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

Today's Daf Yomi

May 25, 2020 | 讘壮 讘住讬讜谉 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 80

Today’s shiur is dedicated by Don Nadel in memory of his mother, Zisa Risa bat Aliya HaCohen z”l on her yahrzeit.聽

What is the requisitve amount for carrying ink – does it matter if it is in dried form, in a quill or an inkwell? Rava brings a number of laws that deal with combining partial acts that independently would not obligate one but together could. Rabbi Yosi says if one takes a partial amount into one public domain and another part into a different public domain, one is not responsible. What distinguishes one public domain from another – various opinions are brought. Eye shadow for one eye – is that meant for medicinal purposes or for beauty? The gemara briefly discusses a number of the items listed in the mishna. In the beginning of the mishna, Rabbi Yehuda brought a smaller amount than the rabbis – why in the cases of earthenware shards did he bring a larger amount? The gemara delves into the issue of lime – why did they use it on girls? What is the amount that Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Nechemia list in the mishna? Does Rabbi yehuda also here obligate for a smaller amount? Teh mishna continues with amounts for carrying earth, fertilizer, fine sand, coarse sand and reeds. There are some debates between Rabbi Akiva and the rabbis.

转谞讗 砖转讬 讗讜转讬讜转 讘讚讬讜 (讜砖转讬) 讗讜转讬讜转 讘拽讜诇诪讜住 砖转讬 讗讜转讬讜转 讘拽诇诪专讬谉 讘注讬 专讘讗 讗讜转 讗讞转 讘讚讬讜 讗讜转 讗讞转 讘拽讜诇诪讜住 讗讜转 讗讞转 讘拽诇诪专讬谉 诪讛讜 转讬拽讜

A tanna taught in a Tosefta: The measure that determines liability for carrying out ink is equivalent to that which is used to write two letters when he carries out dried ink, and two letters when the ink is in the quill, and two letters in the inkwell [kalmarin]. Rava raised a dilemma: What is the halakha if one carried out sufficient ink to write one letter in the form of dried ink, and sufficient ink to write one letter in the quill, and sufficient ink to write one letter in the inkwell? Do they join together to constitute the measure for liability, or is each considered separately? No resolution was found for this dilemma. Therefore, let it stand unresolved.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讜爪讬讗 砖转讬 讗讜转讬讜转 讜讻转讘谉 讻砖讛讜讗 诪讛诇讱 讞讬讬讘 讻转讬讘转谉 讝讜 讛讬讗 讛谞讞转谉 讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讜爪讬讗 讗讜转 讗讞转 讜讻转讘讛 讜讞讝专 讜讛讜爪讬讗 讗讜转 讗讞转 讜讻转讘讛 驻讟讜专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讘注讬讚谞讗 讚讗驻拽讗 诇讘转专讬讬转讗 讞住专 诇讬讛 诇砖讬注讜专讗 讚拽诪讬讬转讗

Rava said: One who carried out a measure of ink equivalent to that which is used to write two letters on Shabbat, and he wrote two letters as he walked, even though he did not place the written material in the public domain, he is liable for carrying out the ink. Their writing is their placement. He is liable even without placing the ink on the ground. And Rava said: One who carried out sufficient ink to write one letter and he wrote it, and then proceeded to carry out sufficient ink to write one more letter and he wrote it, is exempt. What is the reason that he is exempt? At the time that he carried out the last drop of ink, he was lacking the first measure of ink. The ink that he carried out first dried slightly in the interim and not enough remained to write one letter.

讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讗讞转 讜讛谞讬讞讛 讜讞讝专 讜讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讗讞转 讜讛谞讬讞讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 谞注砖讛 讻诪讬 砖拽诇讟讛 [讻诇讘] 讗讜 砖谞砖专驻讛 讜驻讟讜专 讜讗诪讗讬 讛讗 诪谞讞讛 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讜讗诐 拽讚诐 讜讛讙讘讬讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 拽讜讚诐 讛谞讞转 砖谞讬讬讛 谞注砖讬转 专讗砖讜谞讛 讻诪讬 砖谞拽诇讟讛 讗讜 砖谞砖专驻讛 讜驻讟讜专 讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讜讛谞讬讞讛 讜讞讝专 讜讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讜讛注讘讬专讛 讚专讱 注诇讬讛 讞讬讬讘 讜讗诪讗讬 讛讗 诇讗 谞讞 讻讙讜谉 砖讛注讘讬专讛 转讜讱 砖诇砖讛

And Rava said with regard to a similar issue: One who carried out half of a dried fig on Shabbat and placed it in a different domain, and proceeded to carry out another half of a dried fig and placed it, the first becomes as one that was snatched by a dog or burned and he is exempt, as he did not carry out the measure of a dried fig for which he would be liable. The Gemara wonders: And why is he exempt; isn鈥檛 an entire dried fig placed together? Why isn鈥檛 he liable for carrying it out? The Gemara explains: This is what Rava is saying: And if he lifted the first half-fig first before placement of the second, i.e., the two half-figs were never placed together, the first becomes as one that was snatched by a dog or burned and he is exempt. And Rava said: One who carried out half of a dried fig on Shabbat and placed it in a different domain, and proceeded to carry out another half of a dried fig and passed the second half-fig over the already placed first half-fig, is liable even though they were never placed together. The Gemara asks: And why is he liable? The second half-fig did not come to rest. The Gemara answers: It is referring to a case where he passed the second half-fig within three handbreadths of the first half-fig. The halakha is that objects less than three handbreadths apart are considered attached.

讜讛讗诪专 专讘讗 转讜讱 砖诇砖讛 诇专讘谞谉 爪专讬讱 讛谞讞讛 注诇 讙讘讬 诪砖讛讜 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 讘讝讜专拽 讻讗谉 讘诪注讘讬专

The Gemara asks: And didn鈥檛 Rava himself say: An object that passes within three handbreadths of the ground, according to the opinion of the Rabbis, must come to rest atop some defined place and if it does not it is not considered placed? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where Rava said that it must actually come to rest, it is referring to one who throws the object; here, where proximity alone is sufficient to render him liable, it is referring to one who passes an object in his hand, since he can place the object down at any point.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讜讞讝专 讜讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讘讛注诇诐 讗讞讚 讞讬讬讘 讘砖转讬 讛注诇诪讜转 驻讟讜专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘讛注诇诐 讗讞讚 诇专砖讜转 讗讞讚 讞讬讬讘 诇砖转讬 专砖讜讬讜转 驻讟讜专 讗诪专 专讘讛 讜讛讜讗 砖讬砖 讞讬讜讘 讞讟讗转 讘讬谞讬讛诐 讗讘诇 讻专诪诇讬转 诇讗

The Sages taught: One who carried out half of a dried fig into the public domain on Shabbat and proceeded to carry out another half of a dried fig, within one lapse of awareness, is liable; within two lapses of awareness, he is exempt because in neither lapse did he carry out a measure that would render him liable. Rabbi Yosei says: If he carried out the half-figs within one lapse of awareness to one domain he is liable; to two domains he is exempt. If he carried the two half-figs to two separate sections of the public domain, he is exempt because there is no permitted manner to unite the two halves. Rabba said with regard to Rabbi Yosei鈥檚 statement: That is only in a case where there is an area in which there is liability to bring a sin-offering between them. It only applies in a case where there is a private domain between the two sections of the public domain and carrying between them is prohibited by Torah law. However, if the two sections of the public domain were separated by a karmelit, no, he would not be exempt. In that case, there is no Torah prohibition against carrying between the two sections of the public domain through the karmelit, and by Torah law they are not considered separate.

