Beitzah 14b (יד:) — the Talmud in English

Rava said:

the entire first beraita is dealing with one matter: The tanna came to say that one may not pound tisnei—neither in a large mortar nor in a small one—and he gives the reason: one may not pound anything in a mortar at all.

And as for what we learned in the second beraita, that one may pound in a small mortar,

that is not difficult.

For:

this

second beraita, which permits pounding in a small mortar, was

for us,

taught for us, the people of Babylonia, since we pound the wheat ourselves, and we will not come to pound it in a large mortar.

But

if

this

beraita, which prohibits pounding even in a small mortar, was said

for them,

for the people of Eretz Yisrael, whose Jewish slaves pound for them, and they are lax regarding mitzvot and will pound in a large mortar and say that they did so in a small one , therefore they prohibited them from pounding.

In general .

Rav Pappi happened to come to the house of Mar Shmuel

on Yom Tov.

They brought him porridge, but he did not eat

because he thought that the wheat had been pounded in a large mortar.

And we challenge:

Perhaps they made it in a small mortar?

And we answer:

He saw

that Rav Pappi observed

that it was exceptionally fine,

as it was very finely ground, and it was possible to make it that way only in a large mortar.

We raise another challenge:

Perhaps they made it on the previous day?

And we answer:

Rav Pappi saw

Rav Pappi observed

that its surface was peeled and bright.

Its surface was white, and this is possible only with porridge made from wheat pounded that day.

And if you wish, say:

Mar Shmuel’s house was different,

because there were

in Shmuel’s house

unruly slaves .

Mishna:

The Torah permits the labor of sorting on Yom Tov, since it is included among the labors necessary for preparing food. The Sages prohibited it only with regard to things from which people ordinarily sort large quantities, or when it appears that one is sorting for the needs of a weekday. Therefore, they prohibited sorting with utensils designated for sorting a large quantity or for extended use, but with some of these utensils they permitted sorting by means of a change, even things from which people ordinarily sort for an extended period.

The Mishna and the discussion below will explain the ways in which sorting is permitted, and the preferred manner of sorting in each permitted case.

One who sorts legumes on Yom Tov,

Beit Shammai say: He sorts

the

food

from the waste, but he may not sort the waste from the food.

And he eats

the food that he sorted immediately,

because

if he leaves it for later, it is considered as though he is performing the labor of sorting for storage, and not for eating, [and according to their view, the labor of sorting is prohibited on Yom Tov].

And Beit Hillel say: He sorts in his usual manner,

even refuse from among the food, because in their view the labor of sorting was also permitted on Yom Tov for the sake of food preparation.

Therefore, it is permitted to sort even by means of a sheet that he places

in his lap,

and shakes the sheet until the legumes roll downward while the refuse remains above; or he may sort them

with a kanon,

which is a utensil made in the form of a funnel, through which only the legumes pass while the refuse remains inside it;

or with a tamhui,

which is a large bowl with an incline and a depression in which the legumes collect.

However,

the Sages said that

he may not

sort legumes—even according to Beit Hillel—

on a board, or with a sieve, or with a sifter,

because these are utensils designated for sorting for an extended period.

Rabban Gamliel says: He may even

sort legumes by

washing them—

he pours water over them—

and skimming

the refuse that floats on the water.

Gemara:

It was taught in a beraita: Rabban Gamliel said: When do these words apply

—that Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disputed whether on Yom Tov one takes the food or the refuse, and Beit Hillel permitted taking even the refuse—

when the food is greater in quantity than the refuse,

and it is preferable to take the refuse in order to reduce the exertion on Yom Tov.

But

if the

refuse is greater in quantity than the food,

so that removing the refuse involves more exertion than removing the food—

everyone agrees that he takes the food and leaves the refuse.

The Gemara is astonished:

The refuse is greater in quantity than the food—

is there anyone who permits it?

Is there anyone who permits even moving it? Since the majority is refuse, the entire mixture is considered refuse, and it is muktzeh!

We explain:

It is not necessary

for the beraita to say that when the refuse is greater than the food everyone agrees that he takes the food; it is referring to a case in which

the refuse is greater

in terms of

exertion, but is smaller

and is a minority

in quantity.

The entire beraita is speaking of a case in which the food is greater in quantity than the refuse, but the law differs between ordinary refuse, where the exertion involved in removing the food is greater than that involved in removing the refuse, and therefore Beit Hillel said that he should remove the refuse from the food in order to exert himself less on Yom Tov, and fine refuse, whose removal involves more exertion than removing the food, in which case everyone agrees that he takes the food from the refuse.

The tanna’s intention in saying, “When the refuse is greater, everyone agrees that he takes the food from the refuse,” is that when removing the refuse involves greater exertion, he should remove the food, in order to reduce the exertion.

We learned in our Mishna:

Rabban Gamliel says: He may even wash and skim .

It was taught: Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, said: This was

the practice of the house of Rabban Gamliel: They would bring a bucket full of lentils

mixed with refuse,

and pour water over it, and the food would be found

sinking

down below, while

the

refuse

would float

to the top,

and they would remove it, leaving the lentils clean.

And we challenge this:

but wasn’t the opposite taught—

that the refuse sinks and the food floats to the top?

