Jerusalem Beitzah

Mishnah

1 An egg was laid on a holiday. The House of Shammai say that it may be eaten, but the House of Hillel say that it may not be eaten.

Halakhah

“An egg was laid on a holiday,” etc. What is the reason given by the House of Shammai? It is prepared in its mother’s body. What is the reason given by the House of Hillel? It is like muqṣeh that dried without its owner realizing it, and is muqṣeh that dried without its owner realizing it not forbidden? But was it not stated, “if someone slaughters a chicken and finds eggs inside it, even if they are complete they are permitted”? Rabbi Ḥananiah and Rabbi Mana. One said, its taste when eaten from inside the chicken is not comparable to its taste when eaten after it is laid. But the other said, it is not fully developed for hatching until it is laid. What is their status when eaten with milk? Let us say, if they are connected to blood vessels they are forbidden, otherwise permitted.

“Everybody agrees that an egg of which most was laid before the start of the holiday may be eaten on the holiday.” Where do they disagree? If less than half came out, where the House of Shammai say that it may be eaten, but the House of Hillel say that it may not be eaten. “Just as it is forbidden as food so it is forbidden to be moved. If one was mixed with a hundred or a thousand, they are all forbidden.” How does this apply? According to the one who said, if the preparation is in doubt it is forbidden, but even the one who said, if the preparation is in doubt it is permitted, agrees that it is forbidden here. For fallen fruit there is a doubt whether it fell today or yesterday, but here one is forbidden and this determines the status of all of them.

Others say in the name of Rabbi Eliezer: It may be eaten together with its mother. What does this mean, “it may be eaten together with its mother”? If its mother was prepared for slaughter. But are not all chickens prepared for slaughter? Rabbi Abba said, it may be eaten on the basis of its mother’s preparation.

A calf born on a holiday is permitted since slaughter makes it permissible. Rabbi Zeʿira asked, in that case an animal kept outside should be permitted since slaughter makes it permissible, deer should be permitted since slaughter makes it permissible. Rabbi Zeʿira came back and said, a calf is fully formed the day before, but here it was born on the day it was fully formed. Rabbi Abba said, this follows the one who said that an animal gives birth after an incomplete number of months, but what about the one who said, an animal gives birth after a fixed number of months? Consider a case in which he knew when a male had mounted it. A pigeon chick born on a holiday is permitted since slaughter makes it permissible, did we not state, an egg which had started to develop, and chicks which do not yet have wings are forbidden as a prohibited creature, but one does not impose lashes for eating carcass meat? And Rabbi Ḥaggai said, even if he slaughtered them. Rabbi Abun said, understand this as referring to those born with wings.

Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Ḥanina: Any animal that mates during the day gives birth during the day, and one that mates at night gives birth at night. They objected, does a chicken not mate only during the day and it lays eggs both during the day and at night? Rabbi Abun said, there is a difference, since it lays eggs without a male. Rabbi Zeʿira in the name of Giddul: A calf born from a ṭerefa on a holiday is permitted, it is classified as something prepared hidden in something not prepared.

Elsewhere we learned, “An egg from an animal that died without slaughter is permitted if similar eggs are sold in the market. Otherwise it is forbidden. This is the opinion of the House of Shammai, but the House of Hillel prohibit it.” What is the House of Shammai’s reason? It was fully formed before the animal died. Then it should be permitted even if similar eggs are not sold in the market. If you say so, you would permit a cluster of undeveloped eggs. The House of Shammai follow the earlier teaching, and the House of Hillel follow the later teaching.

Rabbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: At first they were saying, one curdles milk neither with the stomach content of the carcass nor with the stomach contents of the Gentile. They changed to say, one curdles milk with the stomach content of the carcass but not with the stomach contents of the Gentile. Rabbi Yose ben Abun said, Samuel bar Abba asked: Does this follow Rabbi Eliezer, since Rabbi Eliezer said, the thoughts of the Non-Jew are about pagan worship? Rabbi Yasa in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Originally, they said, one curdles milk neither with carcass stomach contents nor with Gentile’s stomach contents. They changed to say, one curdles milk with carcass stomach contents and with Gentile’s stomach contents. Rabbi Yose said, the language of a baraita supports Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: Stomach contents of a Gentile or a carcass are forbidden following the original teaching. The stomach contents of a qualified animal which suckled from a ṭerefa are forbidden following the former teaching, and the stomach contents of a ṭerefa which suckled from a qualified one are permitted following the later teaching. And even if the House of Shammai would argue like the House of Hillel in the first teaching, an egg is a growth of its body, the contents of the stomach come from the outside. It parallels what Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Wolves once tore apart more than 300 animals from the flock of Judah ben Shamuai’s sons. The case came before the Sages who permitted their stomach contents. They said, an egg is a growth of its body, the contents of the stomach come from the outside.

“If it was laid on the holiday it may be eaten on the Sabbath, on the Sabbath it may be eaten on the holiday. Rabbi Judah said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer, this is the disagreement. The House of Shammai say that it may be eaten, but the House of Hillel say that it may not be eaten.” Rabbi Ḥanina instructed the Sepphoreans about mustard that grew on its own and about the egg following Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Joḥanan came and preached to them following the rabbis here and the rabbis there. Rabbi Abba bar Zemina in the name of Rabbi Joṣadaq: Because of these two matters Rabbi Joḥanan went down from Sepphoris to Tiberias. He said, why did you bring me this old man, he prohibits what I permit and permits what I prohibit. Rabbi Abba said, a case came before Rabbi Yasa and he wanted to act following Rabbi Joḥanan but when he heard that Rav and Rabbi Ḥanina disagreed he refrained.

They disagreed about the following question: May the remainders of a wick, a fire, or oil that burned out on the Sabbath be lit on the holiday? Rav and Rabbi Ḥanina both say it is forbidden, but Rabbi Joḥanan says, it is permitted. Rabbi Mana said to Rabbi Yudan, is the ruling reversed regarding an egg? He said to him, since the rabbis compare it, the two cases must be equivalent. They said in the name of four Elders: If somebody’s eruv was eaten on the first day he has the same status as the people of his town on the second day. Rav Ḥuna said in the name of Rav: Practice follows the four Elders. Rav Ḥisda asked: Rav’s position seems inconsistent. There, he treats them as two periods of holiness, but here he treats them as one period of holiness. They disagreed about the following question: May the remainders of a wick, a fire, or oil that burned out on the Sabbath be lit on the holiday? Rav and Rabbi Ḥanina both say it is forbidden, but Rabbi Joḥanan says, it is permitted. Rabbi Mana said to Rabbi Yudan, is the ruling reversed regarding an egg? He said to him, since the rabbis compare it, the two cases must be equivalent.

Everybody agrees that fallen fruit is forbidden. Rabbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked Rabbi Zeʿira: What is the difference between fallen fruit and eggs? Is fallen fruit on its tree not forbidden, but are eggs in their mother’s body not permitted? Then if it was laid on the Sabbath it should not be eaten on the holiday, if laid on the holiday it should not be eaten on the Sabbath! He answered him, is that so? Is it not enough that you restricted it by ruling that if it was laid on the holiday it may not be eaten on the holiday without adding the restriction that if laid on the holiday it should not be eaten on the Sabbath, if laid on the Sabbath it should not be eaten on the holiday? Rabbi Jeremiah asked, what is the status of decorations of a sukkah? Rabbi Jeremiah turned around and said, throughout the seven days they are subordinate to the sukkah, afterwards they are prepared. Rabbi Yose said, all seven days the holiness of sukkah is on them, afterwards the holiness of the holiday falls on them. What case was he questioning? If the holiday falls on a Friday according to the one who says, they are two kinds of holiness.

Mishnah

2 The House of Shammai say that sourdough causes liability at the size of an olive and leavened matter at the size of a date, but the House of Hillel say that both cause liability at the size of an olive.

Halakhah

Rabbi Zeriqan in the name of Rabbi Yose ben Ḥanina: They stated this only about eliminating it, but for eating, the amount is the volume of an olive. Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan, whether for elimination or eating, the amount is the volume of an olive. Rabbi Mana was standing with Rabbi Ḥizqiah, he said to him, where did the rabbi hear this? He told him, from Rabbi Abbahu. He answered, we also say, Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan, whether for elimination or eating, the amount is the volume of an olive, for otherwise one would have to state “37 extirpations in the Torah.”

Mishnah

3 If somebody slaughtered a wild animal or a bird on the holiday, the House of Shammai say that he should dig with a stake and cover the blood, but the House of Hillel say that he should not slaughter unless he had dust prepared. But they agree that if he slaughtered that he may dig with a stake and cover the blood, and that the ashes of the cooking stove are prepared.

Halakhah

Rabbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Anyone who cooks carcass meat on a holiday is not flogged, because cooking as a category of work is permitted on a holiday. Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he is flogged, for cooking as a category of work is permitted only for food. Rabbi Abba bar Mamal objected to this statement by Rabbi Joḥanan. Then one who plows on a holiday should not be flogged since actions of the category of plowing are permitted on a holiday. Rabbi Yose in the name of Rabbi Ila: ordinary plowing was not permitted. Rabbi Shammai said before Rabbi Yose: Rabbi Aḥa in the name of Rabbi Ila, this follows Rabbi Simeon, for Rabbi Simeon said, only if he needs the work’s primary result. Rabbi Yose met Rabbi Aḥa. He said to him, did you say this? But did not Rabbi Joḥanan say, the words of Rabbi Meïr are that in 24 matters the House of Shammai are lenient and the House of Hillel restrictive, and this is one of them. Should we say 23? But Rabbi Meïr and Rabbi Simeon both said the same. But did we not hold that Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Simeon both said the same? Should we say, Rabbi Meïr, Rabbi Yose, and Rabbi Simeon all three said the same? But matters which are problematic for the rabbis are obvious for you, are those which are obvious for the rabbis problematic for you? If one harvested for grasses he is liable for harvesting but is not liable for improving the soil. There is only the problem if he harvested in order to improve the soil. Is he liable both for harvesting and for improving the soil? Even if you say it follows Rabbi Simeon, but for the rabbis in any case he plowed, in any case he harvested. Rabbi Mana said, the words of the rabbis support my teacher Rabbi Yose, for Rabbi Ḥiyya said in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan, if one compressed a fish, if he does it for the fish itself he is not liable, but if he does it to produce fish sauce he is liable. Even if you say that he said this following Rabbi Simeon, but for the rabbis in any case he compressed, in any case he produced fish sauce.

Rav Abun in the name of the rabbis there: this implies that the ashes of the stove are prepared only for the commandment. Rabbi Mana said, if he did not prepare it. But if he prepared it, one uses it to cover excrement and to fulfill the commandment. This parallels what Rabbi Shammai said, Rabbi Aḥa preached in the name of Rav Judah: If he prepared it for the commandment one uses it to fulfill the commandment, if he prepared it for excrement, one uses it to cover excrement and for the commandment. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, Rav Zera and Rabbi Abba bar Joseph disagreed. One said, there is preparation for excrement, but the other said, there is no preparation for excrement. The one who said that there is no preparation objected to the one who said that there is preparation, could he not use it to cover the blood of the Koy? He answered him, people are likely to make a mistake about the Koy, people are not likely to make a mistake about excrement. He said to him, if you would say so, he would take the stake and cover. And it was stated so: “If one brought dust to plaster his roof, lime to whitewash his house, one uses it to cover.” There are Tannaim who state, one does not use it to cover. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun in the name of Rav Ḥisda, the one who said that one uses it to cover refers to a case after the act, the one who said that one does not use it to cover refers to someone who asks before starting.