讗讘讬讬 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讻专诪诇讬转 讗讘诇 驻讬住诇讗 诇讗 讜专讘讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 驻讬住诇讗 讜讗讝讚讗 专讘讗 诇讟注诪讬讛 讚讗诪专 专讘讗 专砖讜转 砖讘转 讻专砖讜转 讙讬讟讬谉 讚诪讬讗:

Abaye said: Even if they were separated by a karmelit it is not considered one domain, and he is exempt. However, if the two sections were separated by a large beam, no, they are not considered separate. And Rava said: Even if the two sections were separated by a large beam, according to Rabbi Yosei, they are considered separate and he is exempt. The Gemara comments: And Rava follows his line of reasoning stated elsewhere as Rava said: The definition of domain for Shabbat is like the definition of domain for bills of divorce. Just as with regard to bills of divorce, two areas separated by a beam are not considered one domain, so too, with regard to the halakhot of Shabbat, they are not considered one domain.

讻讞讜诇 讻讚讬 诇讻讞讜诇 注讬谉 讗讞转 注讬谉 讗讞转: 讛讗 诇讗 讻讞诇讬 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 砖讻谉 爪谞讜注讜转 讻讜讞诇讜转 注讬谉 讗讞转 诪讬转讬讘讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讗讜诪专 讻讞讜诇 讗诐 诇专驻讜讗讛 讻讚讬 诇讻讞讜诇 注讬谉 讗讞转 讗诐 诇拽砖讟 讘砖转讬 注讬谞讬诐 转专讙诪讗 讛讬诇诇 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 谞讞诪谞讬 讻讬 转谞讬讗 讛讛讜讗 讘注讬专谞讬讜转:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out blue eye shadow is equivalent to that which is used to paint one eye blue. The Gemara asks: How could the mishna say one eye? Women do not paint only one eye blue. Rav Huna said: Because modest women, who cover their faces with a veil, paint only the one eye that shows blue. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: For carrying out blue eye shadow, if it is used for healing, the measure for liability is equivalent to that which is used to paint one eye blue; if it is used to adorn the eye, the measure that determines liability for carrying out is equivalent to that which is used for two eyes. Hillel, son of Rabbi Shmuel bar Na岣ani, explained it: When this baraita was taught it was in reference to village women. Because immodest behavior is less common there, women do not customarily cover their faces.

(砖注讜讛 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 注诇 驻讬 谞拽讘 拽讟谉: 转谞讗 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 注诇 驻讬 谞拽讘 拽讟谉 砖诇 讬讬谉):

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out wax is equivalent to that which is used to place on the opening of a small hole to seal it. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: Enough to place on the opening of a small hole in a receptacle holding wine. The size of a hole that enables pouring wine is smaller than the size of the hole required when pouring more viscous liquids.

讚讘拽 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 讘专讗砖 讛砖驻砖祝: 转谞讗 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 讘专讗砖 砖驻砖祝 砖讘专讗砖 拽谞讛 砖诇 爪讬讬讚讬谉:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out glue is equivalent to that which is used to place on the top of a board [shafshaf]. The Sages taught: This means an amount equivalent to that which is used to place on the top of a board that is attached to the top of a hunter鈥檚 rod. Hunters would spread glue to trap the birds that land on the board.

讝驻转 讜讙驻专讬转 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 讻讜壮: 转谞讗 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 谞拽讘 拽讟谉:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out tar and sulfur is equivalent to that which is used to seal a hole in a vessel and to make a small hole in that seal. Tar and sulfur were used to seal large cavities in jars. Holes were sometimes made in those seals. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: One is liable for carrying out a measure equivalent to that which can be used to make a large hole into a small hole.

讞专住讬转 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 驻讬 讻讜专 讻讜壮: 诇诪讬诪专讗 讚砖讬注讜专讗 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 谞驻讬砖 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 诇谉 讚砖讬注讜专讗 讚专讘谞谉 谞驻讬砖 讚转谞谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻讚讬 诇讬讟讜诇 讛讬诪谞讜 诪讚转 诪谞注诇 诇拽讟谉 讗讬诪讗 讻讚讬 诇住讜讚 驻讬讟驻讜讟 讻讬专讛 拽讟谞讛:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out crushed earthenware is equivalent to that which is used to knead and make an opening for the bellows to be placed in a gold refiners鈥 crucible. Rabbi Yehuda says: An amount equivalent to that which is used to make a small tripod for the crucible. The Gemara wonders: Is that to say that the measure of Rabbi Yehuda is greater? Don鈥檛 we maintain that the measure of the Rabbis is greater, as we learned in a mishna that Rabbi Yehuda says with regard to reeds: The measure for liability is equivalent to that which is used to take the measure of a shoe for a child? That is smaller than the measure determined by the Rabbis. The Gemara answers: Here too, say it does not mean sufficient material to make the entire tripod, but to plaster the cracks in the small tripod of a small stove, which requires a minimal amount of plaster.

(住讜讘讬谉 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 注诇 驻讬 讻讜专 砖诇 爪讜专驻讬 讝讛讘):

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out bran is equivalent to that which is used to place on the opening of a gold refiners鈥 crucible.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛诪讜爪讬讗 砖讬注专 讻讚讬 诇讙讘诇 讘讜 讗转 讛讟讬讟 [讟讬讟] 诇注砖讜转 驻讬 讻讜专 砖诇 爪讜专驻讬 讝讛讘:

The Sages taught: One who carries out hair is liable in a measure equivalent to that which is used to knead clay with it, as hair would be mixed with clay to reinforce it. The measure that determines liability for carrying out clay is if it is sufficient to make an opening for the bellows to be placed in a gold refiners鈥 crucible.

