MISHNAH: If a cooking stove11:35 ); cf. Chapter 1, Note 409 . was heated with straw or stubbles one may put a dish on it, with olive cake or wood he should not put it on unless he emptied or covered it with ashes. The House of Shammai say, hot water but no dish, but the House of Hillel say, hot water and dish. The House of Shammai say one takes away but may not return it but the House of Hillel say one even may return.
HALAKHAH: “If a cooking stove11:35 ); cf. Chapter 1, Note 409 . was heated,” etc. So is the Mishnah: “one keeps a dish on it.” The Mishnah is Rebbi Jehudah’s, as it was stated: “If there were two coordinated cooking stoves, one emptied or covered with ashes, the other one neither emptied nor covered with ashes, one keeps on the one emptied or covered with ashes. What does one keep on it? The House of Shammai say, one does not keep anything on it. But the House of Hillel say, hot water but no dish. If he removed the hot water pot everybody agrees that he should not return it, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, the House of Shammai say, hot water but no dish; but the House of Hillel say, hot water and dish. If he removed the hot water pot, the House of Shammai say he should not return it, but the House of Hillel say, he may return it.”
Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rav Anan in the name of Rav: it only said “on top of it.” Therefore not into it. How far? Ulla said, up three [hand breadths]. Rebbi Mana said, up to where he would make an impression. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, because he has mastery at a place where the hand has mastery 6:10 ) “to jump”, decreeing that the pot may be returned to the stove only if “the hand does not jump”, it is not so hot that one needs a potholder. It seems that under the influence of Greek, in the mouth of the Galileans the word šōleṭet sounded to Babylonian ears as sōledet . . This comes as what Rebbi Zeˋira said in the name of Rebbi Rashba ( Novellae ad 40b) reads here the full text there. Jehudah: It is permitted to make lukewarm at a place where the hand has mastery but it is forbidden at a place where the hand has no mastery.
Rebbi Joshua the son of the circumciser was serving Rebbi Zeˋira; he brought him piping hot dishes. He asked him, how was this done? He told him, I cleaned out the stove and put it on top. He told him, you should not do this but clean out the stove, take three stones and cast it on them.
Rebbi Abbahu instructed in Bostra: One fills a vessel with hot ashes, puts on top three stones, and casts on them.
Daniel the son of Rebbi Qaṭina in the name of Rebbi Assi: spines of palm branches are like olive cake and wood. That is, if they had been moist and dried out. But if they were dry from the start they are like straw and stubbles.
Animal droppings. There are Tannaim who state, like olive cake and wood; and there are Tannaim who state, like straw and stubbles. He who says like olive cake and wood, small cattle. And he who says like straw and stubbles, large cattle.
One who empties, only if he empties completely, since it was stated: he who empties has to scratch out 36b, ed. Mosad Harav Kook col. 126, Ritba ad 36b ed. S. Schreiber, Rashba Šabbat ad 36b) read לטאטא “to sweep out” (with a broom.) by hand. This implies that he has to empty completely. If one covers with ashes, does he have to cover completely? Since it was stated: when he kindled flax tow over it, this implies even if he did not completely cover it with ashes. When was this said? On a holiday which happens to fall on Friday; Rebbi Ashian said, one kindles flax tow over it.
If he covered it with ashes and it started burning, what? The Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya went to his house and instructed: it is permitted. They asked before Rebbi Zeˋira, and Rebbi Hoshaia, and Rebbi Ḥanania the colleagues of the rabbis, “it started burning”, in the past. Rebbi Immi passed by; the colleagues were scattered; then they wanted to return to it. Rebbi Ḥanania the colleague of the rabbis said to them, as the case happened so it happened. Rebbi Samuel bar Sisartai said, it is questionable for the future. Rebbi Mana said, I objected before Rebbi Abba the son of Rebbi Pappaios: If you say for the past, even if he did not cook on it earlier.