It was stated: “Rabbi Yose says, one does not cover the Koy’s blood because it is a doubtful case.” Since circumcision overrides the Sabbath when the obligation is certain, but does not override the holiday when the obligation is doubtful, then for covering the blood, which does not override the Sabbath in a case of certainty, it is only logical that it should not override the holiday in a case of doubt. But is it permitted to slaughter on a Sabbath? Rabbi Yose said it without attribution, Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: If he slaughtered for a sick person. They told him, does not the shofar in the countryside disprove it? For in case of certainty it does not override the Sabbath, but in a case of doubt it overrides the holiday. What kind of doubt is there? If it is a weekday, he may blow, if it is a holiday, he may blow. Rabbi Ḥananiah in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: In case of a hermaphrodite who blew. And it was stated so: “The hermaphrodite fulfills the obligation for another person of the same kind. A person whose sex cannot be determined fulfills the obligation neither for another person of the same kind nor for a person of a different kind.” Rabbi Yose asked, if in the case of a hermaphrodite who blew, is that the case in which we stated that there is no counterargument? Rabbi Abbaye said, that is one of four cases when the Great Rabbi Ḥiyya said, there is no counterargument. But Rabbi Eleazar the son of Rabbi Eleazar the caper grower found a counterargument. Since circumcision which in a case of doubt does not override the holiday, in a case of certainty does not override holiday night, what can you say about covering the blood where in a case of certainty it overrides holiday night, since in a case of certainty it overrides holiday night, in a case of doubt it should override the holiday. This establishes that what troubled the earlier rabbis and was difficult for them also troubles the later rabbis and is difficult for them. In the opinion of Rabbi Aḥa, the hermaphrodite may be authorized in advance to fulfill the obligation for another person of the same kind. In the opinion of Rabbi Yose, this is valid only after the act.

“But they agree that if he slaughtered that he may dig with a stake and cover, and that the ashes of the cooking stove are prepared.” This applies to ashes that were produced before the holiday, but it does not apply to ashes that were produced on the holiday, if he did not slaughter, but if he slaughtered it is better that he cover with ashes that were produced on the holiday rather than dig with a stake and cover. The colleagues are saying that a positive commandment overrides a prohibition. This is understandable following the opinion of Rabbi Jonah who said, a positive commandment overrides a prohibition even if they are not written side by side. Following the opinion of Rabbi Yose who said, a positive commandment overrides a prohibition only if they were written side-by-side, since he began the meritorious act, one tells him to complete it. Rabbi Zeʿira asked, what if a monkey formed a bowl? Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, Rabbi Zeʿira and Rav Hamnuna disagreed. One said, it is forbidden, but the other said, it is permitted. According to the one who said that it is forbidden it is like cut-up fig cake which dried out without his knowledge. According to the one who said that it is permitted it is as though he prepared it by mistake. According to the one who said that it is permitted, may one use the space it occupies? Would we say that soil may not be used?

Mishnah

4 The House of Shammai say, one does not move the ladder from dovecote to dovecote, but one may bend it from window to window, and the House of Hillel permit it. The House of Shammai say, one may not take unless one had moved them while it was still daylight, but the House of Hillel say, he may stand there and say, this and that I will take.

Halakhah

Judah the son of Rabbi Ḥiyya went out. They asked him, what are the rules for a ladder to the upper floor? He told them, it is permitted. When he returned to his father, he asked him, what case came before you? He said, I permitted them the ladder to the upper floor. He summoned his Tanna, who stated, “when was this said, about a ladder for a dovecote. But a ladder for the upper floor is forbidden.” What is the difference between a ladder for a dovecote and a ladder for the upper floor? Rabbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, a ladder for a dovecote would be weakened if he had used it for work the day before, a ladder for the upper floor may be used for work the day before. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, on the ladder for a dovecote he may stand and use it for his purpose, on the ladder for the upper floor he may not stand on it and use it for his purpose. A ladder for a dovecote even if it is used to climb to the upper floor, a ladder for the upper floor even if it is used to climb to the dovecote.

“The House of Shammai say, one may not take unless one had moved them while it was still daylight.” The position of the House of Shammai seems inconsistent, as we have stated there: “In addition, Rabbi Eliezer said, a person stands near the drying figs Friday afternoon in a Sabbatical year and says, from here I will eat tomorrow.” Is Rabbi Eliezer not a Shammaite? One applies stricter rules when living creatures are involved.

“The House of Hillel say, he may stand there and say, this and that I will take.” The position of the House of Hillel seems inconsistent, as we have stated there: “But the Sages say, only if he marks out the area and says, from here to there,” and here they are saying so? Still they hold that one applies stricter rules when living creatures are involved. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, Levi was knocking on his dovecote and saying, my dovecote will provide me tomorrow.

Mishnah

5 If he prepared black ones and found white ones, white ones and found black ones, two and found three, they are forbidden. Three and found two, they are permitted. Inside the nest and he found outside the nest they are forbidden, but if there are no others around they are permitted.

Halakhah

The Mishnah is Rabbi’s, as it was stated: “200 and he found a mina, the mina was taken away, the words of Rabbi. But the Sages are saying, it is unconsecrated.” There, we have stated: “If somebody said to his son, ‘Second Tithe is in that corner,’ but he found it in another corner, that is unconsecrated.” Rabbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rabbi Assi, this follows Rabbi’s opinion, as we have stated: “Two hundred and he found a talent, a talent was taken, the word of Rabbi, but the Sages say, it is unconsecrated.” He turned around and said, this is everybody’s opinion since pigeon chicks usually start to fly. But did not Rabbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaul state, the same rule applies to pigeon chicks and to eggs? Therefore, it is Rabbi’s. There, his father put it there and he found, here, he himself put it there and he found it. Rabbi Abba bar Cohen said before Rabbi Yose in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: Rabbi Abba bar Zavda instructed according to Rabbi’s opinion concerning Second Tithe.

Rabbi Yudan said, this is only if there were two broods there. But if only one brood is there it does not apply. But did we not state, “if there are no others around they are permitted”? if only a single chick is available.

Samuel said, anybody who tightly closes the shutters on the holiday is liable because of building. This is difficult. Something which if it were done on the Sabbath would make him liable for a purification sacrifice the House of Hillel permit restoring? Rabbi Ḥanania in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: They permitted the end because of the start. For if you say that he cannot put them back he will not open. Don’t let him open! Then he diminishes the enjoyment of the holiday. Rabbi Aḥa said, he may put them back on condition that he not put them back completely. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, if there is no door there. But if there is a door he uses the door.

Mishnah

6 The House of Shammai say that one may not take the pestle to cut meat on it, but the House of Hillel permit. The House of Shammai say that one may not give the hide to be trampled on nor lift it unless meat was left on it, but the House of Hillel permit. The House of Shammai say that one may not remove the shutters but the House of Hillel permit even to return them.

Halakhah

“The House of Shammai say that one may not take the pestle to cut meat on it, but the House of Hillel permit.” Therefore, using it for something other than cutting meat is forbidden. This is what Rabbi Abba, Ḥinena bar Shelemiah in the name of Rav said: The Sages agree with Rabbi Neḥemiah about the press, the plank, and the mace, the press with which he presses, the plank on which one beats them, the mace with which he smashes them.

“The House of Shammai say that one may not give the hide.” They agree that one may not scrape it. What case are we discussing? If it is connected to it, it is part of its body. If it is separated, it parallels what Rabbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, Ḥinena from Cartagena in the name of Rabbi Hoshaia: On a saddle bag full of coins one puts a loaf and may move it. As the following: an Antiochene cooking vessel fell on Rabbi Jeremiah on the Sabbath, they thought about it and lifted it. This was not because practice follows Rabbi Hoshaia but to keep Rabbi Jeremiah out of danger. They agree that one may not salt it. It was stated: but he might salt meat on it to roast. The colleagues in the name of Rav: A person may salt a large quantity even though he will be able to eat only a small quantity of it. Rabbi Aḥa in the name of Rav: One uses a pretext to salt, and uses a pretext to salt again, he salts here and salts there until he has salted everything.

Mishnah

7 The House of Shammai say, one may bring neither a small child, nor a lulav, nor a Torah scroll into the public domain, but the House of Hillel permit it.

Halakhah

Therefore not an adult? Rabbi Samuel, the son of Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, even an adult is permitted. Why was it stated “a small child”? It comes to inform you of the strength of the House of Shammai, how far their restrictions go. Samuel was carried from bed to bed. Rabbi Zeʿira said before Rabbi Yasa, let us say that he was physically weak. He told him, he was healthier than I and you. It was stated, Rabbi Ishmael ben Rabbi Yose says, the stones on which we sat in our youth make war against us in our old age. Rabbi Jonah instructed his colleagues, do not sit on the outside stone benches of the assembly of Bar Ulla because they are cold. Rav commanded his students, do not sit on the outside table at the assembly of Issy because it is cold. Rabbi Abba went down to bathe in the public baths of Tiberias, leaning on two Goths. They fell down and he lifted them up, they fell down and he lifted them up. One asked him, what is this? He said to them, I preserved my strength for my old age. Rav Huna did not come to the house of assembly. Rav Qatina asked, was it not stated that one carries the physically weaks?

Rav Huna instructed the Head of the Dispersion to go out in a chair. Rav Ḥisda asked, was it not stated, one does not go out in a chair, whether men or women? Even a student of the Sages does not err in this matter, and Rabbi Huna erred? Rabbi Jeremiah instructed Bar Gerontios the healer to be carried on a sheet when going to visit the sick on the Sabbath. Miasha the grandson of Rabbi Joshua ben Levi was carried on a sheet when going to preach in public on the Sabbath. Rabbi Zeriqan said to Rabbi Zeʿira, when you go to the South, ask about this. They asked Rabbi Simon. Rabbi Simon told them in the name of Rabbi Joshua ben Levi, not only for the needs of the public but also for a potential public need. Example: Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Abba Mari, and Rabbi Mattaniah instructed to bring bread to Ursicinus on the Sabbath, for a potential public need.

It was stated: And not the key, the House of Hillel permit. And Rav Hoshaia the son of Rav Isaac said, this refers to a key to food supplies, but not to a key to implements. But did not Rabbi Abbahu sit and teach, with a key to a jewel box in his hand? He had pepper inside.

Mishnah

8 The House of Shammai are saying, one may not bring ḥallahNumbers 15:20 and priests’ parts to a Cohen on the holiday, whether they have been separated the day before or on the day itself, but the House of Hillel permit. The House of Shammai said to the House of Hillel, the cases are equivalent. Ḥallah and priests’ parts are a gift to the Cohen, and the priestly contribution is a gift to the Cohen. Just as one may not bring the priestly contribution to the Cohen, so one may not bring these parts. The House of Hillel said to them, no. If you mention the priestly contribution which he has no right to separate, what can you say about the gifts which he may separate?

Halakhah

It was stated: “Rabbi Judah said, the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel did not disagree that one may bring parts which were separated on the holiday, as well as parts which were separated before the start of the holiday with parts separated on the holiday. Where did they disagree? About parts which were separated before the start of the holiday by themselves, where the House of Shammai forbid and the House of Hillel permit.”