住讬讚 讻讚讬 诇住讜讚: 转谞讗 讻讚讬 诇住讜讚 讗爪讘注 拽讟谞讛 砖讘讘谞讜转 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讘谞讜转 讬砖专讗诇 砖讛讙讬注讜 诇驻讬专拽谉 讜诇讗 讛讙讬注讜 [诇砖谞讬诐] 讘谞讜转 注谞讬讬诐 讟讜驻诇讜转 讗讜转谉 讘住讬讚 讘谞讜转 注砖讬专讬诐 讟讜驻诇讜转 讗讜转谉 讘住讜诇转 讘谞讜转 诪诇讻讬诐 讟讜驻诇讜转 讗讜转谉 讘砖诪谉 讛诪讜专 砖谞讗诪专 砖砖讛 讞讚砖讬诐 讘砖诪谉 讛诪讜专 诪讗讬 砖诪谉 讛诪讜专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专 讞讬讬讗 讗诪专 住讟讻转 专讘 讬专诪讬讛 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 砖诪谉 讝讬转 砖诇讗 讛讘讬讗讛 砖诇讬砖 转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗谞驻讬拽谞讜谉 砖诪谉 讝讬转 砖诇讗 讛讘讬讗讛 砖诇讬砖 讜诇诪讛 住讻讬谉 讗讜转讜 砖诪砖讬专 讗转 讛砖讬注专 讜诪注讚谉 讛讘砖专

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out lime is equivalent to that which is used to spread as a depilatory on the smallest of girls. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: In a measure equivalent to that which is used to spread on the finger of the smallest of girls, who would use lime to soften and pamper the skin. Rav Yehuda said that Rav said that initially, lime was used for a different purpose. It was used for daughters of Israel who reached physical maturity, but had not yet reached the age of maturity, and women who sought to remove hair for cosmetic purposes. They would smear daughters of the poor with lime; they would smear daughters of the wealthy with fine flour; they would smear daughters of kings with shemen hamor, as it was stated: 鈥淔or so were the days of their anointing filled, six months with shemen hamor (Esther 2:12). The Gemara asks: What is shemen hamor? Rav Huna bar 岣yya said: Setaket. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said: It is olive oil extracted from an olive that has not yet reached a third of its growth; the acidic oil is effective as a depilatory. It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says that anfiknon is olive oil from an olive that has not reached a third of its growth. And why is it spread on the body? Because it removes the hair and pampers the skin.

专讘 讘讬讘讬 讛讜讬讗 诇讬讛 讘专转讗 讟驻诇讛 讗讘专 讗讘专 砖拽诇 讘讛 讗专讘注 诪讗讜转 讝讜讝讬 讛讜讛 讛讛讜讗 讙讜讬 讘砖讘讘讜转讬讛 讛讜讬讗 诇讬讛 讘专转讗 讟驻诇讛 讘讞讚 讝讬诪谞讗 讜诪转讛 讗诪专 拽讟诇 专讘 讘讬讘讬 诇讘专转讬 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 专讘 讘讬讘讬 讚砖转讬 砖讬讻专讗 讘注讬讬谉 讘谞转讬讛 讟驻诇讗 讗谞谉 讚诇讗 砖转讬谞谉 砖讬讻专讗 诇讗 讘注讬讬谉 讘谞转谉 讟驻诇讗:

With regard to lime, the Gemara relates: Rav Beivai had a daughter. He smeared her with lime limb by limb and, as a result, she became so beautiful that when marrying her off, he received four hundred zuz in gifts for her beyond her dowry. There was a certain gentile in Rav Beivai鈥檚 neighborhood. He had a daughter and wanted to do the same. He smeared her entire body with lime at one time and she died. He said: Rav Beivai killed my daughter. Rav Na岣an said: Rav Beivai, who drinks beer, his daughters require that they be smeared with lime, as beer causes hair growth; we, who do not drink beer, our daughters do not require that they be smeared with lime.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻讚讬 诇住讜讚 讻诇讻讜诇 诪讗讬 讻诇讻讜诇 讜诪讗讬 讗谞讚讬驻讬 讗诪专 专讘 爪讬讚注讗 讜讘转 爪讬讚注讗 诇诪讬诪专讗 讚砖讬注讜专讗 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 谞驻讬砖 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 诇谉 讚砖讬注讜专讗 讚专讘谞谉 谞驻讬砖 讝讜讟讗 诪讚专讘谞谉 讜谞驻讬砖 诪讚专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 诪讬转讬讘讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 谞专讗讬谉 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘讞讘讜讟 讜讚讘专讬 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讘讘讬爪转 讛住讬讚 讜讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 爪讬讚注讗 讜讘转 爪讬讚注讗 讗讬讚讬 讜讗讬讚讬 讞讘讜讟 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讗诪专讬 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗讗谞讚讬驻讗

We learned in the mishna: Rabbi Yehuda says: An amount equivalent to that which is used to spread on the hair that grows over the temple [kilkul] so that it will lie flat. Rabbi Ne岣mya says: An amount equivalent to that which is used to spread on the temple [andifi] to remove fine hairs. The Gemara asks: What is kilkul and what is andifi? Rav said: The temple and the area beneath the temple. The Gemara asks: Is that to say that the measure of Rabbi Yehuda is greater? Don鈥檛 we maintain that the measure of the Rabbis is greater? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 measure is smaller than that of the Rabbis and greater than the measure of Rabbi Ne岣mya. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita where Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: The statement of Rabbi Yehuda and his measure appear to be correct with regard to dissolved lime, and the statement of Rabbi Ne岣mya appears to be correct with regard to blocks of lime. And if it should enter your mind that these terms refer to the temple and the area beneath the temple, both that which is spread on this, kilkul, and that which is spread on that, andifi, are referring to dissolved lime. Rather, Rabbi Yitz岣k said that the school of Rabbi Ami said: When Rav Ne岣mya said andifi he meant a鈥檃ndifa, meaning the lime which was spread on the inside of earthenware vessels containing wine.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讻讛谞讗 讜讻讬 讗讚诐 注讜砖讛 诪注讜转讬讜 讗谞驻专讜转 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 讻讛谞讗 砖谞转讜转 讻讚转谞谉 砖谞转讜转 讛讬讜 讘讛讬谉 注讚 讻讗谉 诇驻专 注讚 讻讗谉 诇讗讬诇 注讚 讻讗谉 诇讻讘砖 讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 诪讗讬 讗谞讚讬驻讗 讗驻讜转讗 讜讻讬 讛讗 讚讛讛讜讗 讘专 讙诇讬诇 [讚讗讬拽诇注 诇讘讘诇 ] 讚讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 拽讜诐 讚专讜砖 诇谞讜 讘诪注砖讛 诪专讻讘讛 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗讚专讜砖 诇讻讜 讻讚讚专砖 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 诇讞讘专讬讛 讜谞驻拽讗 注专注讬转讗 诪谉 讻讜转诇 讜诪讞转讬讛 讘讗谞讚讬驻讬 讜诪讬转 讜讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 诪谉 讚讬诇讬讛 讚讗 诇讬讛:

Rav Kahana strongly objected to this: And does a person turn his money into a loss [anparot]? In doing so, he ruins both the lime and the wine. Rather, Rav Kahana said: This lime is not placed inside the vessel, but it is used to make markings on the outside of the vessel to measure the contents of the vessel, as we learned in a mishna: In the Temple, there were markings on the hin vessel to measure wine. These would indicate that when it is filled to here, that is the measure of wine required for the libation of the sacrifice of an ox, half a hin; when it is filled to here, the measure of wine required for the libation of the sacrifice of a ram, a third of a hin; when it is filled to here, the measure of wine required for the libation of the sacrifice of a sheep, a quarter of a hin. And if you wish, say instead: What is andifa? It is the forehead upon which lime is smeared, not to remove hairs, but to pamper and soften the skin. Thick lime can be used for this purpose. And proof for that is cited from a certain Galilean who happened to come to Babylonia, to whom they said: Stand and teach us the esoteric Act of the Divine Chariot [Ma鈥檃seh Merkava]. He said to them: I will teach it to you as Rabbi Ne岣mya taught it to his colleague. And a hornet emerged from the wall and stung him on his forehead [andifi] and he died. Apparently, andifi means forehead. And with regard to the incident itself, they said about him, in a play on words: From his own, that came to him [min dilei da lei]. He was punished for his arrogance in seeking to teach Ma鈥檃seh Merkava publicly.