It is not difficult:

This—

the second beraita—deals

with

a case in which the refuse is

earth—

and therefore it states that the refuse sinks and the food floats to the top, so that one can remove the food and leave the refuse.

Whereas

this—

the first beraita—deals

with

refuse of

gili—

straw; in this case the refuse floats and the food sinks beneath it, so one must remove the refuse and leave the food.

Mishna:

Beit Shammai say: One may not send

a gift from one person to another

on a Festival except portions

that are prepared and fit to be eaten that day, and are not intended to be eaten on the following day, so that his effort is exclusively for the needs of the Festival.

And Beit Hillel say: One may send domesticated animals, wild animals, and birds, whether alive or slaughtered, because his fellow can eat them that day.

Likewise,

one may send wines, oils, fine flour, and legumes,

as these too are suitable for preparing food for that day.

But one may not

send

grain,

since it is prohibited to grind it that day, despite the fact that grinding is for the purpose of preparing food, because one could grind it the day before and the flour’s taste would not deteriorate.

And Rabbi Shimon permits

sending a gift

of grain,

since one can crush it with a small mortar and cook a dish from it in a pot.

Gemara:

Rav Yechiel taught:

Sending a gift on a Festival is permitted on the condition

that he not do so in a line.

He should not send it publicly, with a large group of people walking one after another in a line, because the matter appears as though they are transporting goods to sell in the marketplace.

A tanna taught: A line consists of no fewer than three people.

Rav Ashi asked: Three men and three types of items—

what is the law?

Do they count, for purposes of the prohibition against publicizing the shipment, as a “line,” as one group of three men, or as three separate men?

And we conclude:

teyku.

The Mishna states:

Rabbi Shimon permits grain.

It was taught: Rabbi Shimon permits grain.

For example:

Wheat—

since one can

make from it

a food called

“ludiyot,”

which does not require grinding, as it is made from whole, cooked wheat grains.

Barley—

since one can

place it

before his animal

to eat.

[The first tanna, who prohibited sending grain, holds that most barley is intended for grinding for human consumption.]

Lentils—

since one can

make from them

a dish of whole lentils, called

“rasisin.”

Mishna:

One may send

a gift from one person to another on a Festival

utensils,

clothing,

whether sewn or not sewn, and even if they contain sha'atnez, provided that

they are

needed for the Festival.

The Gemara will explain what constitutes a Festival need with regard to all these garments.

But one may not

send a

studded sandal,

a wooden sandal covered with leather

that is studded

on its underside with nails, because the Sages prohibited wearing it on a Festival.

Nor

may one send a

shoe that is not sewn,

as it is not fit to be worn on a Festival.

Rabbi Yehuda says: Nor may one send a white shoe,

one that has not been dyed black,

because it requires a craftsman

to blacken it, and it is not customary to wear it while it is white.

This is the principle: Anything

from which one

derives benefit

and uses

on

a Festival, one may send.

Gemara:

And we raised this objection:

Granted:

garments

that are sewn

may be sent—for

when they are seen,

they are suitable

for clothing,

and they are considered a “need of the Festival.”

Garments

that are not sewn as well

may properly be sent—for

when they are seen as coverings .

But

garments that have

kilayim—for what are they suitable ?

And what “need of the Festival” is there for them?

And if you would say: It is suitable to place them

by folding them

beneath him

and sitting upon them.

This is not so. For:

Was it not taught:

It is stated concerning the prohibition against wearing kilayim [Leviticus 19:19], “And a garment of diverse kinds, sha’atnez,

shall not come upon you”—

but you may spread it beneath yourself,

for lying or sitting upon a kilayim garment was not prohibited by Torah law.

But the Sages said: It is prohibited to do so, lest a thread become wound

a thread from the kilayim garment

around his flesh,

and he will thereby derive benefit from wearing kilayim .

And if you would say

that it is fit to sit upon it when

something

intervenes

between

him and the garment,

between him and the kilayim garment, in which case there is no concern that a thread from the kilayim will become wound around him.

This answer is also not correct. For:

Did Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi not say in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Shaul:

Rabbi said in the name of the holy community in Jerusalem: Even ten mattresses

of permitted fabric are placed

one on top of the other, with kilayim beneath them—

the Sages decreed that it be

prohibited to sleep upon them.

(Because it is stated, “It shall not

come upon you.”)

And it is proven that it is prohibited to sit upon sha’atnez even when a permitted garment intervenes.

Rather,

it must be said that our Mishna is speaking

of

sending

a curtain

that contains kilayim, which is not worn but is spread across a doorway, and apparently the prohibition of kilayim does not apply to it.

But this answer too is incorrect, for it is prohibited to spread a kilayim curtain, because of the concern that one might wrap himself in it. For:

Did Ulla not say: Why did they say that a curtain

is considered a “utensil” and becomes

impure

with kelim impurity [and is not considered part of the house, which does not contract impurity]—

because the sun

is accustomed to wrap itself in the lower part of the curtain, and

is warmed against it,

and it is therefore considered a “garment.” Since it is suitable for deriving warmth from, it is also prohibited to make it sha’atnez . The question thus returns: Why is it permitted to send a sha’atnez garment on a Festival, when it is not fit for any use?