It is difficult for the House of Hillel, could he not have the right to separate the priestly contribution? Consider a case in which he made a stipulation! One because of the other. And why was ḥallah stated? Because of ḥallah which was separated on the holiday. As it was stated: “if one kneads dough on a holiday, he separates its ḥallah on the holiday. If he kneaded it before the holiday but forgot to take its ḥallah, it is forbidden to move it, there is no need to say, to take ḥallah from it.” If he mixed water and flour? He only mentioned “kneaded,” so not when he mixed? Rabbi Samuel, brother of Rabbi Berekhiah, said: understand this as a case in which the dough was impure where he takes ḥallah only at the end. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, it should have been the rule that for pure dough one should take ḥallah only at the end. They instituted that one should take it at the start, so that the dough would not become impure. The Mishnah is about the holiday of Passover, therefore on Pentecost and Tabernacles it is permitted. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun, Rabbi Ḥuna in the name of Rabbi Aḥa, even on Pentecost and Tabernacles it is prohibited, because no work may be done on themExodus 12:16.

Mishnah

9 The House of Shammai say that spices are pounded in a wooden mortar, and salt in a container or with a cooking spoon. But the House of Hillel say that spices are pounded normally in a stone mortar and salt in a wooden mortar.

Halakhah

Could he not pound the day before? The colleagues in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan, because they taste bitter, Rabbi Zeʿira in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan, because they lose their taste.

Samuel pounded on the side of the mortar. Rav said, anything that is pounded may be pounded in its ordinary way. Rav Huna, Rabbi Jeremiah, Rabbi Immi in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Garlic, and cress, and mustard seed are pounded in their ordinary way. Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: Anyone who makes oenanthium on a Sabbath is liable because of compounding. Is it therefore permitted on a holiday? Rabbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rabbi Jeremiah: Making oenanthium on a holiday is forbidden because of compounding. Isaac Gold asked Rabbi Joḥanan, may one pound for spiced wine on a holiday? He said to him, it is permitted. Rabbi Isaac from Atosha asked Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish, may one pound to prepare spiced wine on a holiday? He said to him, it is permitted, give it to me and I will drink. Rabbi Zeʿira asked Rabbi Abbahu: Would one not act well in pounding it the day before? He said to him, yes. Rabbi Abbahu’s position is inconsistent. Here he says permitted, and there he says forbidden. But since Rabbi Abbahu knew that Rabbi Zeʿira was restrictive, and that they are restrictive, therefore he agreed with them. Some want to say that so he said to him: If one wants it to be good he will not pound it the day before. Rabbi Zeʿira asked Kallidromos, the slave of Rabbi Judah the Prince, does your master pound to prepare spiced wine on a holiday? He said to him yes, and all kinds of cuts of meat. Rabbi Isaac ben Rabbi Elazar in the name of Rabbi Immi, the father of Rabbi Eudaimon of Sepphoris. Where do they disagree? For grilling. But for the pot it is permitted. Rabbi Naḥum said, Rabbi Samuel bar Abba asked about noodle dough. To let it dry is forbidden, for the pot it is permitted, whether one may make some for each purpose is uncertain.

Mishnah

10 If one selects out legumes on the holiday, the House of Shammai say he picks out the food and eats. But the House of Hillel say, he picks out normally into his chest or a basket, but not on a tablet, not with a fine sieve nor with a coarse sieve. Rabban Gamliel says, also he soaks them and skims them off.

Halakhah

Rabbi Jonah asked, if he did this on the Sabbath, in the opinion of the House of Shammai would he be liable? Rabbi Yose said to him, why not? If he did it on the Sabbath would he not be liable according to the House of Hillel? And here he is liable. Rabbi Mana said, my father Rabbi Jonah said it correctly. The question applies only to the House of Shammai. Why? Because the category of selecting was permitted on the holiday, nothing of the category of selecting was permitted on the Sabbath.

If one selected food out of food, Ḥizqiah said, one is liable, Rabbi Joḥanan said, one is not liable. A baraita disagrees with Ḥizqiah: He selects and eats, he selects and puts on the table. Rabbi Abun bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rabbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: understand this as a case in which guests were eating what was served. But was it not stated: On condition that he did not select all of its kind? In the opinion of Ḥizqiah, because one who selects on the Sabbath is liable. In the opinion of Rabbi Joḥanan, because one who selects normally at another place is liable. In the opinion of Ḥizqiah, even rings among rings, even pomegranates among pomegranates. Or is it so, even people among people? How is this? Everybody agrees with Rabbi Immi’s case. For Rabbi Immi had guests, he served them lupines and beans. He told them, be careful to eat the artichokes at the end.

It was stated: One neither selects, grinds, nor sifts. Anyone who selects, or grinds, or sifts, on the Sabbath is stoned. On a holiday he receives the forty lashes. But did we not state: “he picks out normally into his chest or a basket”? Rabbi Ḥanina from Antonia said, this is Rabban Gamliel’s, for “Rabban Gamliel says, also he soaks them and skims them off.” And was it not stated, in the household of Rabban Gamliel they were grinding pepper in their mills? It is permitted to grind but forbidden to select. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun: Normal grinding was not permitted. And what is the source for the prohibition against selecting, grinding, or sifting? Rabbi Aḥa in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish: No work may be done on themExodus 12:16 up to and you must guard the unleavened breadExodus 12:17. Rabbi Yose asked, but did one not infer cooking only from there? Rabbi Yose did not say so, but Rabbi Yose in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish: Only what can be eaten by every person this alone may be made by youExodus 12:16, up to and you must guard the unleavened bread. Ḥizqiah stated in disagreement: only, every, person, are diminutions, not to select, nor to grind, nor to sift on a holiday.

Rabbi Zeʿira, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Samuel: One who filters is liable because of selecting. Rabbi Zeʿira said, it is more reasonable that it should be because of sifting. Rabbi Jonah and Rabbi Yose both said, at the start we were saying that Rabbi Zeʿira said it correctly, since as in sifting the flour is below and the coarse meal on top, so in filtering wine the wine is at the bottom and the yeast on top, but our argument had no substance. Why? Because the category of selecting was permitted, the category of filtering was permitted. The category of selecting was permitted: “he selects normally, on his chest, or from a pot.” Also the category of filtering was permitted, “on a holiday one puts into one which was hanging.” But the category of sifting was not permitted. As Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yaqe said in the name of Rav Judah, One does not sift again the flour but one may pass it through the back of the sieve. If you say it is because of sifting, it should be forbidden. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, it does not follow Rabbi Judah, for it was stated in the name of Rabbi Judah, also preparations for making food are permitted. There is a question about the following: following the rabbis, may one sift again the flour through the back of the sieve?

Mishnah

11 The House of Shammai say, on a holiday one sends only portions, but the House of Hillel say one sends domestic animals, wild animals, and birds, whether alive or slaughtered. One sends wines, oils, and flour, and legumes, but no grains. Rabbi Simeon permits grains.

Halakhah

It is difficult for the House of Shammai. A large thigh one is permitted to send, a small kid goat one is not permitted to send. Rabbi Yudan said, this applies only if he carries it. But if he leads it and it walks, what is the difference if he leads it to deliver it or he leads it to let it drink? The Great Rabbi Hoshaia asked Rabbi Jehudah the Prince, did you hear from your father whether one may move a chicken? Certainly if it was ready for slaughter it is permitted, otherwise it is forbidden. But are not all chickens ready for slaughter? The question is, maybe even if it is not ready. He told him in a whisper. He asked him, why are you telling me in a whisper? He said to him, just as I heard it in a whisper, so I am telling you in a whisper.

It was stated: “One sends wheat because when crushed it is food, beans because when wet they are food, barley because it is animal feed.” Did we not state so in the name of Rabbi Simeon? For every living being, animals are also included. The argument of Rabbi Simeon parallels that of his teacher Rabbi Akiva. Just as Rabbi Akiva said, for every living beingExodus 12:16, animals are also included, so Rabbi Simeon said, for every living being, animals are also included.

Mishnah

12 One may send garments whether sewn or not sewn, and even if they are not needed for the holiday. But not a sandal with nails nor a shoe which is not sewn. Rabbi Judah says, also no white shoe because it needs a craftsman. This is the principle: Anything which one may use on the holiday one may send.

Halakhah

This is the meaning of the Mishnah: Because it needs the shoemaker’s form. Is the Mishnah Rabbi Eliezer’s? As we have stated there, “the shoe on the shoemaker’s last, Rabbi Eliezer declares pure but the Sages declare impure.” It is the opinion of everybody. It is different here since he is effectively finishing an implement on the holiday. It was stated: One does not dismantle a shoe from the last on the holiday, but one dismantles a shoe from the last on the intermediate days of the holiday.

May one make cheese from milk on the holiday? If you are saying so, he will milk and make cheese on the holiday for the workday.

Rabbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaul stated: It is forbidden to send jewelry. Rabbi Mana said, they prohibited only sending, therefore to wear is permitted. It was stated: “One may move the shofar to let a child drink, the writing tablet, and the bell, and the mirror, to cover vessels.” Rabbi Abun said, a Mishnah says that it is forbidden to wear it, as we have stated: “Anything which one may use on the holiday one may send.” If you say that it is permitted to wear it should be permitted to send. And what does the following statement mean: “One may move the shofar to let a child drink, the writing tablet, and the bell, and the mirror, to cover vessels”? If they are called implements. So far this concerns gold jewelry. Does it also apply to silver jewelry? They said in the name of Rabbi Jeremiah forbidden, and they said in the name of Rabbi Jeremiah permitted. Rabbi Ḥizqiah said, I know the beginning and the end. Small girls were growing up in Rabbi Jeremiah’s dwelling. He went and asked Rabbi Zeʿira, who told him: do not forbid and do not permit.

Mishnah

1 If the holiday falls on a Friday a person may not cook on the holiday specifically for the Sabbath but he may cook for the holiday and if food remains, it remains, or he prepares a dish before the holiday and relies on it for the Sabbath. The House of Shammai say two dishes, but the House of Hillel say one dish. But they agree about a fish and the egg on it that they are two dishes. If he ate it or it was lost, he may not start cooking based on it, but if even a tiny amount was left, he relies on it for the Sabbath.

Halakhah

“If the holiday falls on a Friday,” etc. It is written, what you baked bake, and what you cooked cookExodus 16:23. Rabbi Eliezer says, one bakes on the basis of the baked, and one cooks on the basis of the cooked. Rabbi Joshua says, one bakes and cooks on the basis of the cooked. What is the reason given by Rabbi Eliezer? What you baked bake, and what you cooked cookExodus 16:23. What is the reason given by Rabbi Joshua? What you will bake and what you will cook cookExodus 16:23. Rabbi Eliezer said, this follows the one who said that the Sabbath was given at Marah. But according to the one who said that the Sabbath was given at Alush, they are at Alush and the warning is given at Alush. Consider this, from the Torah it is forbidden and an eruv tavshilin makes it permitted? Rabbi Abbahu said, it would be logical that one should bake and cook on the holiday for the Sabbath. If you allowed this, one would bake and cook on the holiday for a weekday. Consider this, one makes the beds on the holiday for the Sabbath, but one does not bake and cook on the holiday for the Sabbath. Rabbi Ila said, why may one make the beds on the holiday for the Sabbath? Since one may make the beds on Friday night for the Sabbath day. Could one bake and cook on the holiday for the Sabbath? One may not bake and cook on the night of the Sabbath for the Sabbath day.