诪转谞讬壮 讗讚诪讛 讻讞讜转诐 讛诪专爪讜驻讬谉 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讻讞讜转诐 讛讗讬讙专讜转 讝讘诇 讜讞讜诇 讛讚拽 讻讚讬 诇讝讘诇 拽诇讞 砖诇 讻专讜讘 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讻讚讬 诇讝讘诇 讻专讬砖讗 讞讜诇 讛讙住 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 注诇 诪诇讗 讻祝 住讬讚 拽谞讛 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 拽讜诇诪讜住 讜讗诐 讛讬讛 注讘讛 讗讜 诪专讜住住 讻讚讬 诇讘砖诇 讘讜 讘讬爪讛 拽诇讛 砖讘讘讬爪讬诐 讟专讜驻讛 讜谞转讜谞讛 讘讗讬诇驻住:

MISHNA: The measure that determines liability for carrying out earth on Shabbat is equivalent to the seal of large sacks; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Earth was used to seal the openings of sacks so that any tampering would be evident. And the Rabbis say: The measure for liability is much smaller, equivalent to the seal of letters. The measure that determines liability for carrying out manure and fine sand is equivalent to that which is used to fertilize one stalk of cabbage; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. And the Rabbis say: The measure that determines liability for carrying it out is equivalent to that which is used to fertilize a leek, which is less than that used for cabbage. The measure that determines liability for carrying out coarse sand is equivalent to that which is used to place on a full spoon of plaster. The measure that determines liability for carrying out a reed is equivalent to that which is used to make a quill. And if the reed was thick and unfit for writing, or if it was fragmented, its measure for liability is equivalent to that which is used to cook an egg most easily cooked, one that is already beaten and placed in a stew pot.

讙诪壮 注诇 诪诇讗 讻祝 住讬讚 转谞讗 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 注诇 驻讬 讻祝 砖诇 住讬讬讚讬谉 诪讗谉 转谞讗 讚讞讜诇 诪注诇讬 诇讬讛 诇住讬讚 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 诇讗 讬住讜讚 讗讚诐 讗转 讘讬转讜 讘住讬讚 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 注讬专讘 讘讜 转讘谉 讗讜 讞讜诇 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 转讘谉 诪讜转专 讞讜诇 讗住讜专 诪驻谞讬 砖讛讜讗 讟专讻住讬讚 专讘讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘谞谉 拽讬诇拽讜诇讜 讝讛讜 转讬拽讜谞讜:

GEMARA: We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out coarse sand is equivalent to that which is used to place on a full spoon of plaster. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: An amount equivalent to that which is placed on the opening of a plasterer鈥檚 trowel, and not on a spoon used for eating. The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who holds that sand is beneficial for plaster and is, therefore, mixed with it? Rav 岣sda said: It is Rabbi Yehuda, as it was taught in a baraita: In mourning the destruction of the Temple, one may not plaster his house with plaster, which is white, unless he mixed straw or sand in it, which will make the color off-white and less attractive. Rabbi Yehuda says: Straw is permitted, but sand is prohibited because when mixed with plaster it forms white cement [teraksid]. Apparently, Rabbi Yehuda holds that sand is typically mixed with plaster. Rava said: Even if you say that our mishna is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis who disagree with Rabbi Yehuda, we can say that its ruination is its improvement. Even though the Rabbis hold that mixing sand with plaster is not beneficial, since following the destruction of the Temple only partially ruined plaster may be used, adding sand to plaster enables its use.

拽谞讛 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 拽讜诇诪讜住: 转谞讗 拽讜诇诪讜住 讛诪讙讬注 诇拽砖专讬 讗爪讘注讜转讬讜 讘注讬 专讘 讗砖讬 拽砖专 讛注诇讬讜谉 讗讜 拽砖专 讛转讞转讜谉 转讬拽讜:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out a reed is equivalent to that which is used to make a quill. The size of the quill was not specified. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: This refers to a quill that reaches to the joints of one鈥檚 fingers. Rav Ashi raised a dilemma: Is this referring to the upper joint of the fingers, or the lower joint? No resolution was found to this dilemma, and therefore let it stand unresolved.

讜讗诐 讛讬讛 注讘讛 讻讜壮: 转谞讗 讟专讜驻讛 讘砖诪谉 讜谞转讜谞讛 讘讗讬诇驻住 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪专 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬谞讗 诇讘专讬讛 诪讬 砖诪讬注 诇讱 讘讬爪讛 拽诇讛 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘讬注转讗 讚爪讬诇爪诇讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讝讜讟专讗 讗讬诪讗 讚爪讬驻专转讗 讗讬砖转讬拽 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讬讚讬 砖诪讬注 诇讱 讘讛讗 [讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讻讬] 讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 讘讬爪转 转专谞讙讜诇转 讜诪讗讬 拽专讜 诇讛 讘讬爪讛 拽诇讛 砖讬注专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讗讬谉 诇讱 讘讬爪讛 拽诇讛 诇讘砖诇 讬讜转专 诪讘讬爪转 转专谞讙讜诇转 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讻诇 砖讬注讜专讬 砖讘转 讻讙专讜讙专转 讜讛讻讗 讻讘讬爪讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讻讙专讜讙专转 诪讘讬爪讛 拽诇讛:

We learned in the mishna: And if the reed was thick and unfit for writing, it is considered as fuel, and its measure for liability is equivalent to that which is used to cook a beaten egg. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: Beaten means beaten in oil and placed in a stew pot. Mar, son of Ravina, said to his son: Have you heard what an egg cooked easily is? He said to him: The egg of a turtledove. He asked his father: What is the reason? Is it because it is small? If so, say the egg of a sparrow. He was silent and had no explanation. He subsequently asked his father: Have you heard anything about this? He said to him that Rav Sheshet said as follows: This refers to the egg of a chicken. And what is the reason that they call it an egg cooked easily? Because the Sages estimated that there is no egg easier to cook than the egg of a chicken. He asked his father: And what is different about this measure? All measures of prohibited labors on Shabbat involving food are a dried fig-bulk, and here the measure is like an egg cooked easily? He said to him that Rav Na岣an said as follows: He is liable for carrying out a dried fig-bulk from an egg cooked easily, not the entire egg.

