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

Today's Daf Yomi

May 10, 2020 | 讟状讝 讘讗讬讬专 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.

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.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Shabbat 65

Today鈥檚 daf and this week鈥檚 learning is sponsored in memory of Betty Minsk, Batsheva Rut bat Shalom and Faige z鈥漧, by her daughter, Elisa Hartstein.

Today’s shiur is sponsored in memory of Rhonda Mlodinoff by Becca Nagorsky. And in honor of Mother’s Day, in honor of Debbie Pine – Happy Mother’s Day from your children. We are so proud of your dedication to Torah and Am Yisrael. Love, Sarah, Danielle & Zachary Orenshein. And by Karolyn Benger in honor of all the mothers who are learning and teaching.

Are things that are forbidden for concern about marit ayin, because of what others may see and misunderstand, also forbidden in private spaces? The gemara explains more in details about allowing to go out with cotton in ones ears, one’s shoe and to protect from menstrual blood. Does it need to be tied to the body? Some rabbis did not and what was the reaction of others? Shmuel’s father forbade his daughters a number of things – one of them permitted by the mishna. Why? The gemara suggests that another one was possibly connected to his approach to two females rubbing against each other in a sexual manner – however this is rejected. The gemara deals with a contradiction in the mishna regarding prerifa, fastening a cloak using a rock, coin or nut.

砖讜讟讞谉 讘讞诪讛 讗讘诇 诇讗 讻谞讙讚 讛注诐 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜住专讬谉:

One whose clothes fell into water on a Festival may not dry them in the conventional manner; however, he may spread them out in the sun, but not before the people, who may suspect that he laundered his clothes on Shabbat. Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Shimon prohibit doing so even in a place concealed from view. Apparently, the Sages disagree whether or not an action prohibited due to the appearance of prohibition is prohibited everywhere.

讜讘诪讜讱 砖讘讗讝谞讛: 转谞讬 专诪讬 讘专 讬讞讝拽讗诇 讜讛讜讗 砖拽砖讜专 讘讗讝谞讛:

We learned in the mishna that a woman may go out on Shabbat with a cloth that is in her ear. Rami bar Ye岣zkel taught: And that is specifically in a case where the cloth is tied to her ear and she will not come to carry it.

讜讘诪讜讱 砖讘住谞讚诇讛: 转谞讬 专诪讬 讘专 讬讞讝拽讗诇 讜讛讜讗 砖拽砖讜专 诇讛 讘住谞讚诇讛:

The mishna continues: A woman may go out with a cloth that is in her sandal. Rami bar Ye岣zkel taught: And that is specifically in a case where the cloth is tied to her sandal.

讜讘诪讜讱 砖讛转拽讬谞讛 诇讛 诇谞讚转讛: 住讘专 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 诇诪讬诪专 讜讛讜讗 砖拽砖讜专讛 诇讛 讘讬谉 讬专讬讻讜转讬讛 讗诪专 专讘讗 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 拽砖讜专 诇讛 讻讬讜谉 讚诪讗讬住 诇讗 讗转讬讗 诇讗讬转讜讬讬

We learned in the mishna: A woman may go out with a cloth that she placed due to her menstrual flow. Rami bar 岣ma considered saying that it is permitted specifically in a case where it is tied between her thighs. Rava said: It is permitted even though it is not tied to her; since it is repulsive, she will not come to carry it even if it falls.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 诪专讘讬 讗讘讗 注砖转讛 诇讛 讘讬转 讬讚 诪讛讜 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讜转专 讗讬转诪专 [谞诪讬] 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讗讜砖注讬讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 注砖转讛 诇讛 讘讬转 讬讚 诪讜转专

Rabbi Yirmeya raised a dilemma before Rabbi Abba: If she made herself a handgrip in which she could hold the cloth, what is the halakha? Since she does not have to touch the cloth with her bare hand, is there concern that she will come to carry it or not? He said to him: It is permitted. It was also stated that Rav Na岣an bar Oshaya said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: If she made herself a handgrip it is permitted.

专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 谞驻讬拽 讘讛讜 诇讘讬 诪讚专砖讗 讜讞诇讜拽讬谉 注诇讬讜 讞讘专讬讜 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 谞驻讬拽 讘讛讜 诇讻专诪诇讬转 讜讞诇讜拽讬谉 注诇讬讜 讻诇 讚讜专讜 讜讛转谞讬 专诪讬 讘专 讬讞讝拽讗诇 讜讛讜讗 砖拽砖讜专 诇讛 讘讗讝谞讛 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讚诪讬讛讚拽 讛讗 讚诇讗 诪讬讛讚拽:

Rabbi Yo岣nan went out with a cloth in his ear to the study hall on Shabbat, and his colleagues are in disagreement with him and rule that it is prohibited to do so because it was not tied to his ear. Rabbi Yannai went out with it, a cloth in his ear, to a karmelit, an intermediate domain, neither public nor private. And all the Sages of his generation are in disagreement with him. The Gemara asks: Didn鈥檛 Rami bar Ye岣zkel teach: And that is specifically in a case where the cloth is tied to her ear? How could these Sages ignore this halakha? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; this, where it was taught that certain Sages went out with a cloth, is in a case where it was stuck tightly in their ears. Therefore, it was permitted even though it was not tied. That, where Rami bar Ye岣zkel said that going out with a cloth is permitted only when it is tied, is in a case where it was not stuck tightly in his ear.