3:3 ( ת ), Notes 70–88 . As it was stated 2:15, Babli Ketubot 34a . : “He who tithes or cooks on the Sabbath, if it was done unintentionally it may be eaten, intentionally it may not be eaten, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, unintentionally it may be eaten at the end of the Sabbath, intentionally it may not be eaten. Rebbi Joḥanan the Alexandrian said, unintentionally it may be eaten at the end of the Sabbath by others but not by himself, intentionally neither by him nor by others.” Samuel followed Rebbi Joḥanan the Alexandrian. When Rav was instructing his own group he said following Rebbi Meïr; in public he instructed following Rebbi Joḥanan the Alexandrian 15a . . Rebbi Simeon bar Karsana said, he explained to us following Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose, as it was stated 2:16. : “Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose and the quotes in Medieval authors the name is R. Ismael the son of R. Johanan ben Beroqa. said in his father’s name, in any case where for an intentional sin one is liable for extirpation and an unintentional sin for a purification offering, if it was committed on the Sabbath unintentionally or intentionally, the result is forbidden both to him and to others. In any case where for an intentional sin one is not liable for extirpation and an unintentional sin no purification offering is due, if it was committed on the Sabbath unintentionally or intentionally, the result unintentional it may be eaten by others after the end of the Sabbath but not by him, intentionally neither by him nor by others.” They asked before Rebbi Joḥanan, what do you say? He said, I have only the Mishnah 2:3. : “He who tithes or cooks on the Sabbath, if in error it may be eaten, if intentionally it may not be eaten.” Rav Ḥisda heard this and said, the Sabbaths have been permitted! this the reason for Rav Ḥisda’s complaint: “for Rav Huna said …” Rav Huna in the name of Rav, and Rebbi Ḥiyya stated thus: “In earlier times they said, one who forgets some dish on his stove on the Sabbath, unintentionally it may be eaten, intentionally it may not be eaten. People were suspected that they left it intentionally and said, it was forgotten; they forbade it to them when it was forgotten.” And here, you say so? Rebbi Ila said, they were suspected to leave it on, they were not suspected to cook. They imposed a fine for forgetting but not for cooking.
“They came back to say, a dish which will improve the more it shrinks is forbidden; a dish which will deteriorate the more it shrinks is permitted. What is a dish which improves the more it shrinks? For example cabbage, peas, and chopped meat. 2:14 in the name of R. Jehudah. Babli 38a . ” Rebbi Tanḥum bar Illa said, they also considered heads of beets and heads of of leeks as dishes which improve the more they shrink. What about eggs? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose: My father came home and found hot water and permitted it, eggs and forbade them. Rebbi Samuel bar Natan in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: I went with my father to Ḥammat Gader where they brought before us eggs small like crab apples and they tasted delicious like sweetbread.
It was stated: “A woman should not fill a pot with ˋassisiot n. (Greek σίσαρον) “a plant cultivated for its piquant root, perhaps rampion ( campanula rapunculus) (E. G.). and lupines and put them into the oven at the start of the Sabbath, at nightfall. If she did, they are forbidden after the end of the Sabbath until the time they could have been done.” Rebbi Aḥa said: intentionally, following Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Yose said: unintentionally, following Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Mana said, what my teacher Rebbi Yose said is correct: 53b . “He who is planting on the Sabbath, if unintentional, he may keep it, if intentional, he must tear it out. In the Sabbatical year, he must tear it out whether [planting was] unintentional or intentional. Rebbi Jehudah says, it is the other way around. If he was planting on the Sabbath he must tear it out whether it was unintentional or intentional; in the Sabbatical, if unintentional, he may keep it, if intentional, he must tear it out. Why? Because the profit of the Sabbath [is forbidden] to him.” And here, since you say that after the end of the Sabbath he has to wait until the time it could have been done, he did not gain anything from the Sabbath. What is the reason of the rabbis? People are suspected about the Sabbatical but not about the Sabbath. Another explanation: One counts Sabbaticals, one does not count Sabbaths. What is this about? If somebody planted less than thirty days before the Sabbatical and now it is the Sabbatical, if it is because of suspicion, there is no suspicion; if it is for counting, it is not counted. Less than thirty days before the eighth year and now it is the eighth year, if it is because of suspicion, there is suspicion; if it is because of counting, there is counting. It follows him who says because of suspicion, but for him who says because of counting they fined the unintentional because of the intentional The latter text seems to be correct since in counting the age of a tree a month more or less is negligible. But one should not plant a tree a month before the Sabbatical, even though this is not forbidden, since the tree’s years for ˋorla will be counted from the Sabbatical. .
If he took it when it still was daylight he may return it when it still is daylight. If he took it after dark he may return if after dark. If he took it when it still was daylight and the day became holy for him? Rebbi Simon [bar Thaddeus] 38a). in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: If he had put it down on the ground it is forbidden to move it. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: I was serving the Great Rebbi Ḥiyya and I brought him hot water from the lower to the upper apartment and returned it to the stove. Rebbi Jeremiah ben Rebbi Simeon said, even from a stove with little heat to a stove with much heat Rebbi Immi said, many times I was sitting before Rebbi Hoshaia but this I never heard from him. Rebbi Zeriqan said to Rebbi Zeˋira, he did not hear from him that it was permitted; therefore it is forbidden.