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

daf yomi One week at a time (1)

Shabbat 75-81 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time

This week we continue learning about the 39 Melachot and focus on the amounts that make us liable for carrying...
talking talmud_square

Shabbat 80: How Not to Prepare Your Daughter for Marriage

More on blue eye shadow: whoever shadows just one eye?! Modesty vs. hypermodesty - not just a tension of the...

Shabbat 80

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Shabbat 80

转谞讗 砖转讬 讗讜转讬讜转 讘讚讬讜 (讜砖转讬) 讗讜转讬讜转 讘拽讜诇诪讜住 砖转讬 讗讜转讬讜转 讘拽诇诪专讬谉 讘注讬 专讘讗 讗讜转 讗讞转 讘讚讬讜 讗讜转 讗讞转 讘拽讜诇诪讜住 讗讜转 讗讞转 讘拽诇诪专讬谉 诪讛讜 转讬拽讜

A tanna taught in a Tosefta: The measure that determines liability for carrying out ink is equivalent to that which is used to write two letters when he carries out dried ink, and two letters when the ink is in the quill, and two letters in the inkwell [kalmarin]. Rava raised a dilemma: What is the halakha if one carried out sufficient ink to write one letter in the form of dried ink, and sufficient ink to write one letter in the quill, and sufficient ink to write one letter in the inkwell? Do they join together to constitute the measure for liability, or is each considered separately? No resolution was found for this dilemma. Therefore, let it stand unresolved.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讜爪讬讗 砖转讬 讗讜转讬讜转 讜讻转讘谉 讻砖讛讜讗 诪讛诇讱 讞讬讬讘 讻转讬讘转谉 讝讜 讛讬讗 讛谞讞转谉 讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讜爪讬讗 讗讜转 讗讞转 讜讻转讘讛 讜讞讝专 讜讛讜爪讬讗 讗讜转 讗讞转 讜讻转讘讛 驻讟讜专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讘注讬讚谞讗 讚讗驻拽讗 诇讘转专讬讬转讗 讞住专 诇讬讛 诇砖讬注讜专讗 讚拽诪讬讬转讗

Rava said: One who carried out a measure of ink equivalent to that which is used to write two letters on Shabbat, and he wrote two letters as he walked, even though he did not place the written material in the public domain, he is liable for carrying out the ink. Their writing is their placement. He is liable even without placing the ink on the ground. And Rava said: One who carried out sufficient ink to write one letter and he wrote it, and then proceeded to carry out sufficient ink to write one more letter and he wrote it, is exempt. What is the reason that he is exempt? At the time that he carried out the last drop of ink, he was lacking the first measure of ink. The ink that he carried out first dried slightly in the interim and not enough remained to write one letter.

讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讗讞转 讜讛谞讬讞讛 讜讞讝专 讜讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讗讞转 讜讛谞讬讞讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 谞注砖讛 讻诪讬 砖拽诇讟讛 [讻诇讘] 讗讜 砖谞砖专驻讛 讜驻讟讜专 讜讗诪讗讬 讛讗 诪谞讞讛 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讜讗诐 拽讚诐 讜讛讙讘讬讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 拽讜讚诐 讛谞讞转 砖谞讬讬讛 谞注砖讬转 专讗砖讜谞讛 讻诪讬 砖谞拽诇讟讛 讗讜 砖谞砖专驻讛 讜驻讟讜专 讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讜讛谞讬讞讛 讜讞讝专 讜讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讜讛注讘讬专讛 讚专讱 注诇讬讛 讞讬讬讘 讜讗诪讗讬 讛讗 诇讗 谞讞 讻讙讜谉 砖讛注讘讬专讛 转讜讱 砖诇砖讛

And Rava said with regard to a similar issue: One who carried out half of a dried fig on Shabbat and placed it in a different domain, and proceeded to carry out another half of a dried fig and placed it, the first becomes as one that was snatched by a dog or burned and he is exempt, as he did not carry out the measure of a dried fig for which he would be liable. The Gemara wonders: And why is he exempt; isn鈥檛 an entire dried fig placed together? Why isn鈥檛 he liable for carrying it out? The Gemara explains: This is what Rava is saying: And if he lifted the first half-fig first before placement of the second, i.e., the two half-figs were never placed together, the first becomes as one that was snatched by a dog or burned and he is exempt. And Rava said: One who carried out half of a dried fig on Shabbat and placed it in a different domain, and proceeded to carry out another half of a dried fig and passed the second half-fig over the already placed first half-fig, is liable even though they were never placed together. The Gemara asks: And why is he liable? The second half-fig did not come to rest. The Gemara answers: It is referring to a case where he passed the second half-fig within three handbreadths of the first half-fig. The halakha is that objects less than three handbreadths apart are considered attached.

讜讛讗诪专 专讘讗 转讜讱 砖诇砖讛 诇专讘谞谉 爪专讬讱 讛谞讞讛 注诇 讙讘讬 诪砖讛讜 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 讘讝讜专拽 讻讗谉 讘诪注讘讬专

The Gemara asks: And didn鈥檛 Rava himself say: An object that passes within three handbreadths of the ground, according to the opinion of the Rabbis, must come to rest atop some defined place and if it does not it is not considered placed? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where Rava said that it must actually come to rest, it is referring to one who throws the object; here, where proximity alone is sufficient to render him liable, it is referring to one who passes an object in his hand, since he can place the object down at any point.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讜讞讝专 讜讛讜爪讬讗 讞爪讬 讙专讜讙专转 讘讛注诇诐 讗讞讚 讞讬讬讘 讘砖转讬 讛注诇诪讜转 驻讟讜专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘讛注诇诐 讗讞讚 诇专砖讜转 讗讞讚 讞讬讬讘 诇砖转讬 专砖讜讬讜转 驻讟讜专 讗诪专 专讘讛 讜讛讜讗 砖讬砖 讞讬讜讘 讞讟讗转 讘讬谞讬讛诐 讗讘诇 讻专诪诇讬转 诇讗

The Sages taught: One who carried out half of a dried fig into the public domain on Shabbat and proceeded to carry out another half of a dried fig, within one lapse of awareness, is liable; within two lapses of awareness, he is exempt because in neither lapse did he carry out a measure that would render him liable. Rabbi Yosei says: If he carried out the half-figs within one lapse of awareness to one domain he is liable; to two domains he is exempt. If he carried the two half-figs to two separate sections of the public domain, he is exempt because there is no permitted manner to unite the two halves. Rabba said with regard to Rabbi Yosei鈥檚 statement: That is only in a case where there is an area in which there is liability to bring a sin-offering between them. It only applies in a case where there is a private domain between the two sections of the public domain and carrying between them is prohibited by Torah law. However, if the two sections of the public domain were separated by a karmelit, no, he would not be exempt. In that case, there is no Torah prohibition against carrying between the two sections of the public domain through the karmelit, and by Torah law they are not considered separate.

