said to Rabba bar bar Ḥana: You, who are students of Rabbi Yoḥanan, act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan. We will act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina.

בעא מיניה רב הונא מרב אשי חמש מהו אמר ליה אפילו שבע מתר תשע מאי אמר ליה אפילו שמונה אסור

Rav Huna raised a dilemma before Rav Ashi: With a sandal that has five nails inserted into the sole, what is the halakha with regard to going out into the public domain? He said to him: Even with seven nails it is permitted. He asked further: With nine, what is the halakha? He said to him: Even with eight it is prohibited.

בעא מיניה ההוא רצענא מרבי אמי תפרו מבפנים מהו אמר ליה מותר ולא ידענא מאי טעמא

That shoemaker raised a dilemma before Rabbi Ami: If one sewed the sole and attached it to the sandal from within, what is the halakha? May he go out into the public domain after inserting nails into it? Rabbi Ami said to him: It is permitted, and I do not know the reason.

אמר רב אשי ולא ידע מר מאי טעמא כיון דתפרו מבפנים הוי ליה מנעל בסנדל גזרו ביה רבנן במנעל לא גזרו ביה רבנן

Rav Ashi said: And does the Master not know the reason? It is obvious. Since he sewed it from within, it is no longer a sandal, it is a shoe. With regard to a sandal, the Sages issued a decree; with regard to a shoe, the Sages did not issue a decree.

בעא מיניה רבי אבא בר זבדא מרבי אבא בר אבינא עשאו כמין כלבוס מהו אמר ליה מותר איתמר נמי אמר רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא עשאו כמין כלבוס מותר

Rabbi Abba bar Zavda raised a dilemma before Rabbi Abba bar Avina: If he shaped the nail like tongs [kelavus] by bending a nail with two sharp ends and sticking both ends into the sandal, what is the halakha? May he go out into the public domain with it on Shabbat? He said to him: It is permitted. It was also stated that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: If he shaped it like tongs it is permitted.

אמר רב ששת חיפהו כלו במסמרות כדי שלא תהא קרקע אוכלתו מותר

Rav Sheshet said: If he covered the entire sole in nails, so that contact with the ground will not wear it away, it is permitted to go out with that sandal on Shabbat, since it is no longer the spiked sandal with regard to which they issued a decree.

תניא כוותיה דרב ששת לא יצא האיש בסנדל המסומר ולא יטייל מבית לבית אפלו ממטה למטה אבל מטלטלין אותו לכסות בו את הכלי ולסמוך בו כרעי המטה ורבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון אוסר נשרו רב ממסמרותיו ונשתייר בו ארבע או חמש מותר ורבי מתיר עד שבע חיפהו בעור מלמטה וקבע לו מסמרות מלמעלה מותר עשאו כמין כלבוס או כמין טס או כמין יתד או שחיפהו כולו במסמרות כדי שלא תהא קרקע אוכלתו מותר

It was taught in the Tosefta in accordance with the opinion of Rav Sheshet: A man may not go out with a spiked sandal, and may not walk with it even from house to house within his courtyard, and may not even walk from bed to bed within his house. However, since the decree was issued with regard to circumstances identical to a specific incident, it only applies to wearing the sandal. Therefore, one may carry the sandal to cover a vessel with it and to support the legs of the bed with it. And Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, prohibits using it for other purposes as well. If most of its nails fell out, and four or five remain in it, it is permitted to go out with it. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits going out into the public domain with the sandal, even if up to seven nails remain in it. If he covered it with leather from beneath the wood frame of the sandal and inserted nails into it from above, it is permitted. If he made the nail like a tong, or made one end flat like a platter [tas], or sharpened it like a peg, or covered it entirely with nails so that contact with the ground will not wear it away, it is permitted to go out with it.

הא גופה קשיא אמרת נשרו רב מסמרותיו אף על גב דנשתיירו ביה טובא והדר תני ארבע או חמש אין טפי לא

The Gemara analyzes the Tosefta cited in support of Rav Sheshet’s opinion. This Tosefta itself is difficult, as it is self-contradictory. On the one hand you said: If most of its nails fell out it is permitted; apparently, that is the halakha even though many nails remain in the sole. And, however, subsequently it was taught in the Tosefta, without specifying the number of nails that were there from the outset: With four or five nails, yes, going out is permitted; however, with more nails, no, it is prohibited.