讘驻诇驻诇 讜讘讙诇讙诇 诪诇讞: 驻诇驻诇 诇专讬讞 讛驻讛 讙诇讙诇 诪诇讞 诇讚讜专砖讬谞讬: 讜讻诇 讚讘专 砖谞讜转谞转 诇转讜讱 驻讬讛: 讝谞讙讘讬诇讗 讗讬 谞诪讬 讚专爪讜谞讗:

We learned in the mishna: A woman may go out with pepper and with a grain of salt in her mouth. The Gemara explains: She places pepper in her mouth to prevent mouth odor and a grain of salt to treat a toothache. With regard to that which we learned in the mishna: A woman may go out on Shabbat with any thing that she places in her mouth: This refers to ginger or, alternatively, to cinnamon [dartzona].

砖谉 转讜转讘转 砖谉 砖诇 讝讛讘 专讘讬 诪转讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜住专讬谉: 讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖诇 讝讛讘 讗讘诇 讘砖诇 讻住祝 讚讘专讬 讛讻诇 诪讜转专 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讘砖诇 讻住祝 讚讘专讬 讛讻诇 诪讜转专 砖诇 讝讛讘 专讘讬 诪转讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜住专讬谉

We learned in the mishna that the Sages disagree whether or not a woman may go out on Shabbat with a false tooth and a gold tooth; Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits doing so and the Rabbis prohibit doing so. Rabbi Zeira said: They only taught the dispute with regard to a gold tooth. Since it is precious, she might remove it from her mouth to show her friends and come to carry it. However, with regard to a silver tooth, which is less precious, there is no concern that she will remove it from her mouth. Everyone agrees that it is permitted. That opinion was also taught in a baraita: With regard to a tooth made of silver, everyone agrees that it is permitted. With regard to a tooth of gold, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits going out with it and the Rabbis prohibit going out with it.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 专讘讬 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讻讜诇讛讜 住讘讬专讗 诇讛讜 讚讻诇 诪讬讚讬 讚诪讬讙谞讬讗 讘讬讛 诇讗 讗转讬讗 诇讗讞讜讬讬

Abaye said: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and Rabbi Eliezer, and Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar all hold that anything that makes her unappealing when removed, she will not come to remove it and show it to others. Therefore, it is permitted for her to go out with it.

专讘讬 讛讗 讚讗诪专谉 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 驻讜讟专 讘讻讜讘诇转 讜讘爪诇讜讞讬转 砖诇 驻诇讬讬讟讜谉

The Gemara elaborates: The opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is that which we just stated. The opinion of Rabbi Eliezer is as it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer exempts a woman who went out with a bundle of fragrant herbs and with a flask of balsam oil, since a woman whose odor is foul does not remove and show the bundle to others.

专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讚转谞讬讗 讻诇诇 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 诇诪讟讛 诪谉 讛住讘讻讛 讬讜爪讗讛 讘讜 诇诪注诇讛 诪谉 讛住讘讻讛 讗讬谞讛 讬讜爪讗讛 讘讜:

The opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar is as it was taught in a baraita. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar stated a principle: Anything that is worn beneath the net, a woman may go out into the public domain with it, since a woman will not uncover her hair while in the public domain even to show off an ornament. Anything that is worn over the net, e.g., an ornamental hat, a woman may not go out with it, since there is concern that she will remove it and carry it.

诪转谞讬壮 讬讜爪讗讛 讘住诇注 砖注诇 讛爪讬谞讬转 讛讘谞讜转 拽讟谞讜转 讬讜爪讗讜转 讘讞讜讟讬谉 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘拽讬住诪讬谉 砖讘讗讝谞讬讛诐 注专讘讬讜转 讬讜爪讗讜转 专注讜诇讜转 讜诪讚讬讜转 驻专讜驻讜转 讜讻诇 讗讚诐 讗诇讗 砖讚讘专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讘讛讜讛 驻讜专驻转 注诇 讛讗讘谉 讜注诇 讛讗讙讜讝 讜注诇 讛诪讟讘注 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 转驻专讜祝 诇讻转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转:

MISHNA: A woman may go out with a sela coin that she ties on a wound on her foot. The young girls may go out with strings, and even with wood chips that are in the holes in their ears so that the holes will not seal. Young girls would have their ears pierced, but earrings were not placed in their ears until they were older. Jewish women in Arab countries may go out veiled, with a scarf covering their face, and Jewish women in Media may go out with cloaks fastened with stones. And, any person in any place is permitted to go out on Shabbat clothed in that way; however, the Sages spoke in the present, addressing prevalent situations. A woman may fasten her cloak on a stone by inserting a small stone and wrapping her cloak around it, as she would with a button. And likewise, she may do so on a nut or on a coin, as long as she does not fasten her cloak with them on Shabbat ab initio.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 爪讬谞讬转 讘转 讗专注讗

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the tzinit with regard to which the mishna taught that a woman may go out with a coin tied to it on Shabbat? The Gemara explains: It is a wound on the sole of her foot.

讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 住诇注 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讻诇 诪讬讚讬 讚讗拽讜砖讗 诪注诇讬 诇讛 诇讬注讘讚 诇讛 讞住驻讗 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 砖讜讻转讗 诇讬注讘讚 诇讛 讟住讗 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 爪讜专转讗 诇讬注讘讚 诇讛 驻讜诇住讗 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讻讜诇讛讜 诪注诇讬谉 诇讛:

The Gemara asks: What is different about a sela? Why specifically is a coin placed on the wound? If you say that any object that is hard is beneficial for her, make an earthenware shard for her instead. Rather, it is beneficial due to the rust on the coin. If so, make a small silver plate for her. Why specifically a coin? Rather it is beneficial due to the image engraved on the coin. If so, make her an unminted coin and engrave an image on it. Abaye said: Learn from it that all these factors together are beneficial for her.

讛讘谞讜转 讬讜爪讗讜转 讘讞讜讟讬谉: 讗讘讜讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 诇讗 砖讘讬拽 诇讛讜 诇讘谞转讬讛 讚谞驻拽讬 讘讞讜讟讬谉 讜诇讗 砖讘讬拽 诇讛讜 讙谞讬讗谉 讙讘讬 讛讚讚讬 讜注讘讬讚 诇讛讜 诪拽讜讗讜转 讘讬讜诪讬 谞讬住谉 讜诪驻爪讬 讘讬讜诪讬 转砖专讬

The mishna taught that the young girls may go out with strings. The Gemara relates that Shmuel鈥檚 father did not allow his daughters to go out with strings, and did not allow them to lie next to each other, and he made ritual baths for them in the days of Nisan and mats in the Euphrates River in the days of Tishrei. Since the water was shallow and the riverbed muddy, he placed mats on the riverbed so that they could immerse without getting dirty.

诇讗 砖讘讬拽 诇讛讜 讬讜爪讗讜转 讘讞讜讟讬谉 讜讛讗谞谉 转谞谉 讛讘谞讜转 讬讜爪讗讜转 讘讞讜讟讬谉 讘谞转讬讛 讚讗讘讜讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讚爪讘注讜谞讬谉 讛讜讜

The Gemara analyzes the conduct of Shmuel鈥檚 father: He did not allow them to go out with strings. Didn鈥檛 we learn in the mishna that the girls may go out with strings? The Gemara answers: The strings with which the daughters of Shmuel鈥檚 father went out were colorful ones, and he was concerned that because the strings were beautiful they would come to remove them to show them to others and carry them.

诇讗 砖讘讬拽 诇讛讜 讙谞讬讗谉 讙讘讬 讛讚讚讬 诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讛讜谞讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 谞砖讬诐 讛诪住讜诇诇讜转 讝讜 讘讝讜

He did not allow them to lie next to one another. Let us say that this supports the opinion of Rav Huna, as Rav Huna said: Women who rub against one another motivated by sexual desire

驻住讜诇讜转 诇讻讛讜谞讛

are disqualified from marrying into the priesthood. The act renders a woman a zona. It is prohibited for a priest to marry her (Tosafot).

诇讗 住讘专 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 诇讬诇驻谉 讙讜驻讗 谞讜讻专讗讛

The Gemara rejects this: No, that is not necessarily so. Perhaps the reason for Shmuel鈥檚 father鈥檚 insistence was because he thought to prevent them from lying next to one another so that they would not become accustomed to sleeping with a foreign body, which could stimulate sexual desire.