If it was hanging from a peg, or it was put on a footstool. Should we say if it was as if on coals it is permitted and if not it is forbidden? Rebbi Joḥanan ben Rebbi Marius said, if he did not remove his hand from it. But if he removed his hand from it it is forbidden.
MISHNAH: If an oven was heated with straw or stubbles one may not put anything inside it or on its back. If a single burner was heated with straw or stubbles it is like a cooking stove, with olive cake or wood it is like an oven.
HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “If an oven was heated with straw or stubbles,” etc. Bar Qappara stated: It is even forbidden to lean against it. Rebbi Shammai leaned against the air space of the oven. Rebbi Mana told him, did not Bar Qapprara state: It is even forbidden to lean against it?
Rebbi Mana cursed women who spread out their dresses over the airspace of the oven. Rebbi Yudan ben Rebbi Ismael with difficulty instructed to clean out the oven, laid there three stones and put on them; only that the neighboring women should not know of this. Rebbi Yose said, for the Sabbath you go by the heat; for impurity you go after the closure.
MISHNAH: One may not put an egg next to the hot water container to make it soft boiled and he may not break it on tissue, but Rebbi Yose permits. One should not bury it in dust of roads that it should be roasted. What the people of Tiberias did was to divert a jet of cold water into a canal of hot water. The Sages told them if this is on a Sabbath this is like hot water which was heated on the Sabbath; it is forbidden for washing and drinking. But if it is on a holiday it is like water heated on the holiday; it is forbidden for washing but permitted for drinking. From a cleaned-out cooking vessel n. “cooking vessel”. one drinks on the Sabbath; from an Antiochean vessel was that the latter had a small container for coals at its bottom but the Antiochian a large one which kept heat for a very long time. one does not drink even if it is cleaned out.
HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “One may not put an egg next to the hot water container,” etc. There 10:2. , we have stated: “If a mashed apple is added to dough which soured, [the dough] is forbidden.” 10:2 ( ת ) Notes 15–19, Ḥallah 1:1 ( ח ) Note 21 , Pesaḥim 2:4 (29b line 22), פ . It was stated: Rebbi Yose permits it. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: They disagree when it becomes sour from the juice [of the apple]. But if it becomes sour from its solid substance it is permitted. Rebbi Yose follows his own opinion. Just as he says there, its souring is not clearly souring, so he says here, its cooking is not clearly cooking.
It was stated: Rebbi Joḥanan ben Rebbi Marius said, if he did not remove his hand from it. But if he removed it it is forbidden. 1:9 (Notes 167–178 ). The baraita is quoted in Babli Šabbat 123a, Eruvin 77a . An unripe fig which he hid in straw or a flat pita which he hid in coals may be taken on the Sabbath if they were partially uncovered, otherwise they may not be taken. Rebbi Eleazar ben Thaddeus said, in any case he can stick in a spit or a knife and take it. This [statement] of Rebbi Eleazar ben Thaddeus follows Rebbi Simeon, as we have stated 101a , Menaḥot 41b ; Tosephta Yom Ṭov 2:18 ) only R. Simeon’s opinion is quoted. : “A person may not drag a bed, or a chair, or a footstool , or a fauteuil, because he makes a groove, but Rebbi Simeon permits.”
2:9 (61d line 22) ( י ). Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥuna, Rebbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ila: The Sages admit to Rebbi Simeon that a chair whose legs are stuck in mud one is permitted to move on the Sabbath. Since you are saying, it is permitted to move it, similarly it is permitted to return it. Rebbi Yose said, we also have stated 1:9 referring to turnips and radishes partially hidden. : “and they may be removed on the Sabbath.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, this is Rebbi Simeon’s. Rebbi Yose said, a Mishnah says so, “one may not drag any implement except a carriage because it presses 2:10 . The wheels of the carriage will press the dust down, not move it sideways as would be the case if one drags anything without wheels. The Sages opposing R. Simeon forbid moving the “unprepared” dust even if this was not the intention of the person acting. This Mishnah cannot follow R. Simeon; it contradicts the Mishnah in Kilaim. .”
But we have stated 1:9 declares that harvested produce from the preceding year which was stored in the ground does not become subject to the laws of the Sabbatical. : “The Sabbatical year!” Can you say that “the Sabbatical year” follows Rebbi Simeon is irrelevant for the Sabbatical. ? He explains “the Sabbatical year” following Rebbi Simeon since Rebbi Simeon permits the aftergrowth of the Sabbatical year, and here you say so? Even though Rebbi Simeon permits aftergrowth of the Sabbatical year, he still holds it subject to the Sabbatical year and the holiness of the Sabbatical year 9:1), spontaneous growth from stray seeds, to be harvested he still requires it to be consumed by humans or animals, not to be used for industrial production. . Also we have stated for Rebbi Simeon who declares it pure so it cannot become impure, he worries neither about the Sabbatical year nor about the holiness of the Sabbatical year!
