TALMUD-MOED-SHABAT-22

7/26/2019 TALMUD-MOED-SHABAT-22

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/talmud-moed-shabat-22 1/6

Previous Folio / Shabbath Contents / Tractate List

Babylonian Talmud:

Tractate ShabbathFolio 143a

There, since they would putrefy,1 his mind was [set] upon

them from the previous day.2

Logic too indicates that Raba agrees with R. Judah. For

Raba lectured: A woman must not enter a wood-shed to

take thence a wood poker;3 and if a wood poker is broken[on a Festival], it may not be used as fuel on the Festival,

because we may heat with utensils but not with fragments

of utensils. This proves it.4

MISHNAH . BETH SHAMMAI SAY: ONE MAY

REMOVE BONES AND [NUT]SHELLS FROM THE

TABLE;5 BUT BETH HILLEL RULE: ONE MUST

TAKE AWAY THE WHOLE BOARD AND SHAKE IT.

6

ONE MAY REMOVE FROM THE TABLE CRUMBS

LESS THAN THE SIZE OF AN OLIVE AND THE

PANICLES OF BEANS AND LENTILS, BECAUSE

THEY ARE FOOD FOR ANIMALS. AS FOR A

SPONGE, IF IT HAS A LEATHERN HANDLE, ONE

MAY WIPE [THE BOARD] WITH IT; IF NOT, ONE

MAY NOT WIPE [THE BOARD] WITH IT.7 [THE

SAGES MAINTAIN]:8 IN EITHER CASE IT MAY BE

HANDLED ON THE SABBATH9 AND IS NOT

SUSCEPTIBLE TO DEFILEMENT.10

GEMARA. R. Nahman said: As for us, we have no other

[view] but that Beth Shammai agrees with R. Judah, and

Beth Hillel with R. Simeon.11

ONE MAY REMOVE CRUMBS FROM THE TABLE.

This supports R. Johanan. For R. Johanan said: Crumbs

less than an olive in size may not be wantonly12

destroyed.13

PANICLES OF BEANS. Who is the authority?

ylonian Talmud: Shabbath 143 http://halakhah.com/shabbath/shabbath_143.html#chapter_xxii

6 28/04/2016 17:11



[Apparently] R. Simeon, who rejects [the interdict of]

mukzeh?14 Then consider the final clause: AS FOR A

SPONGE, IF IT HAS A LEATHERN HANDLE, ONE

MAY WIPE [THE BOARD] WITH IT; IF NOT, ONE

MAY NOT WIPE WITH IT: this agrees with R. Judah,

who maintains, That which is unintentional is forbidden?15

— Here even R. Simeon agrees, for Abaye and Raba both

maintained: R. Simeon admits in a case of ’cut off his head

but let him not die.’16

The kernels of Syrian dates17 may be handled, since they

are fit [for cattle] on account of their parent source,18 but

those of Persian [dates] are forbidden.19 Samuel handled

them in virtue of [a piece of] bread.20 (Mnemonic:

SHaRNaS SHaPaZ .)21

Samuel is consistent with his view,for Samuel said: One may carry out all his requirements

with bread.22 Rabbah handled them in virtue of a bowl

[flask] of water. R. Huna the son of R. Joshua made them

as a pot of excrements.23 Said R. Ashi to Amemar: But

may we make a pot of excrements at the outset?24 R.

Shesheth threw them away [spat them out] with his tongue.

R. Papa threw them behind the couch.25 It was said of R.

Zechariah b. Eucolos that he would turn his face to the back of the couch and throw them away.

To Part b

Original footnotes renumbered.

If left until the evening after the Festival.1.

Intending them for cats, and therefore they are mukan (q.v.

Glos.).

2.

For wood in a shed is generally meant for fuel, not to be used asa utensil,3.

That Raba accepts the interdict of mukzeh, in accordance with

R. Judah.

4.

By hand, though they are not even fit for a dog — dry and hard

bones are referred to for Beth Shammai do not accept the

interdict of mukzeh.

5.

But the bones and nutshells may not be handled, Beth Hillel

accepting the interdict of mukzeh.

6.

For fear of wringing out the absorbed moisture.7.

This is omitted in some versions.8.When dry.9.

Being neither a wooden utensil, a garment, a sack, nor metal,

and only these can become unclean.

10.


6 28/04/2016 17:11



R. Judah accepts the interdict of mukzeh; R. Simeon does not.

Hence the views ascribed to Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel

respectively in our Mishnah must be reversed.

11.

Lit., ’by hand’.12.

Rashi: since the Mishnah states, ONE MAY REMOVE,

implying that they are removed by hand, and must not be

thrown away. Tosaf. rejects this deduction: moreover, it appears

from Ber. 52b that ’may be destroyed’ is the correct reading.Accordingly, Tosaf. reads there: … may be wantonly destroyed,

the deduction being from the statement, BECAUSE THEY ARE

FOOD FOR ANIMALS, which may be destroyed.

13.

For on Judah’s view it is mukzeh, since it was together with the

edible portion before the Sabbath when it was not mukan for

animals.

14.

The unintentional act is that in holding it water is wrung out.15.

V. p. 357, n. 8.16.

These were of an inferior quality and only fit for cattle.17. Lit., ’their mother’. Sc. the date itself, v. n. 8, the case here being

the reverse.

18.

Because the dates themselves were fit for human beings.19.

Similar to the cases given supra 142b.20.

V. p. 149, n. 6. SH=SHemuel (Samuel). R=Rabbah; N=R. Huna;

S=R. AShi, SH=SHesheth, P=R. Papa; Z=R. Zechariah.

21.

Supra 50b.22.

He collected all the kernels in front of him; the quantity made

them repulsive and he could treat them as a pot of excrements,

which may be removed.