讜注讘讬讚 诇讛讜 诪拽讜讛 讘讬讜诪讬 谞讬住谉 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讚讗诪专 专讘 诪讟专讗 讘诪注专讘讗 住讛讚讗 专讘讛 驻专转 住讘专 砖诇讗 讬专讘讜 讛谞讜讟驻讬谉 注诇 讛讝讜讞诇讬谉

And he made a ritual bath for them in the days of Nisan. This supports the opinion of Rav, as Rav said: When rain falls in the West, Eretz Yisrael, the great witness attesting to that fact is the Euphrates, as the water flow in the Euphrates increases after the rainy season. The rainfall in northern Babylonia, where the source of the Euphrates is located, is essentially parallel to the rainfall in Eretz Yisrael. The increased water flow of the Euphrates in the spring is the result of the rainfall in the winter. Shmuel鈥檚 father held that immersion in the Euphrates would not purify them. A river maintains its status as a river in terms of purification through immersion only if it is established that the rain water that fell would not exceed the naturally flowing spring water. In the halakhot of ritual baths, there are two manners of purification. The first is the immersion in a place where water is gathered, e.g., collected rainwater that does not flow and remains in place. The second is immersion in flowing waters in their natural state, e.g., a spring or a river. However, rainwater purifies only when it is collected; it does not purify when it is flowing.

讜驻诇讬讙讗 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 谞讛专讗 诪讻讬驻讬讛 诪讬讘专讱 讜驻诇讬讙讗 讚讬讚讬讛 讗讚讬讚讬讛 讚讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗讬谉 讛诪讬诐 诪讟讛专讬谉 讘讝讜讞诇讬谉 讗诇讗 驻专转 讘讬讜诪讬 转砖专讬 讘诇讘讚:

And he disagrees with his son Shmuel, as Shmuel said: The river is blessed from its riverbed (ge鈥檕nim); the additional water in the river is not from rainfall but rather from subterranean sources. And this statement of Shmuel disagrees with another ruling that he himself issued, as Shmuel said: The water purifies when flowing only in the Euphrates during the days of Tishrei alone. Since rain does not fall in the summer, only then is it clear that the water is in fact river water.

驻讜专驻转 注诇 讛讗讘谉 讻讜壮: 讜讛讗诪专转 专讬砖讗 驻讜专驻转 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 住讬驻讗 讗转讗谉 诇诪讟讘注

We learned in the mishna: A woman may fasten her cloak on a stone, and on a nut, and on a coin, as long as she does not fasten her cloak with them ab initio on Shabbat. The Gemara asks: Didn鈥檛 you say in the first clause of this halakha in the mishna that a woman may fasten, indicating that she is permitted to do so even ab initio? How do you explain the contradiction? Abaye said: In the latter clause of the mishna we have arrived at the case of a coin, one of the examples cited in the mishna. The halakha with regard to a coin is the exception. Because a coin is set-aside from use on Shabbat, one might conclude that it may not be used at all; nevertheless, it is only prohibited to fasten the cloak on the coin ab initio on Shabbat itself.

讘注讬 讗讘讬讬 讗砖讛 诪讛讜 砖转注专讬诐 讜转驻专讜祝 注诇 讛讗讙讜讝 诇讛讜爪讬讗 诇讘谞讛 拽讟谉 讘砖讘转

Abaye raised a dilemma: What is the halakha with regard to a case where a woman employs artifice to circumvent the halakha and fastens her garment on a nut in order to take the nut out in a permissible fashion to her young child in the public domain on Shabbat?

转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪注专讬诪讬谉 转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪注专讬诪讬谉

The Gemara notes: This is a dilemma according to the one who said that one may employ artifice when there is a fire on Shabbat. One is permitted to wear several layers of garments to take them out of a burning house on Shabbat. And this is a dilemma according to the one who said that one may not employ artifice when there is a fire on Shabbat.

转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪注专讬诪讬谉 讘讚诇讬拽讛 讛转诐 讛讜讗 讚讗讬 诇讗 砖专讬转 诇讬讛 讗转讬 诇讻讘讜讬讬 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讗讬 诇讗 砖专讬转 诇讬讛 诇讗 讗转讬 诇讗驻讜拽讬

The Gemara elaborates: This is a dilemma according to the one who said that one may employ artifice when there is a fire on Shabbat, as the cases are distinct. Perhaps there, artifice is permitted because if you do not permit him to take the garments out of the burning house in that manner, he will come to extinguish the fire. However, here, if you do not permit the woman to employ artifice and take the nut out to her child in the public domain, she will not come to take it out.

讗讜 讚诇诪讗 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪注专讬诪讬谉 讘讚诇讬拽讛 讛转诐 讚专讱 讛讜爪讗讛 讘讻讱 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讗讬谉 讚专讱 讛讜爪讗讛 讘讻讱 讗讬诪讗 砖驻讬专 讚诪讬 转讬拽讜:

Or perhaps, even according to one who said that one may not employ artifice in the case of a fire, there is a distinction between the cases. There, in the case of a fire, wearing garments is the typical manner in which one takes clothing out to the public domain. However, here, utilizing a nut as a button is not the typical manner in which one takes a nut out to the public domain. Since no Torah prohibition is violated by doing so, say that she may well employ artifice to take the nut out to her son. The Gemara concludes: Let this dilemma stand unresolved.