讗讘讬讬 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讻专诪诇讬转 讗讘诇 驻讬住诇讗 诇讗 讜专讘讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 驻讬住诇讗 讜讗讝讚讗 专讘讗 诇讟注诪讬讛 讚讗诪专 专讘讗 专砖讜转 砖讘转 讻专砖讜转 讙讬讟讬谉 讚诪讬讗:

Abaye said: Even if they were separated by a karmelit it is not considered one domain, and he is exempt. However, if the two sections were separated by a large beam, no, they are not considered separate. And Rava said: Even if the two sections were separated by a large beam, according to Rabbi Yosei, they are considered separate and he is exempt. The Gemara comments: And Rava follows his line of reasoning stated elsewhere as Rava said: The definition of domain for Shabbat is like the definition of domain for bills of divorce. Just as with regard to bills of divorce, two areas separated by a beam are not considered one domain, so too, with regard to the halakhot of Shabbat, they are not considered one domain.

讻讞讜诇 讻讚讬 诇讻讞讜诇 注讬谉 讗讞转 注讬谉 讗讞转: 讛讗 诇讗 讻讞诇讬 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 砖讻谉 爪谞讜注讜转 讻讜讞诇讜转 注讬谉 讗讞转 诪讬转讬讘讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讗讜诪专 讻讞讜诇 讗诐 诇专驻讜讗讛 讻讚讬 诇讻讞讜诇 注讬谉 讗讞转 讗诐 诇拽砖讟 讘砖转讬 注讬谞讬诐 转专讙诪讗 讛讬诇诇 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 谞讞诪谞讬 讻讬 转谞讬讗 讛讛讜讗 讘注讬专谞讬讜转:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out blue eye shadow is equivalent to that which is used to paint one eye blue. The Gemara asks: How could the mishna say one eye? Women do not paint only one eye blue. Rav Huna said: Because modest women, who cover their faces with a veil, paint only the one eye that shows blue. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: For carrying out blue eye shadow, if it is used for healing, the measure for liability is equivalent to that which is used to paint one eye blue; if it is used to adorn the eye, the measure that determines liability for carrying out is equivalent to that which is used for two eyes. Hillel, son of Rabbi Shmuel bar Na岣ani, explained it: When this baraita was taught it was in reference to village women. Because immodest behavior is less common there, women do not customarily cover their faces.

(砖注讜讛 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 注诇 驻讬 谞拽讘 拽讟谉: 转谞讗 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 注诇 驻讬 谞拽讘 拽讟谉 砖诇 讬讬谉):

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out wax is equivalent to that which is used to place on the opening of a small hole to seal it. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: Enough to place on the opening of a small hole in a receptacle holding wine. The size of a hole that enables pouring wine is smaller than the size of the hole required when pouring more viscous liquids.

讚讘拽 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 讘专讗砖 讛砖驻砖祝: 转谞讗 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 讘专讗砖 砖驻砖祝 砖讘专讗砖 拽谞讛 砖诇 爪讬讬讚讬谉:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out glue is equivalent to that which is used to place on the top of a board [shafshaf]. The Sages taught: This means an amount equivalent to that which is used to place on the top of a board that is attached to the top of a hunter鈥檚 rod. Hunters would spread glue to trap the birds that land on the board.

讝驻转 讜讙驻专讬转 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 讻讜壮: 转谞讗 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 谞拽讘 拽讟谉:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out tar and sulfur is equivalent to that which is used to seal a hole in a vessel and to make a small hole in that seal. Tar and sulfur were used to seal large cavities in jars. Holes were sometimes made in those seals. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: One is liable for carrying out a measure equivalent to that which can be used to make a large hole into a small hole.

讞专住讬转 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 驻讬 讻讜专 讻讜壮: 诇诪讬诪专讗 讚砖讬注讜专讗 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 谞驻讬砖 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 诇谉 讚砖讬注讜专讗 讚专讘谞谉 谞驻讬砖 讚转谞谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻讚讬 诇讬讟讜诇 讛讬诪谞讜 诪讚转 诪谞注诇 诇拽讟谉 讗讬诪讗 讻讚讬 诇住讜讚 驻讬讟驻讜讟 讻讬专讛 拽讟谞讛:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out crushed earthenware is equivalent to that which is used to knead and make an opening for the bellows to be placed in a gold refiners鈥 crucible. Rabbi Yehuda says: An amount equivalent to that which is used to make a small tripod for the crucible. The Gemara wonders: Is that to say that the measure of Rabbi Yehuda is greater? Don鈥檛 we maintain that the measure of the Rabbis is greater, as we learned in a mishna that Rabbi Yehuda says with regard to reeds: The measure for liability is equivalent to that which is used to take the measure of a shoe for a child? That is smaller than the measure determined by the Rabbis. The Gemara answers: Here too, say it does not mean sufficient material to make the entire tripod, but to plaster the cracks in the small tripod of a small stove, which requires a minimal amount of plaster.

(住讜讘讬谉 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 注诇 驻讬 讻讜专 砖诇 爪讜专驻讬 讝讛讘):

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out bran is equivalent to that which is used to place on the opening of a gold refiners鈥 crucible.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛诪讜爪讬讗 砖讬注专 讻讚讬 诇讙讘诇 讘讜 讗转 讛讟讬讟 [讟讬讟] 诇注砖讜转 驻讬 讻讜专 砖诇 爪讜专驻讬 讝讛讘:

The Sages taught: One who carries out hair is liable in a measure equivalent to that which is used to knead clay with it, as hair would be mixed with clay to reinforce it. The measure that determines liability for carrying out clay is if it is sufficient to make an opening for the bellows to be placed in a gold refiners鈥 crucible.