Rabbi Kahana the son of Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, on condition that he not use a pretext. The Mishnah follows Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar as it was stated: “One does not make food on a holiday for use after the holiday.” Also, it was stated: “A woman may fill a pot with meat even if one eats only one piece from it, a kettle with hot water even if one drinks only one cup from it. But baking, she should bake only what she needs.” For it is stated: “Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, a woman may fill the entire oven with bread because the bread turns out well if the oven is filled.” Rav Ḥuna preached following Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar. Rabbi Joḥanan preached to the Tiberians according to the opinion of Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar. He taught this as a legal ruling, but they took it as a practical instruction. Some wanted to say that he gave a practical instruction. They came and asked him and he taught it as a legal ruling, and they preached again but we do not know whether as a legal ruling or as a practical instruction. Rabbi Abba bar Zavdi said, Rabbi Abbahu instructed following Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar.

Rabbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: He has to say, for me and for anyone who made no eruv. If somebody made no eruv, others who made an eruv are allowed to prepare for him from his own provisions. Rabbi Zeriqan in the name of Rabbi Zeʿura: Only if he transfers his property to them, otherwise they would be preparing his own food for him. If somebody did not make an eruv and neither did others, he may fry a fish. Rav Ḥuna said, he may heat hot water. Samuel said, he may light a candle. Rabbi Ḥiyya stated, “he fills an amphora of water and lights his candle.” “It happened that somebody put a vow on his son to study Torah. The case came before Rabbi Yose ben Ḥalaphta who permitted him to fill him an amphora with water and to light the candle for him.”

Rabbi Ḥiyya the Elder came to his house. They told him, we forgot to make eruv. He asked them, are there any peas left from yesterday? They said to him, yes. Does this imply, even one kind is sufficient? It contained spinach. Does this imply even if the amount is less than the volume of an olive? It was a full measure. Does that imply that it does not need a declaration? Rav Ḥisda said, the Great Rabbi Ḥiyya had made a stipulation.

It was stated, “Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel agree that there are two dishes. Where do they disagree? About the fish and the egg on it, where the House of Shammai are saying it is one dish while the House of Hillel are saying they are two dishes. Everybody agrees that if he applied the egg on salted fish, or cut leeks under the fish, or cooked two kinds in a pot, that they are counted as two dishes.” And practice follows the student’s opinion.

Rav said, I say it must be at least the volume of an olive. Does this not disagree with Rabbi Joḥanan, since Rabbi Joḥanan said, for me and for anyone who did not make an eruv? A baraita supports Rabbi Joḥanan: An eruv requires no minimum amount, either at the start or at the end. “On a holiday which falls on a Friday one makes eruv neither for courtyards nor for domains, the words of Rabbi Meïr. But the Sages are saying, one makes eruv for courtyards but does not make eruv for domains.” One makes eruv for courtyards, because it allows something which is allowed to him, but does not make eruv for domains, because you would permit him something which is prohibited to him. Some Tannaim reverse these opinions. Rabbi Eleazar said, since some Tannaim reverse these opinions, we have to take notice. Rabbi Jeremiah in the name of Rabbi Zeʿura: Anyone who wants to act properly makes the eruv the day before. Rabbi Yudan said, this applies when he did not make eruv tavshilin, but if he made eruv tavshilin it is permitted. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun asked, does eruv tavshilin permit dividers?

Mishnah

2 If it falls after the Sabbath, the House of Shammai say that one immerses everything before the start of the Sabbath, but the House of Hillel say implements before the Sabbath and people on the Sabbath.

Halakhah

The Mishnah is about large implements, but for small implements one may use a pretext and immerse them. Rabbi Hoshaya stated, a person may fill an impure vessel from the cistern, and use this as a pretext and immerse it. If his pail fell into the cistern, his vessel fell into the cistern, he may use this as a pretext and immerse it. Two Amoraim, one referred to implements with primary impurity, the other referred to implements with derivative impurity. The one who referred to derivative impurity objected to the one who referred to primary impurity, even on a weekday would it not need sundown? He said to him, about one who wants to eat his unconsecrated food in purity.

All who are obligated to immerse themselves immerse themselves normally on the Ninth of Av and on the Day of Atonement. Rabbi Ḥanina the second-in-command of the Cohanim said, Our God’s House deserves that the Cohanim should forgo one immersion for its sake. Rabbi Levi preached according to the statement of Rabbi Ḥanina the second-in-command of the Cohanim.

“And people on the Sabbath.” Since a man after an emission of semen immerses himself on the Sabbath.

Mishnah

3 They also agree that one lets the water in a stone vessel touch but not immerse. One immerses from stage to stage and from group to group on the holiday.

Halakhah

The Mishnah does not follow Rabbi, as it was stated: “One does not immerse from stage to stage on the holiday and one does not let the water touch in a stone vessel to purify it on the Sabbath, the opinion of Rabbi. But the Sages say one immerses from stage to stage on the holiday and one lets the water touch in a stone vessel in purity on the Sabbath.” It only said, in a stone vessel. Therefore not in a wooden vessel.

What does “from stage to stage” mean? If he wants to work his dough and then his winepress, or his winepress and then his dough, he has to immerse his implements. What does “from group to group” mean? He was eating with one group and then changed his mind to eat with another group, then he has to immerse.

Mishnah

4 The House of Shammai say, one brings well-being offerings without leaning on them, but not elevation offerings, but the House of Hillel say one brings both well-being and elevation offerings and one leans on them.

Halakhah

The House of Shammai say, leaning on the animal at a different time was permitted. But the House of Hillel say, leaning on the animal at a different time was not permitted. What does leaning on the animal at a different time mean? From the day before. Rabbi Zeʿira said, everybody agrees that he did not fulfill his obligation regarding the reparation offering of a sufferer from skin disease if he leaned on the day before, he fulfilled his obligation with voluntary well-being offerings for which he leaned on the day before. Where do they disagree? The festival well-being offerings. The House of Shammai treat them like voluntary well-being offerings, the House of Hillel treat them like the reparation offering of a sufferer from skin disease. Rabbi Yasa said, what you are saying, he did not fulfill his obligation regarding the reparation offering of a sufferer from skin disease if he leaned on the day before, applies only at the prescribed time. If its prescribed time has passed it becomes like voluntary well-being offerings.

“The House of Hillel said to the House of Shammai: Since when I forbid work for a private person I permit it for Heaven, when it is permitted for the private person is it not logical that it be permitted for Heaven? “The House of Shammai said to them, vows and voluntary gifts are proof, since they are permitted to the private person but forbidden to Heaven. “The House of Hillel said to them, no. If you are speaking about vows and voluntary gifts which have no fixed time, what does this imply for the festival offering which has a fixed time? “The House of Shammai answered them, the festival offering has no fixed time since if he did not offer it on the first day, he may offer it on the second day, if he did not offer it on the second day, he may offer it on the third day. “The House of Hillel told them, the festival offering has a fixed time, for if he did not offer it on the holiday of pilgrimage he may not offer it after the holiday. “The House of Shammai said to them, is it not already said: only what can be eaten by any person this alone may be made for youExodus 12:16? “The House of Hillel answered them, is that a proof? For you it may not be made, but it is made for Heaven. “Abba Shaul says it was based on another reason: Since when your stove is closed down, your Master’s stove is open, when your stove is open it is only logical that your Master’s stove should be open. Another explanation: It is not right for your table should be full but the table of your Creator be empty.”

Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish was passing by the school when he heard them reciting the verse, they sacrificed animal sacrifices and brought elevation sacrifices the next day1 Chronicles 29:21. He said, the one who pauses follows the House of Shammai, the one who reads it as one sentence follows the House of Hillel. One understands elevation sacrifices the next day, but well-being sacrifices the next day? Are not well-being sacrifices brought following the House of Shammai? Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, David died on Pentecost, all of Israel were in acute mourning and they brought the next day.

“It happened that Hillel the Elder brought his elevation offering to the Temple courtyard and leaned on it. The students of Shammai ganged up on him. He began moving its tail, said to them, look, it is a female and I brought it as well-being sacrifice, and kept them talking about other matters until they left. “After some time the House of Shammai became strong and they wanted to fix practice following their words. There was Bava ben Bitay, one of the students of the House of Shammai, who realized that practice followed the House of Hillel. Once he entered the Temple courtyard and found it desolate. He said, the house of those who make our God’s House desolate will be desolate. What did he do? He sent and brought 3,000 sheep from Qedar sheep, checked them for defects, and displayed them on the Temple Mount. He said to them, listen to me, my brothers, the House of Israel. Anybody who wants to bring an elevation sacrifice may bring it and lean on it, to bring a well-being sacrifice may bring it and lean on it. At that moment, practice was fixed following the House of Hillel, and nobody said anything.” Rabbi Isaac ben Rabbi Eleazar said, this cup for breakfast has to be full, the worm in the wood comes from itself, any coal which does not cause a burn at the start will not cause one. “Again it happened that a student of Hillel brought his elevation offering to the Temple courtyard and leaned on it. A student of Shammai saw him and said to him, what is this leaning-on? He said to him, why not be silent? He silenced him by a reprimand and he left.”

Mishnah

5 The House of Shammai are saying that a person may prepare hot water for his feet only if it is drinkable, but the House of Hillel permit. One may make a fire and warm himself by it.

Halakhah

There are two explanations for this: in the opinion of the House of Shammai if he drank from it, in the opinion of the House of Hillel if it is drinkable.

“One may make a fire and warm himself by it.” This is everybody’s opinion on condition that there is a kettle by the fire. Another explanation is possible: In the opinion of the House of Shammai, on condition that there is a kettle by the fire. In the opinion of the House of Hillel, even if there is no kettle by the fire.

Hot water heated on a holiday and similarly hot water heated on Friday for the Sabbath, Rav and Samuel disagreed. One said, one uses it to wash his face, hands, and feet, while the other said, one uses it to wash his 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: Is it permitted for drinking but forbidden for taking a bath? He told him, if you saw a eunuch embracing your wife, would you not feel bad about it? He said, yes. He asked him, can he have intercourse with her at all? He said, so that she does not become promiscuous. He told him, here too, so that they do not become lax. After he left, his students told him, you brushed this man aside with a stick, what do you answer us? He said to them: Is it not already written only what is being eaten by everybody, this alone may be made by youExodus 12:16.

Mishnah

6 In three matters Rabban Gamliel is restrictive following the words of the House of Shammai: One does not store away hot water from the holiday to the Sabbath, one does not raise the candelabrum on the holiday, and one does not bake his bread as large loaves and uses thin cakes instead. Rabban Gamliel said, never in my father’s house did they bake their bread as large loaves and uses thin cakes instead. They said to him, what can we do about your father’s house who were restrictive for themselves but allowed all of Israel to bake their bread as large loaves and on charcoal.

Halakhah

Abba bar Rav Huna said, this is if he did not make an eruv tavshilin for himself. But if he made an eruv tavshilin for himself it is permitted. What is the difference between a dish and hot water? One usually eats from a dish, but one does not usually drink hot water.

“One does not raise the candelabrum on the holiday.” What you are saying is about a composite candelabrum, but not about a candelabrum which is not composite. As the following: Rabbi Yose’s students were sitting together. The candelabrum fell down before them, each of them slipped away individually and went away.

“One does not bake his bread as large loaves but as thin cakes.” Because this makes him work harder he bakes only what is needed. Rabbi Aḥa understood it from the following: what is this great burning rageDeuteronomy 29:23. The Sages understand it from the following, and there were three bags of white-flour baked goods on my headGenesis 40:16.