There, they say, the sun is permitted, a derivative of the sun is forbidden. The rabbis here say, both the sun and derivatives of the sun are permitted. Our Mishnah disagrees with the rabbis here: “One should not bury it in dust of roads that it should be roasted.” There is a difference, because he makes a groove. If it had said “flour” it would have been correct. A baraita disagrees with the rabbis there, as it was stated: “Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, one soft-boils eggs on a boiling hot whitewashed roof but one does not soft-boil eggs in boiling hot dust.” What do the rabbis there do with this? They explain that they disagree with Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. In the opinion of the rabbis there, “what the people of Tiberias did.” In the opinion of the rabbis here the Mishnah was finished. “As to what the people of Tiberias did.”
Mishnah: “What the people of Tiberias did,” etc. in the name of Bar Qappara. Originally they closed the conduit on Friday and they entered and bathed on the Sabbath. They were suspected of filling it with wood on Friday so it would burn continuously on the Sabbath; they forbade them bathing and permitted sweating. They were suspected of coming and bathing but saying “we were sweating.” They forbade bathing and sweating to them. If there were there two basins, one of sweet water and one of salt water. They were suspected of uncovering the planks and bathing in sweet water but saying, “we did bathe in salt water;” they forbade them everything. When they were fenced in they continuously permitted them more until they permitted them water in a cave and the hot springs of Tiberias, but they did not permit bringing towels linen bath towel. . Who permitted the bringing of linen cloths? Rebbi Ḥanina ben Aqabia, as it was stated 8 (Note 115 ), Sukkah 1:9 (52c line 32); in the Babli Eruvin 87a . : Rebbi Ḥanina ben Aqabia permitted three things. He permitted seaweed, he permitted the balcony, and he permitted bringing linen cloths.
There, we have stated: “If somebody bathes in a cave or in the waters of Tiberias he may dry himself even with ten linen towels but may not bring them in his hand.” Samuel said, what should an opinionated person do who never studied and never served 2:6 Notes 116–120 . ? This Mishnah was before they permitted to bring linen towels. Rebbi Jeremiah and Rebbi Zeˋira, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel: Rebbi permitted linen towels. It was stated: One takes a shower neither with hot water nor with cold water. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi said, this baraita was before the Sages permitted the hot springs of Tiberias, as it was stated: One who bathes in the hot springs of Tiberias may sprinkle on himself, but others may not sprinkle on him. Rebbi Simeon ben Menassia said, he may not even sprinkle on himself since he increases vapor and sweeps the floor.
Rebbi Aḥa bar Isaac went bathing with Abba bar Mamal at the Three Graces reads the first word as טירם ( s . v. 4טר) and explains as Latin thermae . . He saw a man sprinkling on himself. He told him, in this way it is forbidden on the Sabbath since he increases vapor and sweeps the floor. Rebbi Abbahu said, others were sprinkling and it fell on him. He answered, but Rebbi Levontin went bathing with Rebbi Jonah. He saw a man sprinkling on himself. He told him, we do not have to be concerned about an isolated opinion.
The Elder Rebbi Isaac went bathing with Rebbi. He asked him, may one put a flask in the circle? He told him, put it in the draw-pot and it becomes a secondary vessel.
3:4, Notes 116–120 ( ע ). As a matter of principle it is forbidden to talk about holy matters at places where people are naked, as in the bathhouse, or which smell badly, as in an outhouse. The question is whether one may ask for urgently needed answers to questions at such a place. The question arises here because it is reported in the previous paragraph that Rebbi (and in this paragraph R. Meїr) answered a question in the hot springs of Tiberias when naked on the Sabbath. Rebbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: One may ask about practice of the bath in the bathhouse and the practice of the toilet in the toilet. As the following: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar went bathing with Rebbi Meïr. He asked him, how about drying oneself with a towel? He told him, it is forbidden. How about rinsing? He told him, it is forbidden. But did not Samuel ask Rav, may one say Amen at a dirty place? He told him: it is forbidden and it is forbidden for me to tell you it is forbidden. There was found a Tanna who stated: One does (not) to Babli 40b . But since the quote comes in support of Rav who forbids, as against prior testimony of Rebbi, R. Meïr, and R. Joshua ben Levi who permit, probably the Leiden text is correct, the word should not be deleted, but practice has to follow Rebbi’s group; Babli 40b . ask about practice of the bath in the bathhouse and the practice of the toilet in the toilet.