诪转谞讬壮 讛拽讬讟注 讬讜爪讗 讘拽讘 砖诇讜 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专

MISHNA: One with an amputated leg may go out on Shabbat with his wooden leg, as it has the legal status of a shoe; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

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 sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

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 61-67 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time

This week we will review Daf 61-67. We will continue to discuss what men and women can go out with...
WhatsApp Image 2020-05-11 at 12.17.15 AM

Amen Sela

One of the most famous coins in Talmudic times appears on our daf, Shabbat 65. The 'Sela' coin was based...

Shabbat 65

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Shabbat 65

砖讜讟讞谉 讘讞诪讛 讗讘诇 诇讗 讻谞讙讚 讛注诐 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜住专讬谉:

One whose clothes fell into water on a Festival may not dry them in the conventional manner; however, he may spread them out in the sun, but not before the people, who may suspect that he laundered his clothes on Shabbat. Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Shimon prohibit doing so even in a place concealed from view. Apparently, the Sages disagree whether or not an action prohibited due to the appearance of prohibition is prohibited everywhere.

讜讘诪讜讱 砖讘讗讝谞讛: 转谞讬 专诪讬 讘专 讬讞讝拽讗诇 讜讛讜讗 砖拽砖讜专 讘讗讝谞讛:

We learned in the mishna that a woman may go out on Shabbat with a cloth that is in her ear. Rami bar Ye岣zkel taught: And that is specifically in a case where the cloth is tied to her ear and she will not come to carry it.

讜讘诪讜讱 砖讘住谞讚诇讛: 转谞讬 专诪讬 讘专 讬讞讝拽讗诇 讜讛讜讗 砖拽砖讜专 诇讛 讘住谞讚诇讛:

The mishna continues: A woman may go out with a cloth that is in her sandal. Rami bar Ye岣zkel taught: And that is specifically in a case where the cloth is tied to her sandal.

讜讘诪讜讱 砖讛转拽讬谞讛 诇讛 诇谞讚转讛: 住讘专 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 诇诪讬诪专 讜讛讜讗 砖拽砖讜专讛 诇讛 讘讬谉 讬专讬讻讜转讬讛 讗诪专 专讘讗 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 拽砖讜专 诇讛 讻讬讜谉 讚诪讗讬住 诇讗 讗转讬讗 诇讗讬转讜讬讬

We learned in the mishna: A woman may go out with a cloth that she placed due to her menstrual flow. Rami bar 岣ma considered saying that it is permitted specifically in a case where it is tied between her thighs. Rava said: It is permitted even though it is not tied to her; since it is repulsive, she will not come to carry it even if it falls.

讘注讗 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘讬 讬专诪讬讛 诪专讘讬 讗讘讗 注砖转讛 诇讛 讘讬转 讬讚 诪讛讜 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讜转专 讗讬转诪专 [谞诪讬] 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讗讜砖注讬讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 注砖转讛 诇讛 讘讬转 讬讚 诪讜转专

Rabbi Yirmeya raised a dilemma before Rabbi Abba: If she made herself a handgrip in which she could hold the cloth, what is the halakha? Since she does not have to touch the cloth with her bare hand, is there concern that she will come to carry it or not? He said to him: It is permitted. It was also stated that Rav Na岣an bar Oshaya said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: If she made herself a handgrip it is permitted.

专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 谞驻讬拽 讘讛讜 诇讘讬 诪讚专砖讗 讜讞诇讜拽讬谉 注诇讬讜 讞讘专讬讜 专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 谞驻讬拽 讘讛讜 诇讻专诪诇讬转 讜讞诇讜拽讬谉 注诇讬讜 讻诇 讚讜专讜 讜讛转谞讬 专诪讬 讘专 讬讞讝拽讗诇 讜讛讜讗 砖拽砖讜专 诇讛 讘讗讝谞讛 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讚诪讬讛讚拽 讛讗 讚诇讗 诪讬讛讚拽:

Rabbi Yo岣nan went out with a cloth in his ear to the study hall on Shabbat, and his colleagues are in disagreement with him and rule that it is prohibited to do so because it was not tied to his ear. Rabbi Yannai went out with it, a cloth in his ear, to a karmelit, an intermediate domain, neither public nor private. And all the Sages of his generation are in disagreement with him. The Gemara asks: Didn鈥檛 Rami bar Ye岣zkel teach: And that is specifically in a case where the cloth is tied to her ear? How could these Sages ignore this halakha? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; this, where it was taught that certain Sages went out with a cloth, is in a case where it was stuck tightly in their ears. Therefore, it was permitted even though it was not tied. That, where Rami bar Ye岣zkel said that going out with a cloth is permitted only when it is tied, is in a case where it was not stuck tightly in his ear.