Mishnah

7 He also gave three lenient rulings: On the holiday one sweeps between the couches and puts down incense, and one makes a helmeted kid-goat on Passover night, but the Sages forbid.

Halakhah

“In Rabban Gamliel’s house one used to sweep between the couches. Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Ṣadoq said, I ate many times at Rabban Gamliel’s and they did not sweep between the couches, but they had spread sheets on the ground and when the guests left they folded them. They said to him, he is permitted to do this even on the Sabbath. In Rabban Gamliel’s house one used to put down incense in a barrel. Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Ṣadoq said, I ate many times at Rabban Gamliel’s and they did not put down incense in a barrel, but they were burning incense in chests on holiday eve, and when the guests arrived they opened them. They said to him, he is permitted to do this even on the Sabbath.”

“And one makes a helmeted kid-goat on Passover night, but the Sages forbid.” “What is a helmeted kid-goat? Entirely roasted, its head, on its hooves, and on its innards. If he parboiled part of it, or cooked part of it, this is not a helmeted kid-goat. One serves helmeted kid-goat in the evening of the first day of Tabernacles, and on the first day of Passover. One serves helmeted calf on the first night of Passover but not helmeted kid-goat.” It was stated: Rabbi Yose said, Theudas of Rome led the people of Rome to eat helmeted kid-goat on Passover nights. The Sages sent and said to him, if you were not Theudas, would we not excommunicate you? Who was Theudas? Rabbi Ḥananiah said, because he was providing for the rabbis. Are you not causing the public to eat consecrated food outside the Temple? And anybody causing the public to eat consecrated food outside the Temple must be excommunicated.

Mishnah

8 Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah permitted three things but the Sages forbid. His cow was going out with a strip between her horns, and one grooms an animal with combs with small teeth on a holiday, and one grinds peppers in their proper mill. Rabbi Judah says, one does not groom an animal on the holiday with a comb with small teeth because it produces bruises, but one may groom with a comb with large teeth. But the Sages are saying one uses neither a comb with small teeth nor one with large teeth.

Halakhah

Rabbi Abba: Both Rav and Samuel are saying, the words of the Sages are that even pulling her with them is forbidden. Rabbi Abba in the name of Samuel: If its horns were drilling it is permitted. Rabbi Yose said, I pointed out the difficulty before Rabbi Abba and he said, we only stated: “the female camel with a nose ring.” Rabbi Zeʿira in the name of Samuel: A badly behaved ox goes out with his bridle, our teachers in the Diaspora do this. Rabbi Aḥa, Rabbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rabbi Jonathan, Rabbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya: A badly behaved donkey goes out with his bridle. Rabbi Illa, Rav Judah in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Rabbi Ḥiyya: A dog goes out with his muzzle. If it is to punish him, it is forbidden. If it is to keep him from eating his bridle, it is permitted.

Ganiva said, he continued to teach this as the ruling. Rabbi Jonah from Bostra asked, if he continued to teach this as the ruling, is that what we were stating: “against the will of the Sages”? Rabbi Jehudah bar Pazi: Bar Delaya stated, they told him, either leave our company or remove the strip from between its horns. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, he was shielding himself against them. Rabbi Ḥananiah said, it went out once and his teeth became black from the fasting and self-denial. Rabbi Idi from Ḥotra said, it was his wife. What is the source for calling his wife “calf”? “Had you not plowed with my calf you would not have solved my riddleJudges 14:18.” There, they are saying, it was his neighbor. Is anybody punished for his neighbor’s behavior? Rabbi Qiris from Irma: To teach you that if anybody has the possibility to protest and he does not protest, he bears responsibility for the damage.

What is קִידוּר? Combs with small teeth which cause bruises. קִירְצוּף, combs with large teeth which do not cause bruises.

“But the Sages are saying one uses neither a comb with small teeth nor one with large teeth.” Not one with small teeth, so that one does not cause a bruise, nor with large teeth, so that one does not tear out hair.

“In the household of Rabban Gamliel they were grinding pepper in their mills. Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Ṣadoq said, my father once ate at Rabban Gamliel’s when they brought before him oily fish sauces containing ground pepper. When he tasted this, he put it away. They said to him, do not worry, they were ground the day before.” But could Rabbi Ṣadoq not share Rabban Gamliel’s mistake and eat? He refrained so that Rabban Gamliel’s example would not be used to permit work.

Mishnah

9 The pepper mill is impure because of three vessels, because of a container, and as a metal vessel, and as a sieve.

Halakhah

The lowest part as a container, the uppermost as a metal vessel, and the middle part as a sieve.

Mishnah

10 A baby carriage is impure as support, may be used on the Sabbath, but may be pulled only over implements. Rabbi Judah said, no vessels are drawn except a carriage because it compresses.

Halakhah

We have stated: “A person may not drag a bed, or a chair, or a footstool, or a armchair, because he makes a groove, but Rabbi Simeon permits.” Rabbi Abba in the name of Rav Ḥuna, Rabbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rabbi Zeʿira, Rabbi Yose in the name of Rabbi Ila: The Sages admit to Rabbi Simeon that one may move a chair whose legs are stuck in mud on the Sabbath. Similarly it is permitted to return it. Rabbi Yose said, we also have stated: “and they may be removed on the Sabbath.” Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, this follows Rabbi Simeon’s opinion. Rabbi Yose said, a Mishnah says so, “one may not drag any implement except a carriage because it compresses.”

Mishnah

1 One does not catch fish from enclosures and one does not feed them. But one catches wild animals and birds from enclosures and feeds them. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, not all enclosures are equal. This is the principle: any animal that still has to be caught is forbidden, but any animal that does not have to be caught is permitted.

Halakhah

“One does not catch fish,” etc. Rabbi Ḥinena said, our Mishnah does not follow Rabbi Judah, as we have stated there: “someone who catches a bird for a cage or a deer for a house is liable,” therefore for a garden or a enclosure he is not liable. Rabbi Judah’s position is inconsistent since we have stated: “one does not catch fish from enclosures and one does not feed them,” therefore for a garden or a enclosure he is not liable? The rabbis’ position is inconsistent, as we have stated there: “but the Sages say, a bird for a cage and a deer for a garden, or a courtyard, or a enclosure,” and we have stated, “but one catches wild animals and fowl from enclosures and feeds them,” therefore not for a garden or a enclosure? One refers to a covered courtyard, the other to an uncovered courtyard. But did we not state “a garden”? Can you say a covered garden? Here it is a large one, and there it is a small one. Rabbi Ulla said, they asked before Rabbi Aḥa, how should this be stated? In any case where the animal still has to be caught one is liable, but if the animal does not have to be caught one is not liable? He answered them, do we not deal with the case that he corrals them into it? But “in any case where the animal still has to be caught it is forbidden, but if the animal does not have to be caught it is permitted.” Rabbi Samuel, Rabbi Berekhiah’s brother, said: any animal that needs nets needs catching, what does not need nets does not need catching.

“One may slaughter from containers, one may not slaughter from fishermen’s nets or from traps.” Rabbi Yose bar Abun in the name of Rabbi Immi: a net of warp. Samuel said, one may catch with a barrel. Rav said, the sluice of a water canal is permitted. Rabbi Yudan said, those between the plates.

Mishnah

2 One may not take from traps for wild animals, or birds, or fish which he set before the holiday unless it was known that they were caught before nightfall. It happened that a Gentile brought fish to Rabban Gamliel who said they are permitted, but I do not want to accept them from him.

Halakhah

How can one know? If the trap was sprung, it is certain that they were caught while it was still daytime. But if the trap was not sprung, it is certain that they were not caught while it was still daytime. And even if the trap was sprung, one may still be concerned that they were not caught while it was still day. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, if it was set in a forest. You should know that it is so since we have stated “fish.” Are fish not there where they are present? Also here at a place where game and birds are found.

Rabbi Zeʿira in the name of Rav, they wanted to say, they are permitted the next day. Rabbi Ḥizqiah and Rabbi Uziel the son of Rabbi Onias of Barat Hauran: They are actually permitted. They wanted to say, the uncertainty about it made it permitted. Rabbi Ḥanina and Rabbi Jonathan both say, if in doubt whether it was prepared it is forbidden. But Rabbi Joḥanan said, if in doubt whether it was prepared it is permitted.

The Elder Rabbi Ḥiyya and Rabbi Simeon ben Rabbi, one said a Gentile’s goods require preparation, the other said, a Gentile’s goods do not require preparation. We did not know who said this and who said that. Since Rav once did not come before the Elder Rabbi Ḥiyya who asked him, where have you been? He told him: a caravan passed by and I ate figs from them, this implies that he said, a Gentile’s goods do not require preparation.

A student of Rabbi Simai went to Antipatris, they brought him Morocco-plums and he ate. A student of Rabbi Joshua ben Levi went there, they brought him Morocco-plums and he did not eat. He came and told it to his teacher who said to him, this one follows the argument of Rabbi Simai, as Rabbi Simai said, a Gentile’s goods do not require preparation. Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Joshua ben Levi: The red grapes in a vineyard are forbidden. Rav Huna in the name of Rav: The hard dates on palm leaves are permitted.

Mishnah

3 One should not slaughter a dangerously ill animal unless it is known that one may eat from it an olive-sized piece of roasted meat during daytime. Rabbi Akiva says, even raw at the place of slaughter. If he slaughtered in the fields he should not bring it by a yoke or a small yoke, but should bring it limb by limb in his hands.

Halakhah

Rabbi Abba in the name of the rabbis there: If he slaughtered it and wolves ate its intestines it is qualified, for the intestines are presumed to be sound. Should one not worry that maybe they were punctured? The intestines are presumed to be sound. It was stated: But one may bring it on its hide. What does he do? He leaves one limb on it and brings it together with it.

Mishnah

4 If a firstborn animal fell into a cistern, Rabbi Judah says, an expert should go down and inspect it, if it has a defect he may lift it and slaughter, Rabbi Simeon says, any whose defect was not recognizable on the eve of the holiday is not prepared.

Halakhah

Rabbi Judah’s position seems inconsistent since we stated there, “Rabbi Judah says, if it was not a carcass before the Sabbath it is forbidden since it is not prepared.” And here he says so? Rabbi Judah follows his own opinion since Rabbi Judah said, expert inspection is not required by the Torah. Rabbi Ḥuna in the name of Rabbi Abba: It is Rabbi Judah’s since Rabbi Judah gives the same rules for inspecting a firstborn animal as inspecting ṭerefah. As you are saying there, one inspects for ṭerefah on a holiday, similarly one inspects a firstborn animal on the holiday. Rabbi Yudan asked: Demay is required by rabbinic law, and inspecting for terefah is required by rabbinic law. Since you are saying that one inspects for ṭerefah on a holiday, does one separate demay on a holiday? Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rabbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Any whose defect was visible on the eve of a holiday but the expert permitted it only on the holiday is not prepared. But was it not stated, a firstborn animal calf which was born from a terefah animal on the holiday is permitted. Rav Ḥisda said, explain it if the expert transgressed and saw it. A case came before Rabbi Immi who wanted to say, between Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Simeon, practice follows Rabbi Judah. Rav Hoshaia brought a baraita of Bar Qappara from the South and stated: But the Sages say, any whose defect was visible on the eve of a holiday but the expert permitted it only on the holiday is not prepared. He revised his opinion.