2:5 (61c line 32) ( י ). Babli 40a . “If it is on a holiday it is like water heated on the holiday,” etc. Hot water heated on a holiday and similarly hot water heated on Friday for the Sabbath, Rav and Samuel, one said, one uses it to wash his face, hands, and feet, while the other said, one uses it to wash his entire 2:5 , the expression “entire” is missing. Since Ex. 12:16 permits to prepare on a holiday what is eaten by everybody, and heating water for bathing is derived from the permission to heat water for consumption, he does not permit the use of a bathtub since the poor do not have bathtubs. Therefore it is necessary to wash each limb separately. body limb by limb. We did not know who said what but since Samuel stated, one uses it to wash his face, hands, and feet, it follows that it was Rav who said, one uses it to wash his entire body limb by limb.
A philosopher asked Bar Qappara; Ablat asked Levi the eunuch 6:7 Note 115 . : Is it permitted for drinking but forbidden for taking a bath? He told him, if you saw an eunuch embracing your wife, would you not feel badly about it? He said, yes. He asked him, can he squeeze her in any way? He said, that she should not get loose morals. He told him, here also that they should not get loose morals. After he left, his students told him, this one you pushed away with a stick; what do you answer us? He said to (him) [them]. : Is there not already written 12:16 . only what is being eaten by everybody, this alone may be made by you.
“From a cleaned-out samowar n. “cooking vessel”. one drinks on the Sabbath.” Therefore not if it was not cleaned out. Rebbi Ashian said, because the coals touch its body. Rebbi Ḥanina the son of Rebbi Hillel said, because the wind enters its body and the coals will burn. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, because it was made in pieces; he is afraid that its glue was weathered away and he adds water
“From an Antiochean vessel was that the latter had a small container for coals at its bottom but the Antiochian a large one which kept heat for a very long time. one does not drink even if it is cleaned out.” Rebbi Ḥananiah, Rebbi Yasa, Rebbi Aḥa Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, because it is heated from its walls. The rabbis of Caesarea, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: If it was cleaned out and open it is permitted.
MISHNAH: One may not put cold water into a hot water container which was removed in order to heat it but one may put into it or into a cup to make it lukewarm.
HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “One may not put cold water into a hot water container which was removed,” etc. Rebbi Abba the (son of the) son of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: they stated this only for a cup, therefore not into itself. Rebbi Mana said, I objected before Rebbi Abba [the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba]: Rebbi Joḥanan could not have stated this on the first part [of the Mishnah] nor on the second part! “In order to heat it”, therefore to make it lukewarm is permitted. There came Rebbi Abba bar Cahana, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of (Rebbi) [Rav]. If to heat it, it is forbidden, if to make it lukewarm it is permitted.
It was stated: “One may add hot water to cold but not cold to hot, following the words of the House of Shammai. But the House of Hillel say, whether hot to cold or cold to hot it is permitted. When has this been said? Into a cup, but into a bathtub hot to cold is permitted but cold to hot is forbidden, and Rebbi Simeon [ben Menassia] permits.” Rav comes following Rebbi Simeon ben Menassia and Rebbi Joḥanan following Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri. It was stated: “Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri forbids.” “A person may fill an amphora full of water and put it close to the pyre, not that it become hot but to disperse its coldness. A person may immerse himself in cold water, come out and warm himself next to the pyre, the words of Rebbi Meïr, but the Sages forbid.” Rebbi Meïr says it correctly; what is the rabbis’ reason? It should come as what Rebbi Zeˋira said in the name of Rav Jehudah: It is permitted to make lukewarm at a place where the hand rules 6:10 ) “to jump”, decreeing that the pot may be returned to the stove only if “the hand does not jump”, it is not so hot that one needs a potholder. It seems that under the influence of Greek, in the mouth of the Galileans the word šōleṭet sounded to Babylonian ears as sōledet . ; it is forbidden to make lukewarm at a place where the hand does not rule. 1:6 (Notes 160–179) ( מ ). Even how far “where the hand does not rule”? Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi, Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Up to where he puts his hand and it is burned.
Everybody agrees that a secondary vessel is permitted. What is the difference between a primary and a secondary vessel? Rebbi Yose said, here the hand rules, there the hand does not rule. Rebbi Jonah said, in neither case does the hand rule. But they forced distance for a primary vessel; they did not force distance for a secondary vessel. (Mishnah: “Into a pan or a pot which was taken off the fire boiling,” etc.) Rebbi Mana said, a pot of rice supports my father, a pot of groats supports my father, for you move them from place to place and they still are boiling hot.
MISHNAH: Into a pan or a pot which was taken off the fire boiling one should not give spices but one may give them into the bowl or into the tray. Rebbi Jehudah says, one may put them in everything except what contains vinegar or fish sauce.