讘驻诇驻诇 讜讘讙诇讙诇 诪诇讞: 驻诇驻诇 诇专讬讞 讛驻讛 讙诇讙诇 诪诇讞 诇讚讜专砖讬谞讬: 讜讻诇 讚讘专 砖谞讜转谞转 诇转讜讱 驻讬讛: 讝谞讙讘讬诇讗 讗讬 谞诪讬 讚专爪讜谞讗:

We learned in the mishna: A woman may go out with pepper and with a grain of salt in her mouth. The Gemara explains: She places pepper in her mouth to prevent mouth odor and a grain of salt to treat a toothache. With regard to that which we learned in the mishna: A woman may go out on Shabbat with any thing that she places in her mouth: This refers to ginger or, alternatively, to cinnamon [dartzona].

砖谉 转讜转讘转 砖谉 砖诇 讝讛讘 专讘讬 诪转讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜住专讬谉: 讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖诇 讝讛讘 讗讘诇 讘砖诇 讻住祝 讚讘专讬 讛讻诇 诪讜转专 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讘砖诇 讻住祝 讚讘专讬 讛讻诇 诪讜转专 砖诇 讝讛讘 专讘讬 诪转讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜住专讬谉

We learned in the mishna that the Sages disagree whether or not a woman may go out on Shabbat with a false tooth and a gold tooth; Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits doing so and the Rabbis prohibit doing so. Rabbi Zeira said: They only taught the dispute with regard to a gold tooth. Since it is precious, she might remove it from her mouth to show her friends and come to carry it. However, with regard to a silver tooth, which is less precious, there is no concern that she will remove it from her mouth. Everyone agrees that it is permitted. That opinion was also taught in a baraita: With regard to a tooth made of silver, everyone agrees that it is permitted. With regard to a tooth of gold, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits going out with it and the Rabbis prohibit going out with it.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 专讘讬 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讻讜诇讛讜 住讘讬专讗 诇讛讜 讚讻诇 诪讬讚讬 讚诪讬讙谞讬讗 讘讬讛 诇讗 讗转讬讗 诇讗讞讜讬讬

Abaye said: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and Rabbi Eliezer, and Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar all hold that anything that makes her unappealing when removed, she will not come to remove it and show it to others. Therefore, it is permitted for her to go out with it.

专讘讬 讛讗 讚讗诪专谉 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 驻讜讟专 讘讻讜讘诇转 讜讘爪诇讜讞讬转 砖诇 驻诇讬讬讟讜谉

The Gemara elaborates: The opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is that which we just stated. The opinion of Rabbi Eliezer is as it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer exempts a woman who went out with a bundle of fragrant herbs and with a flask of balsam oil, since a woman whose odor is foul does not remove and show the bundle to others.

专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讚转谞讬讗 讻诇诇 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 诇诪讟讛 诪谉 讛住讘讻讛 讬讜爪讗讛 讘讜 诇诪注诇讛 诪谉 讛住讘讻讛 讗讬谞讛 讬讜爪讗讛 讘讜:

The opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar is as it was taught in a baraita. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar stated a principle: Anything that is worn beneath the net, a woman may go out into the public domain with it, since a woman will not uncover her hair while in the public domain even to show off an ornament. Anything that is worn over the net, e.g., an ornamental hat, a woman may not go out with it, since there is concern that she will remove it and carry it.

诪转谞讬壮 讬讜爪讗讛 讘住诇注 砖注诇 讛爪讬谞讬转 讛讘谞讜转 拽讟谞讜转 讬讜爪讗讜转 讘讞讜讟讬谉 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘拽讬住诪讬谉 砖讘讗讝谞讬讛诐 注专讘讬讜转 讬讜爪讗讜转 专注讜诇讜转 讜诪讚讬讜转 驻专讜驻讜转 讜讻诇 讗讚诐 讗诇讗 砖讚讘专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讘讛讜讛 驻讜专驻转 注诇 讛讗讘谉 讜注诇 讛讗讙讜讝 讜注诇 讛诪讟讘注 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 转驻专讜祝 诇讻转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转:

MISHNA: A woman may go out with a sela coin that she ties on a wound on her foot. The young girls may go out with strings, and even with wood chips that are in the holes in their ears so that the holes will not seal. Young girls would have their ears pierced, but earrings were not placed in their ears until they were older. Jewish women in Arab countries may go out veiled, with a scarf covering their face, and Jewish women in Media may go out with cloaks fastened with stones. And, any person in any place is permitted to go out on Shabbat clothed in that way; however, the Sages spoke in the present, addressing prevalent situations. A woman may fasten her cloak on a stone by inserting a small stone and wrapping her cloak around it, as she would with a button. And likewise, she may do so on a nut or on a coin, as long as she does not fasten her cloak with them on Shabbat ab initio.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 爪讬谞讬转 讘转 讗专注讗

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the tzinit with regard to which the mishna taught that a woman may go out with a coin tied to it on Shabbat? The Gemara explains: It is a wound on the sole of her foot.

讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 住诇注 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讻诇 诪讬讚讬 讚讗拽讜砖讗 诪注诇讬 诇讛 诇讬注讘讚 诇讛 讞住驻讗 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 砖讜讻转讗 诇讬注讘讚 诇讛 讟住讗 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 爪讜专转讗 诇讬注讘讚 诇讛 驻讜诇住讗 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讻讜诇讛讜 诪注诇讬谉 诇讛:

The Gemara asks: What is different about a sela? Why specifically is a coin placed on the wound? If you say that any object that is hard is beneficial for her, make an earthenware shard for her instead. Rather, it is beneficial due to the rust on the coin. If so, make a small silver plate for her. Why specifically a coin? Rather it is beneficial due to the image engraved on the coin. If so, make her an unminted coin and engrave an image on it. Abaye said: Learn from it that all these factors together are beneficial for her.

讛讘谞讜转 讬讜爪讗讜转 讘讞讜讟讬谉: 讗讘讜讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 诇讗 砖讘讬拽 诇讛讜 诇讘谞转讬讛 讚谞驻拽讬 讘讞讜讟讬谉 讜诇讗 砖讘讬拽 诇讛讜 讙谞讬讗谉 讙讘讬 讛讚讚讬 讜注讘讬讚 诇讛讜 诪拽讜讗讜转 讘讬讜诪讬 谞讬住谉 讜诪驻爪讬 讘讬讜诪讬 转砖专讬

The mishna taught that the young girls may go out with strings. The Gemara relates that Shmuel鈥檚 father did not allow his daughters to go out with strings, and did not allow them to lie next to each other, and he made ritual baths for them in the days of Nisan and mats in the Euphrates River in the days of Tishrei. Since the water was shallow and the riverbed muddy, he placed mats on the riverbed so that they could immerse without getting dirty.

诇讗 砖讘讬拽 诇讛讜 讬讜爪讗讜转 讘讞讜讟讬谉 讜讛讗谞谉 转谞谉 讛讘谞讜转 讬讜爪讗讜转 讘讞讜讟讬谉 讘谞转讬讛 讚讗讘讜讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讚爪讘注讜谞讬谉 讛讜讜

The Gemara analyzes the conduct of Shmuel鈥檚 father: He did not allow them to go out with strings. Didn鈥檛 we learn in the mishna that the girls may go out with strings? The Gemara answers: The strings with which the daughters of Shmuel鈥檚 father went out were colorful ones, and he was concerned that because the strings were beautiful they would come to remove them to show them to others and carry them.

诇讗 砖讘讬拽 诇讛讜 讙谞讬讗谉 讙讘讬 讛讚讚讬 诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讛讜谞讗 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 谞砖讬诐 讛诪住讜诇诇讜转 讝讜 讘讝讜

He did not allow them to lie next to one another. Let us say that this supports the opinion of Rav Huna, as Rav Huna said: Women who rub against one another motivated by sexual desire

驻住讜诇讜转 诇讻讛讜谞讛

are disqualified from marrying into the priesthood. The act renders a woman a zona. It is prohibited for a priest to marry her (Tosafot).

诇讗 住讘专 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 诇讬诇驻谉 讙讜驻讗 谞讜讻专讗讛

The Gemara rejects this: No, that is not necessarily so. Perhaps the reason for Shmuel鈥檚 father鈥檚 insistence was because he thought to prevent them from lying next to one another so that they would not become accustomed to sleeping with a foreign body, which could stimulate sexual desire.

讜注讘讬讚 诇讛讜 诪拽讜讛 讘讬讜诪讬 谞讬住谉 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讚讗诪专 专讘 诪讟专讗 讘诪注专讘讗 住讛讚讗 专讘讛 驻专转 住讘专 砖诇讗 讬专讘讜 讛谞讜讟驻讬谉 注诇 讛讝讜讞诇讬谉

And he made a ritual bath for them in the days of Nisan. This supports the opinion of Rav, as Rav said: When rain falls in the West, Eretz Yisrael, the great witness attesting to that fact is the Euphrates, as the water flow in the Euphrates increases after the rainy season. The rainfall in northern Babylonia, where the source of the Euphrates is located, is essentially parallel to the rainfall in Eretz Yisrael. The increased water flow of the Euphrates in the spring is the result of the rainfall in the winter. Shmuel鈥檚 father held that immersion in the Euphrates would not purify them. A river maintains its status as a river in terms of purification through immersion only if it is established that the rain water that fell would not exceed the naturally flowing spring water. In the halakhot of ritual baths, there are two manners of purification. The first is the immersion in a place where water is gathered, e.g., collected rainwater that does not flow and remains in place. The second is immersion in flowing waters in their natural state, e.g., a spring or a river. However, rainwater purifies only when it is collected; it does not purify when it is flowing.