It and its youngLeviticus 22:28 fell into a cistern. Rabbi Eliezer said, he should lift the first one for the purpose of slaughtering it and slaughter it. The second one has to be provided for where it is so it should not die. Rabbi Joshua says, he should lift the first one for the purpose of slaughtering it and not slaughter it, and use a pretext and lift the second one. Even though he had no intention of slaughtering either of them, he is permitted. Rabbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked: Is Rabbi Eliezer’s position not inconsistent? Here he says, one is prohibited from using a pretext but there he says, one is permitted to use a pretext. There it is because “not to be seen nor found,” here, what do you have? Is Rabbi Joshua’s position not inconsistent? Here he says, one is permitted to use a pretext, but there he says, one is prohibited from using a pretext. Rabbi Idi said, here it is a rabbinic Sabbath prohibition, but there it involves liability for a purification offering. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Bun said, here it is to protect Jews’ money, there what do you have? Rabbi Isaac and Rabbi Joshia, one agreed with one of them, the other with the other.

Mishnah

5 One may not move an animal that dies from its place. It happened that Rabbi Tarfon was asked about this and about ḥallah which became impure. He entered the study hall and asked. They told him that one may not move them from their place.

Halakhah

Samuel said, the five Elders who instructed Rabbi Tarfon in Lydda erred. Rav Mattanah said, the case concerned a firstborn animal. Rabbi Abbin said, the Mishnah says so: “about this and about ḥallah which became impure.” Since that one was holy, so also this one was holy. They asked before Levi, may one inspect a torn animal in a dark house? He said, bring it outside. Rabbi Immi asked, we heard that one does not inspect cases of skin disease in a dark house. Did we hear that one does not inspect a torn animal in a dark house? Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, it is not for this reason, but for fear that it would be found ṭerefah and moving it would be forbidden. It turns out that Rav Mattanah follows Samuel, and Levi follows Rav. Rabbi Abba, Rav Judah in the name of Samuel said, practice follows Rabbi Judah.

Mishnah

6 One does not agree to buy a share in an animal on the holiday but one agrees to buy a share in it on the eve of the holiday and then slaughters and distributes among them. Rabbi Judah says a person may weigh against a vessel or against a dagger, but the Sages are saying that one does not use scales at all.

Halakhah

So additional participants may be added. If there were five they could be turned into ten.

It was stated: “A person may not say to another, I participate with you for a tetradrachma, I participate with you for a sheqel, but he may say to him, I am taking a half, a third, or a quarter.” The great Rabbi Ḥiyya and Rabbi Simeon ben Rabbi did weigh a firstborn animal piece against piece. When was this said? On a weekday. Therefore on a holiday it is forbidden because “one does not use scales at all.” Rav Avun, Rav Judah in the name of Samuel: Even to hang it on the scales because of the rats is forbidden. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, not for this reason but because we did state, “Rabbi Judah says a person may weigh against a vessel or against a dagger, but the Sages are saying that one does not use scales at all.” Therefore the first Tanna is of the opinion that one may use them, and therefore to hang it on the scales because of the rats is permitted.

It was stated: Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, a person may reassure himself by weighing in pounds, to know what he got. As the following: Rabbi Mana bought Sabbatical carob fruit. He asked Rabbi Ḥizqiah, who answered him, the rabbis usually follow the opinion of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel.

It was stated: “The butcher should not weigh in his hand and put down since his hand is like a pound weight, but he may cut with a knife and give to each one.”

It was stated: One does not strip by the feet on the holiday, nor on a weekday of a firstborn animal or disqualified consecrated animals. Rabbi Abun said, so that he should not be like one who uses it for work when it is still living. Rabbi Justus bar Shunem said, they decided that one should not form herds from them. Rabbi Mana said, everybody agrees that to make bellows is permitted, to beat them, the Elder Rabbi Ḥiyya and Rabbi Simeon ben Rabbi, one said it is forbidden, and the other said it is permitted. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun said, everybody agrees that to beat them is permitted, to make bellows, the Elder Rabbi Ḥiyya and Rabbi Simeon ben Rabbi, one said it is forbidden, and the other said it is permitted.

Mishnah

7 One does not sharpen the knife but one cleans it against another knife. A person may not say to the butcher, weigh me meat for a denar, but he slaughters and they distribute among themselves.

Halakhah

“One does not sharpen the knife on the holiday but one cleans it against another knife.” Rav Ḥisda said, this follows Rabbi Judah’s opinion. Rav Judah in the name of Samuel said, it is everybody’s opinion, to remove the fat on it.

Mishnah

8 A person may say to the grocer, fill me this vessel, but he may not specify the measure. Rabbi Judah says, if it was a measuring cup he may not fill it. It happened that Shaul ben Botnit filled his measures on the eve of the holiday and gave them to the customers on the holiday. Abba Shaul says, that is what one does on a holiday, but the Sages say one does this also on a weekday because of the emptying of the measuring vessels.

Halakhah

Rav Huna said, either less or more. Rabbi Eleazar said to Zeura bar Ḥama, fill me this vessel and tomorrow we will measure it.

It was stated: “Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Ṣadoq and Abba Shaul ben Botnit were grocers in Jerusalem. They used to fill their measuring vessels on the eve of a holiday and give them to the customers on the holiday. Rabbi Ḥananiah ben Aqabiah says, they also acted in the same way on the intermediate days of the holiday because of the emptying of the measuring vessels. He also collected 300 amphoras, and his colleague collected 300 amphoras. The Sages said to them, you did not have to do this, but since you were stringent with yourselves, they should be used for public needs.” Once he was sick and our teachers went to visit him. He said to them, you see this right hand which measured honestly.

Rabbi Ḥanina said, anybody who says that the All-Merciful is indulgent, may his intestines dissolve, for He is patient and then collects what He is owed. Rabbi Aḥa said, it is written, His surroundings are very hairyPsalms 50:3. He is exacting with them like a hair’s width. Rabbi Yose said, not for this reason, but because of what is written, He is awesome on His surroundingsPsalms 89:8, those near Him fear Him more than those far away.

Mishnah

9 A person may say to another, give me eggs or walnuts by number since people normally count these in their households.

Halakhah

It was stated: A person may say to another, give me a kelah of spices since people normally put a kelah of spices into their dishes.

Mishnah

1 Anyone who transports wine jugs from place to place may not transport them in a basket or box, but he may transport on his shoulder in front of him. Anyone who transports straw may not tie the box and throw it over his shoulder but must carry it in his hand. One may start from a pile of straw but not from wood in storage.

Halakhah

“Anyone who transports wine jugs,” etc. Rabbi Ḥanin bar Levi said, the Mishnah is about these little flasks of which one can carry two or three in one hand. If it is one big one, carrying it in front of him is usual, and carrying it on his back is usual. Just as you are saying, he brings it with its hide, similarly he brings it with its jar. Just as you are saying, he brings it limb by limb, similarly he brings it vial by vial.

Rabbi Yudan asked, may one move straw from a private domain to the public domain? Is that not the Mishnah, “anyone who transports straw may not tie the box and throw it over his shoulder”? The Mishnah follows the one who says, for every living beingExodus 12:16, animals are also included. What is his problem? Following the one who says, animals are not included. Also for the one who says, animals are included, the Mishnah is about transporting as feed. What is his problem? If he transports it as fuel.

Rabbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rabbi Yasa: It is forbidden to touch dried muqṣeh.

Rabbi said to his son Rabbi Simeon, climb up and bring us dried figs from the upper floor. He said to him, is it not forbidden because of muqṣeh? He retorted, are you still holding that? Nothing but figs and grapes can be forbidden because of muqṣeh! Rabbi Samuel bar Sosartai: Because they smell bad during the intermediate stage. Rabbi Zeʿira asked before Rabbi Yasa: Is it not reasonable to hold that the case involved split dates? He said to him, that is my opinion also. Rabbi Yose ben Rabbi Abun, Rabbi Isaac bar Bisna in the name of Rabbi Joḥanan: The case involved split dates.

“He said to him, nothing but figs and grapes can be forbidden because of muqṣeh!” Rabbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rabbi Abbahu: that is, concerning the Sabbath. But concerning tithes, everything may pass through a stage of muqṣeh. Rabbi Yose said, the Mishnah said so: “Dried figs when he presses them and in a bin if he planes with a roller.”

Mishnah

2 One does not take wood from a hut but only from what is leaning on it. One brings wood from the field from what was collected, but from a corral even what is strewn about. What is a corral? Any enclosure close to the village, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Yose says, any enclosure that one enters with a key, even inside the Sabbath domain.

Halakhah

“One does not take wood from a hut but only from what is leaning on it.” Samuel said, if he did not intend to fortify it. But if he intended to fortify it it is forbidden, unless he made a stipulation about it. So if he made a stipulation it is permitted. Rav Naḥman bar Jacob asked, may a person stipulate to tear down tents? One said before Samuel, if it was attached to it, and Rav Naḥman bar Jacob was wondering about it.

It was stated: “Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Simeon said, the Houses of Shammai and Hillel did not disagree that one brings wood from the field from what was collected, but from a corral even what was strewn about. Where did they disagree? About what is strewn about in a field, where the House of Shammai forbid but the House of Hillel permit.”

Rabbi Nathan said, The House of Shammai agree with the House of Hillel that one brings wood from the field from what was collected, and from a corral what was collected. Where did they disagree? About what is strewn about in a corral, where the House of Shammai forbid but the House of Hillel permit. Rabbi Yose in the name of Rav Jeremiah, Rabbi Ḥaninah brings it in the name of Rav: practice follows the restrictive opinion, including what was strewn about in a corral. Rabbi Judah’s opinion seems inconsistent, as we have stated there, “Rabbi Judah says, even if it only contains a cistern, or an irrigation ditch, or a cave, one carries in it.” And here he says so? Rabbi Mana said, Rabbi Judah treated it as a house.

Mishnah

3 One does not split logs nor a log which broke on the holiday. Also one splits neither with a hatchet, nor with a sickle, nor with a plane, but with a dagger. From a room full of produce which was blocked but became accessible one takes from the opening. Rabbi Meïr says, also one opens it up and takes.

Halakhah

“One does not split logs nor a log which broke.” This means a log which broke on the holiday. But a log which broke on the eve of a holiday is permitted if it cannot be called an implement. But if it can be called an implement even if it broke on the eve of a holiday it is forbidden.

It was stated: “Branches of a fig tree with figs on them, broomsticks from a date palm with dates on them, which he collected for food, he eats from them on the holiday. If he collected them as wood, he may not eat from them on the holiday.”

Rav said, one uses implements as fuel, one does not use broken pieces of implements as fuel. That is, vessels which broke on the holiday. But vessels which broke on the eve of the holiday are permitted if they cannot be called implements. But if they can be called implements even if they broke on the holiday they are permitted.

Rabbi Ḥiyya stated: One may use food as fuel, but not with their shells or pits. Rav was sitting before the Elder Rabbi Ḥiyya and was eating. He was seen throwing things into the stove and in front of the stove. The Elder Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him, throw in this way. He asked him, what is the difference between this way and that way? He said to him, pasha’s son, behind them, behind them. Rabbi Ḥanina said, he was throwing food. The Babylonian Rabbi Immi said, he was sick. He said to him, in this way it would be forbidden on the holiday.

“Neither with a hatchet.” In the House of Rabbi Yannai they are saying, one splits with a hatchet. Rabbi Hoshaia stated, one splits with a hatchet. Samuel said, practice follows the one who said, one splits with a hatchet. It was stated: Rabbi Yose ben Kipper said in the name of Rabbi Eleazar ben Shamua, the House of Shammai forbid but the House of Hillel permit.