HALAKHAH: May one put spices at the bottom and pour on them from above? Rebbi Jonah said, it is forbidden and pouring confers the status of primary vessel. The force of Rebbi Jonah comes from this 11:7 . Lev. 6:21 precribes that pottery vessels after being used to cook a ḥaṭṭat sacrifice must be broken and metal vessels cleansed and washed. The Mishnah explicitly includes pouring hot water in the biblical definition of “cooking”. : “Both vessels used for cooking or into which it was poured boiling.” Rebbi Yose said, there a pottery vessel absorbs; spices are not cooked 1–16 , pp. 404–407, New York 1991. . Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun objected: Did we not state 7(1 ). The argument is that Lev . 6:21 reads a passive “a pottery vessel in which something has been cooked”, not “in which one cooked”. This is taken to mean that one cooks in, not by the vessel. In that case, the vessel is really “secondary vessel” since its walls do not transfer heat to the meat being cooked. The only case one can think of is pouring boiling water into the vessel. Since the argument of R. Yose does not work for metal pots, R. Jonah is justified. , “the same holds for brass vessels.” Can one say that brass vessels absorb?
Can one pour in from a stream? Rebbi Ḥanina, the son of Rebbi Hillel, said, the disagreement of Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Isaac bar Gufta asked before Rebbi Mana: If he did this on the Sabbath, is he guilty because of cooking? If he did this with meat and milk23:19 , 34:26 , Deut. 14:21 ) with emphasis on cooking. , is he guilty because of cooking? He said to him, parallel to what Rebbi Zeˋira said, what is certainly a dumpling? Only if fire burned underneath it. So here also, what is certainly a cooked dish? Only if fire burned underneath it.
“Rebbi Jehudah says, one may put them in everything except what contains vinegar or fish sauce.” In the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah, salt is like fish sauce and wine 1:7 show that R. Jehudah holds that fish sauce and wine cure and, therefore, act as if cooking. Cf. Babli 42b . like vinegar.
MISHNAH: One does not put a vessel under the light to catch the oil but when he put it there when it still was daylight it is permitted. One may not use it because it is not prepared.
HALAKHAH: “One does not put a vessel under the light to catch the oil but when he put it there when it still was daylight it is permitted. One may not use it because it is not prepared,” etc. Rebbi Ḥaggai asked, if it burned out when it still was day but he realized it only after it was dark? The colleagues asked: If it burned out on this Sabbath but he realized it only afterwards on the Sabbath? Rebbi Joḥanan said, nothing in its natural form is not prepared except one item. Rebbi Eleazar objected: Is not oil in the lamp in its natural state, nevertheless it is not prepared! It was put there from the start to be used up in the lamp. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish objected: Is not seed grain in its natural form, nevertheless it is not prepared! It was put there from the start to be used up in the ground. They objected: Are there not eggs used for chicks which are in their natural form, nevertheless they are not prepared! They were put there from the start to become chicks. Rebbi Jeremiah objected: Are there not Sukkah decorations which are in their natural form, nevertheless they are not prepared! There is a difference, as Rebbi Abba Mari, Rebbi Yose’s brother, said: For the seven days they become insignificant in the Sukkah . Afterwards they are prepared, the decorations even if edible become part of the building. Taking them on holiday or Sabbath would be equivalent to tearing down a part of the sukkah . But after the holiday they are simply fruits hanging on the wall which can be taken at any moment. . Rebbi Ḥinena objected: Is not lint which was scattered in its natural state, nevertheless it is not prepared! Here about vessels; what we said there about food. Rebbi Nasa objected, are there not figs put out to ferment and not intended to be food on this Sabbath. , which dried but he did not touch, in their natural form, nevertheless they are not prepared! figs on the roof. Here about vessels; what we said there about food.
MISHNAH: One moves a new light but not a used one; Rebbi Simeon says one may move any light except one which was burning on the Sabbath.
HALAKHAH: (Mishnah: “One moves a new light but not a used one;” etc.) Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada objected: Did we not state, “one turns a basket upside down in front of the chicks that they may climb up and down”? They said, this is the one of Rebbi Joḥanan figs on the roof. .
As it was stated: “All lights may be moved except the light which was burning on the Sabbath, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, it is permitted to move a new light but forbidden to move an old one on the Sabbath. . Rebbi Simeon says, all lights may be moved except the light which was burning on the Sabbath; if it burned out it is permitted to move it.”
