Beitzah 16a — the Talmud in English

Rav Tahlifa, brother of Rabbenai the Khuzite, taught:

A person should not make a large expenditure, since

all

a person's earnings for

a person's food are allotted to him

from the beginning of the year, on the days of judgment,

from Rosh Hashanah until Yom Kippur.

And they do not add to him beyond what they allotted for his food, and he is found lacking money for his food.

Except for the expenditure of Shabbatot, the expenditure of Yom Tov, and the expenditure for teaching his sons Torah,

for which he may make a large expenditure, because they were not allotted to him at all for that year; rather, everything is according to what he is accustomed to spend for them, so they provide him from Heaven.

If he reduced—

they reduce for him, and if he added—

they add for him.

Rabbi Abbahu said: What is the verse,

from where can it be learned that a person's earnings for his food are allotted to him at the beginning of the year?—

Psalms 81

“Blow on the new moon

[at the renewal of the moon], the blowing of

the shofar,

when the moon's renewal is

concealed

[covered]—

for the day of our festival.”

Which is the festival on which the new moon

whose renewal

“is concealed”,

for during the day of Rosh Hashanah the moon is not visible throughout the entire world, but only in a small part of it, since it is “covered” from the sight of most of the world during the hours before and after the conjunction?

You must say: This is Rosh Hashanah.

For on the other festivals, when the moon is full, it is visible throughout the entire world.

And it is written

in the continuation of the verse

“For

on that festival, Rosh Hashanah—

a statute

[the allotment of food]

it is for Israel.

A judgment for the God of Jacob.”

And the Gemara explains:

What,

from where

is it indicated that this “statute”

is a term for food?

For it is written

[Genesis 47] concerning Pharaoh's priests:

“And they ate their statute that Pharaoh gave them.”

Mar Zutra said: From here:

[Proverbs 30]

“Give me my allotted bread.”

And now the Gemara brings several matters dealing with the food of Shabbat.

It was taught: They said concerning Shammai the Elder: All his days he ate for the honor of Shabbat:

If

he found a fine animal,

he

would say: This is for Shabbat.

And if afterward

he found another finer than it—

he would set aside the second

for Shabbat

and eat the first

on a weekday. And it is found that even the eating of the first was for the honor of Shabbat, for it was only because he ate it first that he left the second for Shabbat.

But Hillel the Elder had a different measure. For all

his deeds

were

for the sake of Heaven.

And he would eat the first animal on a weekday before he found a second, finer animal, and he trusted that he would find a fine animal also for Shabbat.

As it is stated

[Psalms 68]

“Blessed is the Lord—

day by day.”

It was taught likewise: Beit Shammai say: From the first of your days,

beginning on the first day of the week, prepare your needs

for your Shabbatot,

for the coming Shabbat.

And Beit Hillel say:

There is no need. Rather,

“Blessed is the Lord day by day.”

And further concerning Shabbat:

Rabbi Hama son of Rabbi Hanina said: One who gives a gift to his fellow—

does not need to inform him

that he gave it to him, so that the recipient will not wonder from where this thing came to him.

As it is stated

[Exodus 34]

“And Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone.”

He raised an objection

from what we learned in a beraita, for it was taught:

[Exodus 31]

“To know that I am the Lord Who sanctifies you.” The Holy One, blessed is He, said to Moses: Moses! I have a good gift in My treasury, and “Shabbat” is its name, and I wish to give it to Israel. Go and inform them.

From here Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: One who gives bread to a child—

must inform his mother,

by means of a sign [as will be explained below] that he gave him bread as a gift, so that affection and friendship may increase in Israel!

And we answer:

It is not difficult.

This refers to a gift that is destined to be revealed,

which is liable to become known to the recipient—in such a case he need not inform him. Therefore, God did not inform Moses that the skin of his face shone, since those who saw the rays would inform him.

This refers to a gift that is not destined to be revealed,

in that case the giver must inform the recipient.

And we challenge this:

Shabbat too—

after all, it is

a gift that is destined to be revealed,

for the Holy One, blessed is He, was destined to command the Children of Israel concerning its observance!

And we answer:

Its reward

for observing Shabbat—

is not destined to be revealed.

The Master said

in the beraita:

From here Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: One who gives bread to a child must inform his mother.

What should he do

what should he do

to him

to the child so that his mother will know that he gave him bread?

He should rub oil on him,

rub him with oil,

and fill him

and fill the area around his eyes with

kohl

[blue]. Then his mother will ask him who did this, and the child will tell her who it was, and he will also tell her about the bread that he gave him.

But nowadays,

and now

since we are concerned about sorcery

in rubbing with oil and filling with blue around the eye—

what

should be done to him?

Rav Pappa said: He should rub him

rub him

with that same kind

that he fed him, and thus his mother will know that he fed him.