讜驻诇讬讙讗 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 谞讛专讗 诪讻讬驻讬讛 诪讬讘专讱 讜驻诇讬讙讗 讚讬讚讬讛 讗讚讬讚讬讛 讚讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗讬谉 讛诪讬诐 诪讟讛专讬谉 讘讝讜讞诇讬谉 讗诇讗 驻专转 讘讬讜诪讬 转砖专讬 讘诇讘讚:

And he disagrees with his son Shmuel, as Shmuel said: The river is blessed from its riverbed (ge鈥檕nim); the additional water in the river is not from rainfall but rather from subterranean sources. And this statement of Shmuel disagrees with another ruling that he himself issued, as Shmuel said: The water purifies when flowing only in the Euphrates during the days of Tishrei alone. Since rain does not fall in the summer, only then is it clear that the water is in fact river water.

驻讜专驻转 注诇 讛讗讘谉 讻讜壮: 讜讛讗诪专转 专讬砖讗 驻讜专驻转 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 住讬驻讗 讗转讗谉 诇诪讟讘注

We learned in the mishna: A woman may fasten her cloak on a stone, and on a nut, and on a coin, as long as she does not fasten her cloak with them ab initio on Shabbat. The Gemara asks: Didn鈥檛 you say in the first clause of this halakha in the mishna that a woman may fasten, indicating that she is permitted to do so even ab initio? How do you explain the contradiction? Abaye said: In the latter clause of the mishna we have arrived at the case of a coin, one of the examples cited in the mishna. The halakha with regard to a coin is the exception. Because a coin is set-aside from use on Shabbat, one might conclude that it may not be used at all; nevertheless, it is only prohibited to fasten the cloak on the coin ab initio on Shabbat itself.

讘注讬 讗讘讬讬 讗砖讛 诪讛讜 砖转注专讬诐 讜转驻专讜祝 注诇 讛讗讙讜讝 诇讛讜爪讬讗 诇讘谞讛 拽讟谉 讘砖讘转

Abaye raised a dilemma: What is the halakha with regard to a case where a woman employs artifice to circumvent the halakha and fastens her garment on a nut in order to take the nut out in a permissible fashion to her young child in the public domain on Shabbat?

转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪注专讬诪讬谉 转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪注专讬诪讬谉

The Gemara notes: This is a dilemma according to the one who said that one may employ artifice when there is a fire on Shabbat. One is permitted to wear several layers of garments to take them out of a burning house on Shabbat. And this is a dilemma according to the one who said that one may not employ artifice when there is a fire on Shabbat.

转讬讘注讬 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 诪注专讬诪讬谉 讘讚诇讬拽讛 讛转诐 讛讜讗 讚讗讬 诇讗 砖专讬转 诇讬讛 讗转讬 诇讻讘讜讬讬 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讗讬 诇讗 砖专讬转 诇讬讛 诇讗 讗转讬 诇讗驻讜拽讬

The Gemara elaborates: This is a dilemma according to the one who said that one may employ artifice when there is a fire on Shabbat, as the cases are distinct. Perhaps there, artifice is permitted because if you do not permit him to take the garments out of the burning house in that manner, he will come to extinguish the fire. However, here, if you do not permit the woman to employ artifice and take the nut out to her child in the public domain, she will not come to take it out.

讗讜 讚诇诪讗 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪注专讬诪讬谉 讘讚诇讬拽讛 讛转诐 讚专讱 讛讜爪讗讛 讘讻讱 讗讘诇 讛讻讗 讗讬谉 讚专讱 讛讜爪讗讛 讘讻讱 讗讬诪讗 砖驻讬专 讚诪讬 转讬拽讜:

Or perhaps, even according to one who said that one may not employ artifice in the case of a fire, there is a distinction between the cases. There, in the case of a fire, wearing garments is the typical manner in which one takes clothing out to the public domain. However, here, utilizing a nut as a button is not the typical manner in which one takes a nut out to the public domain. Since no Torah prohibition is violated by doing so, say that she may well employ artifice to take the nut out to her son. The Gemara concludes: Let this dilemma stand unresolved.

诪转谞讬壮 讛拽讬讟注 讬讜爪讗 讘拽讘 砖诇讜 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专

MISHNA: One with an amputated leg may go out on Shabbat with his wooden leg, as it has the legal status of a shoe; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

Scroll To Top