“Nor with a sickle.” There are Tannaim who state that one splits, and there are Tannaim who state that one does not split. Rav Ḥisda said, the one who said one splits refers to a hand sickle, the one who says one does not split refers to a scythe.

There are Tannaim who state that one separates with Cilician cloth, and there are Tannaim who state that one does not separate. Rav Ḥisda said, the one who said one separates refers to healthy hair, the one who said one does not separate refers to weak hair.

There are Tannaim who state that one rubs aromatic wood, there are Tannaim who state that one does not rub. The one who said one rubs refers to moist wood, the one who said one does not rub refers to dry wood.

There are Tannaim who state that one sweetens mustard seed on glowing coals, there are Tannaim who state that one does not sweeten. The one who said one sweetens refers to putting the mustard on the coals, the one who said one does not sweeten refers to putting the coals on the mustard.

There are Tannaim who state that one rubs silver with chalk, there are Tannaim who state that one does not rub. The one who said one rubs refers to putting it on before the start of the holiday, the one who said one does not rub refers to putting it on during the holiday.

“Rabbi Meïr says, also one opens it up and takes.” Rabbi Abba, Rav Judah in the name of Samuel: But only at the place of access. And so it was stated “The Sages agree with Rabbi Meïr about seals in the ground that one pushes aside, and removes, and unties, and cuts. On the Sabbath one pushes aside but one neither removes, unties, nor cuts. For implements on the Sabbath it is permitted, there is no need to mention on a holiday.”

Mishnah

4 One does not open the lamp because he would make it a vessel nor does one make charcoal, and one does not cut a wick into two. Rabbi Judah says, one may cut it in the fire for two lamps.

Halakhah

It was stated: Closed pans, if he made them before the holiday he may not open them on the holiday since he would be effectively making a vessel usable on the holiday.

There, we have stated: “About rural pans, that they are pure in a tent with a corpse but impure if carried by a person afflicted with gonorrhea. Rabbi Eleazar ben Rabbi Ṣadoq says, even if carried by a person afflicted with gonorrhea they are pure since their production was not finished.” It turns out that the minority opinion here corresponds to the majority opinion there and the minority opinion there corresponds to the majority opinion here.

Rabbi Abba in the name of Rav Judah: One leans a splinter against the wall so that it does not scratch. It was stated: One does not extinguish a splinter to save it, if it is to prevent it from filling the house or the pot with smoke it is permitted. Rabbi Ḥanania said, if there is no empty space there. But if there is empty space there one throws it into the empty space and this is enough. Rabbi Nasa said, is this correct? Do we say this, that one may rub on salve to apply kohl on the holiday? Rabbi Mana said, one is for protection, the other for healing.

“About a wick three things were said as restrictions and three as leniencies. The following three were said as restrictions: One does not make it new on the holiday, nor does one cut one into two pieces, nor does one singe it by fire. The following three were said as leniencies: One softens it, and soaks it in oil, and divides it into two lights by fire.” Rabbi Ḥinena said, if he needs both of them. It was stated, Rabbi Judah bar Pazi in the name of Bar Delaia: He brings two lamps, inserts it into both of them, and separates them by fire into two lamps. Rabbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Ḥinena bar Idi in the name of Rav: One cleans the wick on a holiday.

Mishnah

5 One does not break earthenware nor cut paper to grill on them salted fish. One does not clean out stove or cooking range but one smooths. One does not arrange two amphoras to cook a pot on them. One does not support a pot by a splinter, nor support the door with one. One does not drive an animal with a stick on the holiday.

Halakhah

The sausage maker cannot do it on the holiday since he is cutting bast.

The daughter of the Elder Rabbi Ḥiyya went to bake in the stove. She found a heap in it. She came and asked her father who said to her, go and empty it. She said, I cannot do it. He said to her, go and smooth it. She had known this but she wanted to hear it from her father.

Rav said, one transfers from oven to stove but not from stove to oven. Rav Abba bar Ḥana said, one transfers from oven to stove and from stove to oven but not from evening to morning. Rav Avun in the name of Rav: One transfers from oven to stove, from stove to oven, and from evening to morning, but not from holiday to weekday.

“One does not arrange two amphoras to cook a pot on them.” Because of building. It was stated: “A blind person may not go out with his stick, nor the shepherd with his bag, but Rabbi Simeon permits.” This is what Rabbi Simeon was saying: Since one thing is permitted to him, let him be permitted everything.

Mishnah

6 Rabbi Eliezer says, a person takes a wood chip to use as a toothpick and collects wood from the courtyard and lights a fire since anything in the courtyard is prepared, but the Sages are saying one collects from what is in front of him and lights a fire.

Halakhah

What is the difference between them? Making a heap. In Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion one may make a heap, in the rabbis’ opinion one may not make a heap.

Mishnah

7 One makes fire neither with stones, nor with wood, nor with water, and one does not heat tiles to fry on them. In addition, Rabbi Eliezer says, a person stands by the muqṣeh on a Sabbath eve in a sabbatical year and says, from here I will eat tomorrow, but the Sages say, only if he marks out the area and says, from here to here.

Halakhah

“One does not heat tiles to fry on them.” There are Tannaim who state, one may heat. And there are Tannaim who state, one may not heat. Rav Ḥisda said, the one who said one may heat refers to tiles that have already been tested. And the one who said one may not heat refers to tiles that have not been tested.

“In addition, Rabbi Eliezer says, a person stands by the muqṣeh on a Sabbath eve in a sabbatical year and says, from here I will eat tomorrow.” Rabbi Eliezer’s position seems inconsistent, as we have stated there, “the House of Shammai say, one may not take unless one had moved them while it was still daylight,” and is Rabbi Eliezer not a Shammaite? One applies stricter rules when living creatures are involved. “But the Sages say, only if he marks out the area and says, from here to here.” The Sages’ position seems inconsistent, since we have stated there “the House of Hillel say, he may stand there and say, this and that I will take,” and here they are saying so? Still they hold that one applies stricter rules when living creatures are involved.

Mishnah

1 One lowers produce through a skylight on the holiday. Also one covers produce with vessels because of leaks, the same holds for jugs of wine and jugs of oil. On the Sabbath one may put a vessel under a leak.

Halakhah

“One lowers produce through a skylight on the holiday,” etc. The Mishnah is about this roof, but from another roof it is forbidden if it is not at the same height. But if it is at the same height it is permitted. It was stated: If there was a window, one lowers through the window.

Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: One spreads a mat over rows of bricks on the Sabbath.

Rabbi Simeon ben Rabbi Yannai said: I did not hear from my father, my sister told me in his name. An egg which was laid on a holiday one props up against a vessel so it should not roll off. But one does not cover it with a vessel. But Samuel says, one may cover it with a vessel. Rabbi Mana said, only if the vessel does not touch the egg itself.

Rabbi Hoshaia stated: One may spread a sheet over a swarm of bees in the summer because of the sun, in the rainy season because of the rain. Is this following Rav? Following Samuel? Here it is on top, there it is below.

Rabbi Bisna in the name of Rabbi Yose bar Ḥanina: It is forbidden to move the beam of a loom used for fine cloth. The hunters were spreading traps and these were damaged by the sun. They came to ask Rav, may one move them? He told them, it is forbidden to touch them. Designate them for placing under your heads and it is permitted for you to move them.

It was stated: If an amphora of ṭevel developed a leak one brings another vessel and puts it under it. If it fills up, it is forbidden to move it. Rabbi Zeʿira said, this implies that one makes an uncommon arrangement for muqseh to save it. But did we not state, from the vat of grapes, from the load of olives which drew fluid one may not take on the holiday, and does this not go without saying on the Sabbath? Rav Ḥisda said, even though both of them are tevel, one is muqṣeh and the other is not. The following implies that one makes an uncommon arrangement for muqseh to save it. It was stated. If a lamp burned out, one saves its oil. Rabbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, this follows Rabbi Simeon’s opinion since Rabbi Simeon said, if it burned out it is permitted to move it. Rabbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, he mentioned only “to move it,” therefore one is permitted to save it.

It was stated: “One puts a vessel under a leak on the Sabbath. If it fills up, one pours out and repeats without hesitation.” Rabbi Ḥanania said, they made this like rivers and springs coming from outside the Sabbath domain, as it was stated: from rivers and springs coming from outside the Sabbath domain one fills on the Sabbath and there is no need to say on a holiday.

Mishnah

2 One is liable on the holiday for everything classified as Sabbath rest, classified as obligatory, classified as meritorious. These are classified as Sabbath rest: One does not climb on a tree, nor ride on an animal, nor sail on water, nor clap the hands in anger, nor clap the hands in joy, nor dance. These are classified as obligatory, one does not judge, nor contract preliminary marriage, nor give ḥaliṣah, nor enter levirate marriage. These are classified as meritorious, one does not dedicate, nor dedicate one’s worth, nor dedicate as heremNumbers 18:14, nor collect priestly contributions and tithes. All these were said regarding a holiday, all the more so regarding the Sabbath. The only difference between holiday and Sabbath is preparation of food.

Halakhah

Sabbath rest which is voluntary, and obligation which is meritorious. What is Sabbath rest which is voluntary? One does not climb on a tree, nor ride on an animal, nor sail on water, nor clap his hands in anger, nor clap his hands in joy, nor dance. What is obligation which is meritorious? One does not judge, nor contract preliminary marriage, nor give ḥaliṣah, nor enter levirate marriage.

It was stated: One does not climb on a tree whether moist or dried-up. A living tree is understandable, but a dried-up tree? Does this mean we say, it is forbidden to step on a twig on the Sabbath? Or does it follow Rabbi Meïr, as Rabbi Meïr said, “a dried-up vine is forbidden but does not sanctify”? It is everybody’s opinion, they forbade the dried-up tree as a precaution concerning a living tree. Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi came running before Rav. He asked him, how did you come? He told him, by the warped date palm. He said to him, who permitted you?

Rabbi Aḥa in the name of Rav: It is forbidden to trample on a twig on the Sabbath. There is no difference between the roots of a tree or the leaves of cabbage. If they are three hand-breadths high. But if they are not three hand-breadths high they are like the ground.

Why did they say that one does not climb on a tree? Is it for fear that he might forget and eat, or for fear that he might forget and shake it? Let us hear from the following: If he was riding on an animal one tells him, get down. This implies that it is for fear that he might forget and shake it.

Why did they say, if he was riding on an animal one tells him, get down? The colleagues say, maybe the animal will ... Rabbi Yose said to them, consider the case, if it was a large camel! Rabbi Aḥa bar Pappus stated before Rabbi Zeʿira: There is a difference, because he is commanded about the rest of his animals like his own: That your ox and your donkey restExodus 23:12, like youDeuteronomy 5:14. There are Tannaim who state, one may lean on an animal. There are Tannaim who state, one may not lean on an animal. Rav Ḥisda said, the one who said one may lean on refers to someone who is healthy, the one who said one may not lean on refers to someone who is weak. Rabbi Yose says, Rabbi Abba bar Mamal and the colleagues disagreed. One said, one may lean on, but the other said, one may not lean on. The one who said one may lean on refers to leaning lightly, the one who said one may not lean on refers to putting his full weight on it. We do not know who said what. Since Rabbi Yose did not say anything in the name of Rabbi Abba bar Mamal, this implies that a healthy person may lean on, a weak one may not lean on.