23.

Surely not. Thus he disagrees with R. Huna.24.

Upon which he reclined while eating.25.

Tractate List

Shabbath 143b

CHAPTER XXII

MISHNAH . IF A CASK [OF WINE] IS BROKEN,1 ONE

MAY SAVE THEREOF THE REQUIREMENTS2 FOR

THREE MEALS, AND HE [THE OWNER] CAN SAY TO

OTHERS, ’COME AND SAVE FOR YOURSELVES’,

PROVIDED THAT HE DOES NOT SPONGE IT UP.3

FRUIT MAY NOT BE SQUEEZED IN ORDER TO

EXPRESS THEIR JUICES:4 IF THEY EXUDE OFTHEIR OWN ACCORD THEY ARE PROHIBITED. R.

JUDAH SAID: IF [THEY STAND] AS EATABLES,5


6 28/04/2016 17:11



THAT WHICH EXUDES FROM THEM IS PERMITTED;

BUT IF FOR LIQUIDS,6 THAT WHICH EXUDES

FROM THEM IS PROHIBITED. IF HONEYCOMBS

ARE CRUSHED ON THE EVE OF THE SABBATH AND

IT [THE HONEY] EXUDES SPONTANEOUSLY, IT IS

FORBIDDEN; BUT R. ELEAZAR 7 PERMITS IT.

GEMARA. A Tanna taught: One must not sponge up wine

nor dab up oil,8 so that he should not act as he does during

the week.

Our Rabbis taught: If one’s produce is scattered in his

courtyard, he may collect a little at a time and eat it,9 but

not into a basket or a tub, so that he should not act as he

does during the week.

FRUIT MAY NOT BE SQUEEZED, [etc.]. Rab Judah said

in Samuel’s name: R. Judah agreed with the Sages in

respect to olives and grapes. What is the reason? Since they

are [normally] for expressing, he puts his mind to them.10

But ’Ulla said in Rab’s name: R. Judah disagreed in respect

of olives and grapes too. While R. Johanan said: The

halachah is as R. Judah in the case of other produce, but

the halachah is not as R. Judah in the case of olives and

grapes. Rabbah said in Rab Judah’s name in Samuel’s

name: R. Judah agreed with the Sages in respect of olives

and grapes, while the Sages agreed with R. Judah in respect

of other produce. Said R. Jeremiah to R. Abba: Then

wherein do they differ? When you find it [I will tell you,]

he replied.11 R. Nahman b. Isaac said: It is reasonable that

they differ in the case of mulberries and pomegranates.12

For it was taught: If one draws off oil from olives, or wine

from grapes,13 and [then] carries them in,14 whether as

eatables or for their liquids, that which exudes from them is

forbidden. If one draws fluid out of mulberries or juice15

out of pomegranates, and [then] carries them in, as

eatables, that which exudes from them is permitted; [if he

carries them in] for their liquid or without specifying [their

purpose], that which exudes from them is forbidden: the

words of R. Judah. But the Sages maintain: Whether for

eating or for drinking, that which exudes from them isforbidden.

Now, does R. Judah hold that if it [the purpose] is


6 28/04/2016 17:11



unspecified, it [the exuding liquid] is forbidden? But surely

we learnt: A woman’s milk defiles,16 [whether it flows]

with or without [the woman’s] desire; a cow’s milk defiles

only [when it flows] with [its owner’s] desire.17 Said R.

Akiba, It [the reverse] follows a minori: if woman’s milk,

which is set apart for infants only, defiles [whether it flows]

with or without [her] desire, then cow’s milk, which is set

apart for both infants and adults, surely defiles [whether it

flows] with or without [the owner’s] desire.18 [Said they to

him]: If a woman’s milk is unclean19 without [her] desire,

that may be because the blood of her wound is unclean;20

shall cow’s milk be unclean

- To Next Folio -

Original footnotes renumbered.

On the Sabbath.1.

Lit., ’food’.2.

I.e., he must not absorb the spilt wine in a sponge, lest he wring

it out (into a vessel), which is forbidden.

3.

This is forbidden under threshing, v. supra 73a.4.

E.g., dates which are intended for eating.5.

E.g., dates intended for honey.6.

This is the reading supra 19b, R. Eleazar b. Shammua’ being the

Tanna that is meant — Rashi ibid; v. BaH. Cur. edd. R. Eliezer.

7.

With his hands, which he then wipes on the edge of a vessel so

that the oil runs unto it.

8.

This implies that he may collect only what he intends eating

there and then. Tosaf. however, favours the deletion of ’and eat

it’.

9.

If they exude their liquid he does not mind, or is even pleased.10.

Probably: if you think carefully about it you will find the answer

yourself.

11.

Which were not usually pressed for juice.12.Ri. (v. Tosaf. a.l.) Rashi translates; if oil oozes out of olives, etc.

— of its own accord.

13.

To the house for storing. ’Then’ is added on the Ri’s explanation.

Rashi: he had (previously) carried in.

14.

Lit., ’wine’.15.

I.e., if it falls on a food-stuff it makes it liable to defilement, cf.

p. 45, n. 1, likewise, it is defiled itself if it comes into contact

with a dead sherez (q.v. Glos.)- Rashi, Maim. and Asheri in

Maksh. VI, 8.

16.

Cf. p. 45, n. 1.17.For the power of rendering food susceptible to uncleanness

depends upon whether the fluid is regarded as a liquid or not.

Hence since cows milk is more widely used as a liquid than

18.


6 28/04/2016 17:11



woman’s milk, its power in this respect cannot be less than that

of the latter.

In the same sense as in p. 727, n. 7.19.

Likewise in the same sense; Nid. 55b.20.

Tractate List


Documents

TALMUD-MOED-SHABAT-22