住讬讚 讻讚讬 诇住讜讚: 转谞讗 讻讚讬 诇住讜讚 讗爪讘注 拽讟谞讛 砖讘讘谞讜转 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讘谞讜转 讬砖专讗诇 砖讛讙讬注讜 诇驻讬专拽谉 讜诇讗 讛讙讬注讜 [诇砖谞讬诐] 讘谞讜转 注谞讬讬诐 讟讜驻诇讜转 讗讜转谉 讘住讬讚 讘谞讜转 注砖讬专讬诐 讟讜驻诇讜转 讗讜转谉 讘住讜诇转 讘谞讜转 诪诇讻讬诐 讟讜驻诇讜转 讗讜转谉 讘砖诪谉 讛诪讜专 砖谞讗诪专 砖砖讛 讞讚砖讬诐 讘砖诪谉 讛诪讜专 诪讗讬 砖诪谉 讛诪讜专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专 讞讬讬讗 讗诪专 住讟讻转 专讘 讬专诪讬讛 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 砖诪谉 讝讬转 砖诇讗 讛讘讬讗讛 砖诇讬砖 转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗谞驻讬拽谞讜谉 砖诪谉 讝讬转 砖诇讗 讛讘讬讗讛 砖诇讬砖 讜诇诪讛 住讻讬谉 讗讜转讜 砖诪砖讬专 讗转 讛砖讬注专 讜诪注讚谉 讛讘砖专

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out lime is equivalent to that which is used to spread as a depilatory on the smallest of girls. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: In a measure equivalent to that which is used to spread on the finger of the smallest of girls, who would use lime to soften and pamper the skin. Rav Yehuda said that Rav said that initially, lime was used for a different purpose. It was used for daughters of Israel who reached physical maturity, but had not yet reached the age of maturity, and women who sought to remove hair for cosmetic purposes. They would smear daughters of the poor with lime; they would smear daughters of the wealthy with fine flour; they would smear daughters of kings with shemen hamor, as it was stated: 鈥淔or so were the days of their anointing filled, six months with shemen hamor (Esther 2:12). The Gemara asks: What is shemen hamor? Rav Huna bar 岣yya said: Setaket. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said: It is olive oil extracted from an olive that has not yet reached a third of its growth; the acidic oil is effective as a depilatory. It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says that anfiknon is olive oil from an olive that has not reached a third of its growth. And why is it spread on the body? Because it removes the hair and pampers the skin.

专讘 讘讬讘讬 讛讜讬讗 诇讬讛 讘专转讗 讟驻诇讛 讗讘专 讗讘专 砖拽诇 讘讛 讗专讘注 诪讗讜转 讝讜讝讬 讛讜讛 讛讛讜讗 讙讜讬 讘砖讘讘讜转讬讛 讛讜讬讗 诇讬讛 讘专转讗 讟驻诇讛 讘讞讚 讝讬诪谞讗 讜诪转讛 讗诪专 拽讟诇 专讘 讘讬讘讬 诇讘专转讬 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 专讘 讘讬讘讬 讚砖转讬 砖讬讻专讗 讘注讬讬谉 讘谞转讬讛 讟驻诇讗 讗谞谉 讚诇讗 砖转讬谞谉 砖讬讻专讗 诇讗 讘注讬讬谉 讘谞转谉 讟驻诇讗:

With regard to lime, the Gemara relates: Rav Beivai had a daughter. He smeared her with lime limb by limb and, as a result, she became so beautiful that when marrying her off, he received four hundred zuz in gifts for her beyond her dowry. There was a certain gentile in Rav Beivai鈥檚 neighborhood. He had a daughter and wanted to do the same. He smeared her entire body with lime at one time and she died. He said: Rav Beivai killed my daughter. Rav Na岣an said: Rav Beivai, who drinks beer, his daughters require that they be smeared with lime, as beer causes hair growth; we, who do not drink beer, our daughters do not require that they be smeared with lime.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻讚讬 诇住讜讚 讻诇讻讜诇 诪讗讬 讻诇讻讜诇 讜诪讗讬 讗谞讚讬驻讬 讗诪专 专讘 爪讬讚注讗 讜讘转 爪讬讚注讗 诇诪讬诪专讗 讚砖讬注讜专讗 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 谞驻讬砖 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 诇谉 讚砖讬注讜专讗 讚专讘谞谉 谞驻讬砖 讝讜讟讗 诪讚专讘谞谉 讜谞驻讬砖 诪讚专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 诪讬转讬讘讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 谞专讗讬谉 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘讞讘讜讟 讜讚讘专讬 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 讘讘讬爪转 讛住讬讚 讜讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 爪讬讚注讗 讜讘转 爪讬讚注讗 讗讬讚讬 讜讗讬讚讬 讞讘讜讟 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讗诪专讬 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗讗谞讚讬驻讗

We learned in the mishna: Rabbi Yehuda says: An amount equivalent to that which is used to spread on the hair that grows over the temple [kilkul] so that it will lie flat. Rabbi Ne岣mya says: An amount equivalent to that which is used to spread on the temple [andifi] to remove fine hairs. The Gemara asks: What is kilkul and what is andifi? Rav said: The temple and the area beneath the temple. The Gemara asks: Is that to say that the measure of Rabbi Yehuda is greater? Don鈥檛 we maintain that the measure of the Rabbis is greater? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 measure is smaller than that of the Rabbis and greater than the measure of Rabbi Ne岣mya. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita where Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: The statement of Rabbi Yehuda and his measure appear to be correct with regard to dissolved lime, and the statement of Rabbi Ne岣mya appears to be correct with regard to blocks of lime. And if it should enter your mind that these terms refer to the temple and the area beneath the temple, both that which is spread on this, kilkul, and that which is spread on that, andifi, are referring to dissolved lime. Rather, Rabbi Yitz岣k said that the school of Rabbi Ami said: When Rav Ne岣mya said andifi he meant a鈥檃ndifa, meaning the lime which was spread on the inside of earthenware vessels containing wine.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讻讛谞讗 讜讻讬 讗讚诐 注讜砖讛 诪注讜转讬讜 讗谞驻专讜转 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 讻讛谞讗 砖谞转讜转 讻讚转谞谉 砖谞转讜转 讛讬讜 讘讛讬谉 注讚 讻讗谉 诇驻专 注讚 讻讗谉 诇讗讬诇 注讚 讻讗谉 诇讻讘砖 讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 诪讗讬 讗谞讚讬驻讗 讗驻讜转讗 讜讻讬 讛讗 讚讛讛讜讗 讘专 讙诇讬诇 [讚讗讬拽诇注 诇讘讘诇 ] 讚讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 拽讜诐 讚专讜砖 诇谞讜 讘诪注砖讛 诪专讻讘讛 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗讚专讜砖 诇讻讜 讻讚讚专砖 专讘讬 谞讞诪讬讛 诇讞讘专讬讛 讜谞驻拽讗 注专注讬转讗 诪谉 讻讜转诇 讜诪讞转讬讛 讘讗谞讚讬驻讬 讜诪讬转 讜讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 诪谉 讚讬诇讬讛 讚讗 诇讬讛:

Rav Kahana strongly objected to this: And does a person turn his money into a loss [anparot]? In doing so, he ruins both the lime and the wine. Rather, Rav Kahana said: This lime is not placed inside the vessel, but it is used to make markings on the outside of the vessel to measure the contents of the vessel, as we learned in a mishna: In the Temple, there were markings on the hin vessel to measure wine. These would indicate that when it is filled to here, that is the measure of wine required for the libation of the sacrifice of an ox, half a hin; when it is filled to here, the measure of wine required for the libation of the sacrifice of a ram, a third of a hin; when it is filled to here, the measure of wine required for the libation of the sacrifice of a sheep, a quarter of a hin. And if you wish, say instead: What is andifa? It is the forehead upon which lime is smeared, not to remove hairs, but to pamper and soften the skin. Thick lime can be used for this purpose. And proof for that is cited from a certain Galilean who happened to come to Babylonia, to whom they said: Stand and teach us the esoteric Act of the Divine Chariot [Ma鈥檃seh Merkava]. He said to them: I will teach it to you as Rabbi Ne岣mya taught it to his colleague. And a hornet emerged from the wall and stung him on his forehead [andifi] and he died. Apparently, andifi means forehead. And with regard to the incident itself, they said about him, in a play on words: From his own, that came to him [min dilei da lei]. He was punished for his arrogance in seeking to teach Ma鈥檃seh Merkava publicly.