“Nor sail on water.” Rabbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rabbi Abbahu: This implies that it is forbidden to set something under sail to send it away from him. And similarly, it is forbidden to set something under sail to bring it to him. Rabbi Abba Mari and Rabbi Mattaniah were sitting. They saw a person splitting the water to both sides and drinking. Rabbi Abba Mari said to Rabbi Mattaniah, this is what Rabbi Jacob bar Zavdi said in the name of Rabbi Abbahu, a person is forbidden to set something under sail to send it away from him. He answered, it is what we have stated, “a person may break open an amphora to eat dried figs from it.”

“Nor clap the hands in anger.” סִיפּוּק is in anger, as you are saying, Balak became angry with Balaam and he clapped his hands in angerNumbers 24:10.

“Nor clap the hands in joy.” טִיפּוּחַ expresses pleasure. Rabbi Jonah and the colleagues, one said this way it is permitted, the other way it is forbidden, but the other said, both ways it is forbidden. We did not know who said what, but since Rabbi Jonah said, in our days there were old men who were clapping the backs of their hands on the Sabbath, this implies that he said, this way it is permitted, the other way it is forbidden. Rabbi was marrying off his son Rabbi Simeon where they clapped the backs of their hands on the Sabbath. Rabbi Meïr passed by and heard their sound. He said, our teachers, is the Sabbath permitted? Rabbi heard his voice, he said, who is that who comes to trouble us in our home? Rabbi Meïr heard his voice and fled. They went out and ran after him. The wind blew his turban from Rabbi Meïr’s neck. Rabbi looked out of the window and saw the neck of Rabbi Meïr from behind. He said, I gained my learning only because I saw Rabbi Meïr’s neck from behind. Rabbi Joḥanan and Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish both said, we gained our learning only because we saw Rabbi’s finger from the back of his sleeve.

“Nor dance.” Rabbi Jeremiah, Rabbi Zeʿira in the name of Rav Ḥuna: Jumping: one lifts both legs simultaneously. Dancing: one lifts one and keeps the other down. Rabbi Eleazar said, making any sound is forbidden on the Sabbath. Rabbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac thought he could knock for a new synagogue. Rabbi Hillel son of Rabbi Vales would knock on a cup. Rabbi Ila stayed late at the great assembly. When he went home, he found them sleeping. He lay down on the stairs so as not to knock on the gate on the Sabbath. Rabbi Jeremiah explained Scripture with Rabbi Immi’s son. He went and wanted to wake him up on Sabbath morning. He started knocking on the door. His father told him, who permitted you to do this? Rabbi Abba bar Cahana asked before Rabbi Yasa, may one knock on a belly on the Sabbath? He said to him, who permitted that on a weekday? Rabbi Samuel ben Eudaimon said, the rabbis are accustomed on a weekday from the navel upward, through his clothing from the navel downward.

“One does not judge.” Rabbi Ḥizqiah, Rabbi Aḥa, said in the name of Rabbi Abbahu: It is forbidden to judge monetary cases on Friday. Does not a Mishnah object: “Therefore one does not judge criminal matters on Sabbath eve or holiday eve”? Hence, one judges monetary cases! Also, Rabbi Ḥiyya stated the following: One judges monetary cases on Friday but not criminal matters. One is for practice, the other concerns the Torah’s requirements.

Rabbi Abba bar Cohen said before Rabbi Yose: Rabbi Aḥa in the name of Rabbi Jacob bar Idi: A man may not preliminarily marry on a Friday. That means, to make an engagement feast. This implies that the preliminary marriage itself is permitted. Samuel says, even on the Ninth of Ab a preliminary marriage is permitted, so that another man does not get there before him. Samuel’s position seems inconsistent. There, he says, God puts singles in a housePsalms 68:7, To rise on scales, they all are vapor!Psalms 62:10 And here, he says so? That means, that he should not get there before him through prayer. Even so, it would not be permanent.

Rabbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rabbi Immi: Rabbi Joḥanan and Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. One said, one dedicates, the other said, one does not dedicate. The rabbis of Caesarea make it explicit: Rabbi Joḥanan said, one dedicates without problems on a holiday, Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one does not dedicate without problems on a holiday. There are Tannaim who state, he goes to sellers of lambs, there are Tannaim who state, he goes to sellers of Pesaḥim. The one who says, he goes to sellers of lambs, follows the one who says, one dedicates. The one who says, he goes to sellers of Pesaḥim, follows the one who says, one does not dedicate. This implies that it does not become unconsecrated and then dedicated again. If you say that it becomes unconsecrated and then dedicated again, it should be forbidden because of dedicating, and we have stated, “one does not dedicate.” Rabbi Ḥananiah and Rabbi Mana, one said, if he dedicates for the next day, but the other said, if he dedicated for the upkeep of the Temple. Rabbi Shammai said, even according to the one who said that one dedicates, in the Temple court because rabbinic Sabbath prohibitions were permitted in the Temple.

“All these were said on a holiday, all the more so on the Sabbath.” Are these the only cases? Are there no others? There is stoning on the Sabbath, there is no stoning on a holiday. There is extirpation on the Sabbath, there is no extirpation on a holiday. There is flogging on a holiday, there is no flogging on the Sabbath. If you say, we are coming to state cases connected with food, did we not state: “one lowers produce through a skylight on the holiday but not on the Sabbath”? In addition from the following, one grinds aromatic wood for a circumcision on a holiday but not on the Sabbath. Rabbi Yose said, only if he circumcised. In addition from what was stated, “The Sages agree with Rabbi Meïr about seals in the ground that one pushes aside, and removes, and unties, and cuts. On the Sabbath one pushes aside but one neither removes, unties, nor cuts. For implements on the Sabbath it is permitted, there is no need to mention on a holiday.”

“The only difference between holiday and Sabbath is preparation of food.” What is the difference between them? Rav Ḥisda said, to sharpen the tip of the spit is a difference between them. Rabbi Ḥanania the son of Rabbi Abbahu said, to make fire from wood is a difference between them. Rabbi Judah bar Pazi stated from Bar Delaiah: what is the difference? Is the matter to sharpen the tip of the spit? or is the matter to make fire from the stones? You only have the following: “One does not sharpen the knife but one cleans it against another knife.” Rav Ḥisda said, this follows Rabbi Judah’s opinion. Rav Judah in the name of Samuel said, it is everybody’s opinion, to remove the fat on it.

May one light an lamp that serves no purpose? Ḥizqiah said, it is forbidden. A baraita disagreed with Ḥizqiah: “Do not make fire in all of your dwelling places on Sabbath dayExodus 35:3. On the Sabbath you may not make fire, but you make fire on a holiday.” If you say, we deal with cases connected with food, is there not written, only what can be eaten by any breathing being, that alone may be made by youExodus 12:16. So we are dealing with an lamp that serves no purpose. Rabbi Avuna said, it was stated there, the House of Shammai forbid but the House of Hillel permit. Rabbi Naḥum the brother of Rabbi Ila asked before Rabbi Joḥanan. He said to him, neither forbid nor permit.

Mishnah

3 Animals and vessels are like the feet of their owner. If he hands over his animal to his son or to a shepherd they are like his own feet. Vessels particular to one of the brothers in a common household are like his feet, but those not assigned to one brother are like the place where they walk.

Halakhah

The Mishnah applies if he handed it over on the holiday, but if he handed it over to him on holiday eve it is like the shepherd’s feet. This applies if there is one shepherd there, but if there is not one shepherd there, like the feet of the herdsman. And it was stated as follows: “If he hands his animal to the herdsman even though he did not inform the herdsman it is like the herdsman’s feet.”

Mishnah

4 If one borrows vessels from another person, on holiday eve they are like the feet of the borrower, on the holiday like the feet of the lender. If a woman borrowed from another spices, water, and salt, for her dough, they are like the feet of both of them. Rabbi Judah excludes water since it lacks stability.

Halakhah

Rabbi Abba said, for eruv they went according to the logical rule. You can see that this is so since they say there in the name of Rav Ḥisda, but they do not know whether from a tradition or a Mishnah, “even logs.” Did we mean to say that logs have no stability?

“Rabbi Judah excludes water since it lacks stability.” What is the difference between them? Hot water. The one who said, because it lacks stability, it has stability. The one who says because they are absorbed in the dough, it is not absorbed in the dish.

Mishnah

5 A piece of burning charcoal is like the feet of its owner but a flame may be everywhere. One commits misappropriation of sacred property with burning charcoal of the Temple, one may not use its flame but one does not commit misappropriation of sacred property.

Halakhah

“Five things were said about burning charcoal and five about the flame. One commits misappropriation of sacred property with the burning charcoal of the Temple, one may not use its flame but one cannot commit misappropriation of sacred property with the latter. Burning charcoal of idolatry is forbidden, its flame is allowed. Anyone who makes a vow not to use anything of another person may not use his burning charcoal but is allowed his flame. Anyone who carries burning charcoal into the public domain is liable but for the flame he is free of punishment. One says the blessing over the flame but not over glowing charcoal.” Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: If the charcoal was crackling one says the blessing. Rabbi Joḥanan from Karṣion in the name of Rabbi Naḥum bar Simai: Only if the flame leaps away from it.

Mishnah

6 A private cistern is like the feet of the individual, but one of the townspeople is like the feet of the people of this town, and of the pilgrims from Babylonia like the feet of the person who draws the water.

Halakhah

A well between two Sabbath domains. Rabbi Joḥanan said, one makes an iron wall for it. Rabbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, even a partition made of reeds, on condition that the water not flow in both directions. Rabbi Yudan said, they were stricter with their words than with words of the Torah. Rabbi Ḥanina said, is it not mixture of kind in its own kind? But they were strict with their words as with words of the Torah.

This implies that if one finds a vessel on the road it is like the feet of the finder.

Mishnah

7 If somebody had produce in another village and the people of that village made an eruv to come to him, they should not bring him his produce. But if he made an eruv, his produce has his status.

Halakhah

Rav and Samuel: one says, like the feet of the depositor. The other one says, they are like the feet of the person with whom they are deposited. The Mishnah disagrees with the one who says, they are like the feet of the person with whom they are deposited. As we have stated, “If somebody had produce in another village and the people of that village made an eruv to come to him, they should not bring him his produce.” If you say, they are like the feet of the person with whom they are deposited, they should bring him his produce. Rabbi Yudan said, explain it if the key was in the hands of the owner, or that he did not concede his powers to them before the start of the holiday. What does this statement mean? “If he invited guests they may not carry away their parts unless through another person he gave them the right to their parts on the eve of the holiday.” Are they not like the feet of the person with whom they are deposited from the moment that he gave them the rights to their parts?

Mishnah

8 If he invited guests they may not carry away their parts unless through another person he gave them the right to their parts on the eve of the holiday. One does not water or slaughter animals that live in the open country but one waters and slaughters domestic animals. What are domestic animals? Those that stay overnight in the village, animals that live in the open country that stay overnight in the dust.

Halakhah

“The following are the animals that live in the open country, those who leave on Passover and return with the rains. The following are the domestic ones, those who stay in the village overnight. Rabbi says, it is permitted to slaughter these and those which entered the Sabbath domain after dark. What are animals that live in the open country? Those who grow up in the dust.” Rabbi Zeʿira said, this implies, it is permitted to move a vessel which entered the Sabbath domain from outside the Sabbath domain. Rabbi Simeon bar Karsana in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: But only within four cubits. For example, a Saracen honored Gamliel the Twin with truffles. He came and asked Rabbi Mana who said to him, receive them in your kitchen and eat them within four cubits.