Rabbi Yohanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai: Every mitzva that the Holy One, blessed is He, gave to Israel, He gave it to them

publicly,

in public,

except for

the mitzva of

Shabbat, which He gave to them

in

in secret.

As it is stated

concerning the mitzva of Shabbat [Exodus 31]:

“Between Me and the Children of Israel—

it is an eternal sign.”

And we challenge this:

If so,

since it was given to us in secret,

the gentiles should not be punished

in the future

for it,

for not accepting it!? For in the future the Holy One, blessed is He, will judge the nations because they refused to accept the Torah when He offered it to them, before the giving of the Torah at Sinai.

And if the giving of Shabbat was in secret, they did not know of it and did not refuse to accept it, and they should not be punished for their abstention from accepting it!?

And we answer: The mitzva of

Shabbat

was indeed

made known to them,

but only

its reward was not made known to them.

And if you wish, say: Its reward too was made known to them

to all the nations.

Rather, the matter of the

“additional soul”

that is given to a person on Shabbat, by which he has an expansive heart for rest and joy, and eats and drinks much without becoming disgusted with eating and drinking [Rashi]—this

was not made known to them.

For Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: The Holy One, blessed is He, gives an additional soul to a person on the eve of Shabbat, and at the conclusion of Shabbat they take it from him.

As it is stated

[Exodus 31]

“Shabbat—

and he rested.”

And we expound:

Once Shabbat has passed,

when Shabbat has passed with the completion of a person's resting on it—

woe,

woe to the person, because

a soul has been lost

that had been given to him!

We learned in the Mishna the matter of the eruv tavshilin:

A person makes a cooked dish on the eve of Yom Tov.

Abaye said: They taught

that a person makes an eruv tavshilin

only

when he makes

a cooked dish. But

when he makes the eruv with

bread—

it is not

an eruv.

And we considered this:

What is different about bread, that it does not

serve for making the eruv?

If you say

because

we require something that “accompanies the bread”,

something that is a relish, with which one accompanies the bread,

we require

for the eruv, since only through this is it recognizable that he is preparing it for the Shabbat meal.

And

if

bread does not “accompany the bread”,

for it is not a relish, and there is no indication from its preparation that it is for the Shabbat meal, since a person eats bread in his meal every day.

It is impossible to say that this is the reason.

For

porridge

[a cooked dish of crushed wheat or barley]

also,

after all it is something

that does not “accompany the bread”,

for it is not considered an important relish, but is considered like the bread itself.

And the proof is:

For Rabbi Zeira said: These Babylonians

are

fools,

because

they eat bread with bread

[bread with bread, meaning bread with porridge].

Thus porridge too is considered like bread, since it is made from crushed wheat and barley.

And

nevertheless

Rav Nahumi bar Zechariah said in the name of Abaye: One may make an eruv with porridge!

Rather,

this is the distinction between bread and a cooked dish with regard to the eruv:

For an eruv tavshilin—

we require something uncommon,

something that is not common,

we require.

And bread is common, and

if

porridge were not common.

There are those who say:

Abaye said: They taught only a cooked dish, but

with

bread—

one does not

make an eruv.

And we considered this:

What is the reason?

If you say that we require something uncommon, and bread is common.

But porridge is not common, and

nevertheless

Rav Nahumi bar Zechariah said in the name of Abaye: One does not make an eruv with porridge!

[the opposite of the first formulation, which holds that one does make an eruv with porridge].

Rather, we require something that accompanies the bread, and bread does not accompany the bread.

And porridge too does not accompany the bread!

For Rabbi Zeira said: These Babylonians are fools, because they eat bread with bread.

Rabbi Hiyya taught: Lentils that

remained

at the bottom of

the

pot,

are significant, and a person may

rely on them on account of an eruv tavshilin.

And this applies only when there is an olive-sized amount in them.

Rav Yitzhak, son of Rav Yehuda, said: The fat that is on a knife—

he scrapes it off

from the knife, from the fat that is upon it,

and relies upon it,

on the fat that he scraped off,

on account of an eruv tavshilin.

And this applies only—

when there is an olive-sized amount in it.

Rav Asi said in the name of Rav: Small salted fish,

which can be eaten because they have been salted even if they are not cooked—

there does not apply to them

the prohibition against eating

“the cooking of gentiles.”

For the Sages decreed a prohibition against food cooked by a gentile only in the case of significant cooking, when, had it not been cooked, it would be impossible to eat it.

Rav Yosef said: And if a gentile roasted them—

a Jew may rely on them

to cook from Yom Tov for Shabbat when he places them

on account of an eruv tavshilin.

And if a gentile made from them

from the small fish a food called

“kasa de-harsena”—

a fish fried in fish innards fat and flour—this is significant cooking, for the flour is not eaten as it is, and

it is forbidden

to eat this food.

And we challenge this:

It is obvious!

For flour is not eaten raw.