诪转谞讬壮 讗讚诪讛 讻讞讜转诐 讛诪专爪讜驻讬谉 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讻讞讜转诐 讛讗讬讙专讜转 讝讘诇 讜讞讜诇 讛讚拽 讻讚讬 诇讝讘诇 拽诇讞 砖诇 讻专讜讘 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讻讚讬 诇讝讘诇 讻专讬砖讗 讞讜诇 讛讙住 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 注诇 诪诇讗 讻祝 住讬讚 拽谞讛 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 拽讜诇诪讜住 讜讗诐 讛讬讛 注讘讛 讗讜 诪专讜住住 讻讚讬 诇讘砖诇 讘讜 讘讬爪讛 拽诇讛 砖讘讘讬爪讬诐 讟专讜驻讛 讜谞转讜谞讛 讘讗讬诇驻住:

MISHNA: The measure that determines liability for carrying out earth on Shabbat is equivalent to the seal of large sacks; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Earth was used to seal the openings of sacks so that any tampering would be evident. And the Rabbis say: The measure for liability is much smaller, equivalent to the seal of letters. The measure that determines liability for carrying out manure and fine sand is equivalent to that which is used to fertilize one stalk of cabbage; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. And the Rabbis say: The measure that determines liability for carrying it out is equivalent to that which is used to fertilize a leek, which is less than that used for cabbage. The measure that determines liability for carrying out coarse sand is equivalent to that which is used to place on a full spoon of plaster. The measure that determines liability for carrying out a reed is equivalent to that which is used to make a quill. And if the reed was thick and unfit for writing, or if it was fragmented, its measure for liability is equivalent to that which is used to cook an egg most easily cooked, one that is already beaten and placed in a stew pot.

讙诪壮 注诇 诪诇讗 讻祝 住讬讚 转谞讗 讻讚讬 诇讬转谉 注诇 驻讬 讻祝 砖诇 住讬讬讚讬谉 诪讗谉 转谞讗 讚讞讜诇 诪注诇讬 诇讬讛 诇住讬讚 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 诇讗 讬住讜讚 讗讚诐 讗转 讘讬转讜 讘住讬讚 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 注讬专讘 讘讜 转讘谉 讗讜 讞讜诇 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 转讘谉 诪讜转专 讞讜诇 讗住讜专 诪驻谞讬 砖讛讜讗 讟专讻住讬讚 专讘讗 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 转讬诪讗 专讘谞谉 拽讬诇拽讜诇讜 讝讛讜 转讬拽讜谞讜:

GEMARA: We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out coarse sand is equivalent to that which is used to place on a full spoon of plaster. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: An amount equivalent to that which is placed on the opening of a plasterer鈥檚 trowel, and not on a spoon used for eating. The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who holds that sand is beneficial for plaster and is, therefore, mixed with it? Rav 岣sda said: It is Rabbi Yehuda, as it was taught in a baraita: In mourning the destruction of the Temple, one may not plaster his house with plaster, which is white, unless he mixed straw or sand in it, which will make the color off-white and less attractive. Rabbi Yehuda says: Straw is permitted, but sand is prohibited because when mixed with plaster it forms white cement [teraksid]. Apparently, Rabbi Yehuda holds that sand is typically mixed with plaster. Rava said: Even if you say that our mishna is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis who disagree with Rabbi Yehuda, we can say that its ruination is its improvement. Even though the Rabbis hold that mixing sand with plaster is not beneficial, since following the destruction of the Temple only partially ruined plaster may be used, adding sand to plaster enables its use.

拽谞讛 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 拽讜诇诪讜住: 转谞讗 拽讜诇诪讜住 讛诪讙讬注 诇拽砖专讬 讗爪讘注讜转讬讜 讘注讬 专讘 讗砖讬 拽砖专 讛注诇讬讜谉 讗讜 拽砖专 讛转讞转讜谉 转讬拽讜:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out a reed is equivalent to that which is used to make a quill. The size of the quill was not specified. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: This refers to a quill that reaches to the joints of one鈥檚 fingers. Rav Ashi raised a dilemma: Is this referring to the upper joint of the fingers, or the lower joint? No resolution was found to this dilemma, and therefore let it stand unresolved.

讜讗诐 讛讬讛 注讘讛 讻讜壮: 转谞讗 讟专讜驻讛 讘砖诪谉 讜谞转讜谞讛 讘讗讬诇驻住 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪专 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬谞讗 诇讘专讬讛 诪讬 砖诪讬注 诇讱 讘讬爪讛 拽诇讛 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘讬注转讗 讚爪讬诇爪诇讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讝讜讟专讗 讗讬诪讗 讚爪讬驻专转讗 讗讬砖转讬拽 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讬讚讬 砖诪讬注 诇讱 讘讛讗 [讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讻讬] 讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 讘讬爪转 转专谞讙讜诇转 讜诪讗讬 拽专讜 诇讛 讘讬爪讛 拽诇讛 砖讬注专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讗讬谉 诇讱 讘讬爪讛 拽诇讛 诇讘砖诇 讬讜转专 诪讘讬爪转 转专谞讙讜诇转 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讻诇 砖讬注讜专讬 砖讘转 讻讙专讜讙专转 讜讛讻讗 讻讘讬爪讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讻讙专讜讙专转 诪讘讬爪讛 拽诇讛:

We learned in the mishna: And if the reed was thick and unfit for writing, it is considered as fuel, and its measure for liability is equivalent to that which is used to cook a beaten egg. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: Beaten means beaten in oil and placed in a stew pot. Mar, son of Ravina, said to his son: Have you heard what an egg cooked easily is? He said to him: The egg of a turtledove. He asked his father: What is the reason? Is it because it is small? If so, say the egg of a sparrow. He was silent and had no explanation. He subsequently asked his father: Have you heard anything about this? He said to him that Rav Sheshet said as follows: This refers to the egg of a chicken. And what is the reason that they call it an egg cooked easily? Because the Sages estimated that there is no egg easier to cook than the egg of a chicken. He asked his father: And what is different about this measure? All measures of prohibited labors on Shabbat involving food are a dried fig-bulk, and here the measure is like an egg cooked easily? He said to him that Rav Na岣an said as follows: He is liable for carrying out a dried fig-bulk from an egg cooked easily, not the entire egg.

Scroll To Top