Rebbi Jeremiah and Rebbi Abba, both in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan. One said, the words of Rebbi Meïr, anything which is specifically for something prohibited is prohibited. But the other one said, anything which one specified for something prohibited is prohibited. We did not know who said what. Since Rebbi (Ḥanina) [Ḥanania] said, Rebbi Jeremiah asked, is this (brick) [lamp] 5, p. 99 and in Hayerushalmi Kiphshuto ) who identified the word as Greek λύχνος “lamp”. R. Jeremiah asks why R. Meїr permits to move a lamp which was not lit for the Sabbath since it is a tool specifically built for a forbidden activity. not specifically for something forbidden? This implies that he was the one who said, anything which is specifically for something prohibited is prohibited. The one who said specific, so much more if he specified. But he who said if he specified, not if it is specific.
A Mishnah disagrees with him who said, anything which is specifically for something prohibited is prohibited, as we have stated there 18:2 . : “Its undercarriage defines as “a kind of wooden box made to transport women” (cf. Arabic سُدّة “bench, seat”). The μηχανή is the contraption where the wheels are attached. If this is permanently fixed to the box it is an appendix to the box and follows its rules; if the box may be lifted it is a tool by itself. Wooden tools or vessels are impervious to impurity if either they are flat, not enclosing any volume, or are so large that they cannot be lifted empty or full. The latter is determined as a volume of 40 seah (a Roman culeus ) 20 amphoras or 512 liter. For the House of Shammai, the volume enclosed has to be 40 seah , but for the House of Hillel the volume of the entire vessel is measured. If the undercarriage can be disconnected it can become impure even if the passenger compartment cannot, its volume is not added to the volume of the compartment according to the House of Hillel, and if it is under one roof with a corpse it is not considered a separate entity but part of the “tent”. , if it can be separated it is not connected to it, will not be measured with it, does not protect in a tent with a corpse; one may not drag it on the Sabbath if it contains coins.” And it was stated for this, if there were coins on it but they fell off, it may be dragged. Rav Sheshet said, this is Rebbi Sineon’s since Rebbi Simeon said, “if it burned out it is permitted to move it.” They said, why do we not explain it according to everybody, if he forgot. You cannot do this, as we have stated there 18:2 . : “if it cannot be separated it is connected to it, will be measured with it, does protect in a tent with a corpse; one may drag it on the Sabbath even though it contains coins.” Can you say about this, it is according to everybody, if he forgot?
A Mishnah disagrees with him who said, anything which is specifically for something prohibited is prohibited, as we have stated: “If there is a stone on top of an amphora he tilts it on its side and it falls down.” Rebbi Abba in the name of (Rebbi) [Rav] Ḥiyya bar Ashi: Rav explained this about one who forgot. Also from the sequel, “if it was between amphoras he lifts it, tilts it on its side and it falls down.” This also Rav explained about one who forgot.
A Mishnah disagrees with him who said, anything which is specifically for something prohibited is prohibited, as we have stated: “one turns a basket upside down in front of the chicks that they may climb up and down.” And it was stated about this, when they climbed on it by themselves it is forbidden to move it only if specifically selected for forbidden purposes. Here the selection is not made by the farmer but by his chicks. A different approach in the Babli, 43a . . Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said before Rebbi Zeˋira, explain it if it is disgusting. He told him, did not Rebbi Hoshaia state, even a seah , even a three-qab , about 6.4 liter. . Can you say that seah and three-qab are disgusting?
Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Meïr. Samuel said, practice follows Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, practice follows Rebbi Simeon. . They asked before Rebbi Joḥanan, you, what are you saying? He told them, I only have the Mishnah: “One may move any light except one which was burning on the Sabbath.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish instructed in al-Tarabulus, it is permitted to move a small light. Rebbi Ḥelbo and Rebbi Abbahu. Before Rebbi Ḥelbo they did not take away, before Rebbi Abbahu they took away. Rebbi Yasa visited Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya. He wanted to remove it before him. He told him, before us? Rebbi Yose the Galilean came before Yose ben Ḥanina; he wanted to take it away, he told him, who permitted you? It is found Rav and Rebbi Joḥanan, who forbid, are one. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, who permit, are one. Rebbi Eleazar bar Ḥanina: It happened and they moved a metal lamp instead of a pottery light on the Sabbath. Where do we hold? If following Rebbi Meїr, even the metal lamp should be forbidden. If following Rebbi Simeon, even a pottery light should be permitted. But we are following Rebbi Jehudah since Rebbi Jehudah is the one who said, a pottery light is disgusting, a metal light is not disgusting.