אמר רב ששת לא קשיא כאן שנגממו כאן שנעקרו:

Rav Sheshet said: This is not difficult, and it can be resolved as follows: Here, where it was permitted to go out wearing the sandal if the majority of nails fell out, it is referring to a case where they were broken, i.e., the heads of the nails were broken off while most of the nail remained embedded in the sole. In that case, it is clearly evident that most of the nails fell out. Here, where it was permitted only if four or five nails remain, it is referring to a case where they were totally removed and only the nails that remain in the shoe are visible.

ארבע או חמש מותר: השתא חמש שרי ארבע מיבעיא אמר רב חסדא ארבע מסנדל קטן וחמש מסנדל גדול:

The Gemara continues its detailed analysis of the Tosefta: It was taught that if most of the nails in the sandal came out and only four or five nails remain, it is permitted to go out wearing it. The Gemara asks: Now, if it was mentioned that when five nails remain, going out is permitted, is it necessary to mention four? Rav Ḥisda said that the Tosefta means: If four nails remain from the nails in a small sandal, and if five nails remain from the nails in a large sandal, going out is permitted.

ורבי מתיר עד שבע: והתניא רבי מתיר עד שלש עשרה נוטה שאני

It was taught in the Tosefta: And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits up to seven. The Gemara asks: Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that for a sandal with an uneven sole, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits up to thirteen? The Gemara answers: An uneven sole is different. Since the nails are inserted for the purpose of straightening the sole, it does not have the legal status of a spiked sandal.

השתא דאתית להכי לרבי יוחנן נמי לא קשיא נוטה שאני

The Gemara notes: Now that you have arrived at this new explanation that a sandal with an uneven sole has a different legal status, for Rabbi Yoḥanan, who stated, contrary to the opinions of the tanna’im in this baraita, that the number of nails permitted in each sandal is five, this baraita is also not difficult. He could explain that a sandal with an uneven sole is different and requires additional nails. However, in the case of a sandal with an even sole, even the other tanna’im would not permit that many.

אמר רב מתנה ואמרי לה אמר רב אחדבוי בר מתנה אמר רב מתנה אין הלכה כרבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון פשיטא יחיד ורבים הלכה כרבים מהו דתימא מסתברא טעמא דרבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון בהא קא משמע לן

Rav Mattana said, and some say Rav Aḥadvoi bar Mattana said that Rav Mattana said: The halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, who completely prohibited moving a spiked sandal. The Gemara asks: That is obvious. Isn’t there a halakhic principle that in a dispute between an individual and the many, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of the many? The Gemara answers: Lest you say that the rationale for the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, is more reasonable in this case, and therefore the halakha should be ruled in accordance with his opinion. Rav Mattana teaches us that that is not the halakha.

אמר רבי חייא אי לאו דקרו לי בבלאי שרי איסורי שרינא ביה טובא וכמה בפומבדיתא אמרין עשרין וארבע בסורא אמרין עשרין ותרתין אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק וסימניך עד דאתא מפומבדיתא לסורא חסר תרתי:

Rabbi Ḥiyya said: If not for the fact that they would call me: Babylonian who permits prohibitions, I would permit the insertion of many nails into a spiked sandal. The Gemara asks: And how many nails would he have permitted? In Pumbedita they said: Twenty-four nails. In Sura they said: Twenty-two. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: And this is your mnemonic to remember which opinion was stated in Sura and which opinion was stated in Pumbedita: Until Rabbi Ḥiyya came from Pumbedita to Sura he lost two nails from his shoe. Since the route that Rabbi Ḥiyya took from Pumbedita to Eretz Yisrael passed through Sura, one could say: Due to the rigors of the journey, two nails fell from the sandal of Rabbi Ḥiyya between Pumbedita and Sura.

ולא ביחיד בזמן שאין ברגלו מכה:

It was taught in the mishna: And he may not go out with a single sandal when there is no wound on his foot.

More Ways to Learn with Hadran

Join Hadran Communities! Connect with women learning in your area.

Scroll To Top