Shabbat 104b (קד:) — the Talmud in English

Mishna:

One who writes two letters

unwittingly

in one lapse of awareness,

meaning that between writing one letter and the other he did not remember that today was Shabbat, or that he was unaware of the prohibition against writing,

is liable

a sin-offering.

If he wrote with ink, with pigment,

a type of earth,

with red paint,

a type of stone that colors red,

with gum,

tree resin,

with copper sulfate,

copper water,

or with anything that makes a mark

and the mark endures,

if he wrote

on two walls of a corner

of a house that are adjacent to one another, for example, one in the east and the other in the north, and at the place where the walls meet he wrote one letter on each wall,

or on two leaves of a ledger,

two separate boards,

and they are read together,

the two letters are read together because they are written on the edges of the boards adjacent to one another,

he is liable.

One who writes on his flesh

two letters with ink

is liable.

One who engraves

with iron

on his flesh

the form of two letters—

Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable to bring a sin-offering, but the Sages exempt him,

because this is not the usual manner of writing.

If he wrote with liquids,

such as berry juice, which blackens, or

with fruit juice,

the juice of all other fruits, or

with road dust,

with mud [another interpretation: he traced with his finger in the dust], or

with scribes’ dust,

the powder from a scribe’s inkwell [according to both interpretations above],

or with anything that does not endure, he is exempt.

If he wrote

with the back of his hand,

on the back of his hand, having held the quill upside down, with the pointed end facing upward, and turned his hand so that the back of his hand faced downward, and wrote,

or if he wrote

with his foot, with his mouth, or with his elbow,

having bent his arm and held the quill in the bend between his elbow and hand,

he is exempt in all these cases, because this is not the usual manner of writing.

If he wrote one letter adjacent to existing writing,

where one letter had already been written and he wrote another letter beside it,

or if he wrote over existing writing,

meaning that he passed the quill over letters already written and renewed them,

if he intended to write a het but wrote two zayins,

because the quill skipped over the roof of the het and two zayins remained,

If he wrote one letter

on the ground and one on a beam,

or

wrote on two walls of a house

that do not form a corner [and the same applies if he wrote on one wall but the letters were far apart], or

on two leaves of a ledger

made of columns, writing each letter in a different column,

and they are not read together,

as they cannot be read together unless he cuts away what separates them,

he is exempt.

If he wrote one letter as an abbreviation,

making a dot or mark over the letter to indicate that the intention was a complete word—

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Beteira deems him liable, but the Sages exempt him.

Gemara:

The Gemara explains:

“ink”

means

ink.

“Pigment”—

pigment.

“Red paint”—

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: Its name is sikrata. “Gum”—

gum.

“Copper sulfate”—

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Shmuel said: Blacksmiths’ dye.

A dye with which they color black shoes.

We learned in the Mishna:

“Or with anything that makes a mark.”

The Gemara asks:

What does this statement come to include?

And it answers:

It comes to include that which Rabbi Ḥananya taught: If one wrote

a bill of divorce

with tarai water,

a type of fruit [another interpretation: rainwater],

and

water of

afza,

berries known as gallnuts,

it is valid,

because it endures; and the same applies with regard to Shabbat.

Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: If one wrote

a bill of divorce

with lead,

meaning lead,

with black,

meaning charcoal,

or with blackening agent,

meaning copper sulfate,

it is valid.

We learned in the Mishna:

“One who engraves on his flesh,”

Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable, but the Sages exempt him.

It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer said to the Sages: Did not ben Stada bring out

writings of

sorcery from Egypt

when they were written

in an engraving on his flesh [to conceal them from the eyes of the magicians who inspected everyone leaving Egypt, to ensure that they would not take out writings of sorcery with them in order to teach them to the inhabitants of another country]? This demonstrates that this is a manner of writing; why, then, do you exempt one who does so on Shabbat?

They said to him,

the Sages said to him: Ben Stada

was insane!

In this act he endangered himself by doing something that people do not ordinarily do,

and no proof may be brought from the actions of the insane!

We learned in the Mishna:

“If he wrote one letter adjacent to existing writing,”

he is exempt.

The Gemara asks:

Who is the tanna

of the Mishna?

Rava bar Rav Huna said: It is not in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer.

For if it were Rabbi Eliezer, he said

with regard to the labor of weaving [below, 105a] that although at the beginning of weaving a garment one is not liable until he weaves three threads, nevertheless, if he wove a row

of one

thread

onto the woven fabric,

onto what had already been partially woven,

he is liable.

Here, too, if one added one letter adjacent to existing writing, Rabbi Eliezer would deem him liable.

We learned in the Mishna:

“If he wrote over existing writing,”

he is exempt.

The Gemara asks:

Who is the tanna?

Rav Ḥisda said: It is not in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda.

As it was taught in a baraita: If one needed to write the Divine Name

in a Torah scroll,

and intended

mistakenly

to write “Yehuda,” but erred and did not insert a dalet into it,

in “Yehuda,” and instead wrote the Divine Name, which was written without the proper intention and is therefore not fit for use,

he passes a quill over it

a second time, with the intention of writing for the sanctity of the Name,

and sanctifies it.

But the Sages say: The Name is not of the highest quality!

It follows that, according to Rabbi Yehuda, writing over existing writing is considered as though he is now writing; therefore, with regard to Shabbat as well, he should be liable.

A tanna taught: If one wrote one letter

on Shabbat

and completed

with it

a scroll,

meaning that this letter was the final letter in one of the twenty-four sacred books, or if he

wove one thread and completed a garment—

he is liable.

Who is the tanna

of this baraita?

Rava bar Rav Huna said: It is Rabbi Eliezer, who says:

One who adds a row

of one thread to the woven fabric is liable.

Rav Ashi said: You may even say that it is the Sages.

For

completing

a scroll or garment

is different,

as the Sages agree that he is liable in that case, since it is a significant labor. They disagreed only when one adds to a partially woven fabric, which is not thereby completed as a garment.

Rabbi Ami said: If one wrote one letter in Tiberias, and

a

second letter in Sepphoris,

he is liable.

What is the reason? Because

it is writing

of two letters,

except that it lacks proximity

to one another.

The Gemara raises an objection:

But we learned

in the Mishna:

“If he wrote on two walls of a house, or on two leaves of a ledger, and they are not read

together,”

he is exempt.

Here, too, they are not read together.

The Gemara answers:

There,

the writing lacks an act of bringing them together,

as it is impossible to bring them together without an act, namely, cutting away what separates them. But

here, the writing does not lack an act of bringing them together,

as Rabbi Ami is speaking of a case in which he wrote each letter on the edge of the board, so that they can be brought together without an act of cutting.

A tanna taught: If one corrected [

corrected]

one letter, he is liable.

The Gemara raises an objection:

Now, if one who writes one letter is exempt, is one who corrects one letter liable?!

The Gemara answers:

Rav Sheshet said: With what are we dealing here? For example, he removed the roof of a het and made it into two zayins,

thereby correcting the scroll.

Rava said: For example, he removed the tag of a dalet,

the protrusion on its right side,

and made it into a resh.

Although he corrected only one letter, this is nevertheless a significant act, since he thereby corrected the scroll, for it is prohibited to leave an uncorrected scroll in one’s possession. It is therefore comparable to writing one letter and thereby completing a scroll, concerning which it was said above that one is liable even according to the Sages.