It was stated: If a light was lying on a table he takes away the table and the light falls down. Rebbi Joḥanan said, this one is close to be liable for a purification sacrifice; forwards for setting a fire, backwards for extinguishing. Samuel bar Abba before Rebbi Yasa: when it was extinguished. He told him, may your mind be at rest 120a) quoted by RAN (Commentary to Alfasi #454) prefers the Yerushalmi version to the Babli’s. . Where do we hold? If following Rebbi Meïr, even the table should be forbidden. If following Rebbi Simeon, even the light should be permitted. But here following Rebbi Jehudah, since Rebbi Jehudah says, a pottery light is disgusting, a table is not disgusting.
It was stated: If he stipulated about it it shall be permitted. Where do we hold? If following Rebbi Meїr, even if he stipulated it should be forbidden. If following Rebbi Simeon, even if he did not stipulate it should be permitted. But here we hold following Rebbi Jehudah, since Rebbi Jehudah says, a pottery light is disgusting, a table is not disgusting. From where did you understand to say, we are holding with Rebbi Jehudah? As it was stated: If a light was lying behind a door one opens and closes on the Sabbath if only he not intend either to extinguish or to make it burn. Rav and Samuel explain it about one who forgot but cursed one who would do this; May the Eternal extirpate the man who does this, awake and answering 2:12 . .
Who has “anything which is specifically for something prohibited is prohibited”, not Rebbi Meïr? Therefore, the one who stated “if he stipulated about it it shall be permitted” was Rebbi Simeon. But a cup, or a bowl, or a lantern, even after they were extinguished it is forbidden to touch them. Rebbi Tabi in the name of Rav Ḥisda: Even Rebbi Simeon who there says it is permitted here he agrees that it is forbidden, for if you tell him that it is permitted he will extinguish them and use them.
Rebbi Mana said, earlier we were of the opinion to say, where do they disagree? When it was extinguished, if the rats had dragged the wick away, when it was compressed. But you may even say if the rats had not dragged the wick away, when it was not compressed, if it contained oil.
There, we have stated: “A man may carry his son with a stone in his hand, or a basket with a stone in it. items with other things which may be moved on the Sabbath. ” The House of Rebbi stated, food and stone in it, we do not say anything, for Rebbi Romanos brought out a pan from Rebbi’s house full of coals on the Sabbath. Could you say that coals are pressed? But it must have oil left in it. Rebbi Abbahu said, I confirmed it, cuts of fragrances were on it.
Rebbi Abba bat Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, it is forbidden to move a tarkos . Rebbi Immi instructed: it is permitted. Rebbi Jeremiah saw them moving it at the great assembly and did not object to them. In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said, up to three it is a chair, more than this a ladder. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, he who permits follows Rebbi Simeon, as it was stated: “A person may not drag a bed, or a chair, or a footstool, or a fauteuil , because he makes a groove, but Rebbi Simeon permits.” 2:9 (61d line 22) ( י ). Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥuna, Rebbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ila: The Sages admit to Rebbi Simeon that a chair whose legs are stuck in mud one is permitted to move on the Sabbath. Since you are saying, it is permitted to move it, similarly it is permitted to return it. Rebbi Yose said, we also have stated 1:9 referring to turnips and radishes partially hidden. : “and they may be removed on the Sabbath.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, it is Rebbi Simeon’s. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, a Mishnah says so, “one may not drag any vessel except a carriage because it presses 2:10 . The wheels of the carriage will press the dust down, not move it sideways as would be the case if one drags anything without wheels. The Sages opposing R. Simeon forbid moving the “unprepared” dust even if this was not the intention of the person acting. This Mishnah cannot follow R. Simeon; it contradicts the Mishnah in Kilaim. .”
Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Rebbi: It was said relating to the Sabbath. Ḥizqiah in the name of the House of Rebbi Yannai, it was said relating to presumptions 7:4 Note 49 . . Rebbi Yose in the name of the House of Rebbi Yannai, it was said relating to impurity. Rebbi Aḥa bar Ḥinnena, Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, it is permitted to move a small light. Is it not a vessel? Is not everything in the house prepared? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, explain it that he took it with him as merchandise, or it arrived Friday evening at nightfall, and you cannot infer anything.
MISHNAH: One may put a vessel under the light to catch the sparks but one may not put water in it since he would extinguish.
HALAKHAH: Here you say, “one does not put a vessel under the light,” to catch sparks? “But one may not put water in it since he would extinguish.” And there you say, “one may put a vessel under the light”? Here he needs the oil but there he does not need the sparks.
“But one may not put water in it since he would extinguish.” Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: This is Rebbi Yose’s. We were of the opinion to say, where disagree (Rebbi Meïr) [what Rebbi Yose says] and the rabbis? When he made a barrier of vessels. But not if he made a barrier of water. Since Rebbi Samuel said in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: This is Rebbi Yose’s, it implies that there is disagreement even if he made a barrier of water.