Shabbat 106a — the Talmud in English

And Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yohanan said: If one of the brothers dies ![](pamud.bmp "

precise page location")

all the brothers should worry

lest they die.

If one of the members of a group dies, the entire group should worry.

Some say:

specifically

if the older brother died

the brothers should worry, since the attribute of justice has prevailed over the head of the household.

And some say:

specifically

if the younger brother died

the brothers, the calamity begins with the younger one.

We learned in the Mishna:

And all those who cause damage are exempt.

Rabbi Abbahu taught before Rabbi Yohanan: All those who cause damage are exempt, except for one who wounds and one who kindles

for we find a Mishna that one who wounds his fellow on Shabbat is liable, and likewise there is a Mishna that one who kindles a stack is liable, even though they cause damage. It follows that these labors are exceptions with regard to one who causes damage.

Rabbi Yohanan said to him: Go teach it outside

go outside and state that beraita there; that is to say, it is an error,

“one who wounds and one who kindles” is not a Mishna

for they too are exempt when causing damage.

And if you should conclude that it is a Mishna, “one who wounds”—

when he needs

the blood that emerges from the wound

for his dog

for it is an improvement with regard to the dog.

“One who kindles”—

when he needs its ashes

and therefore he is liable; but in the case of complete damage, he is exempt.

And we raise an objection against Rabbi Abbahu:

But we learned

in our Mishna:

All those who cause damage are exempt

which indicates even one who wounds and one who kindles, and it is difficult for the beraita of Rabbi Abbahu, which teaches: except for one who wounds and one who kindles?

And we resolve:

The Mishna is Rabbi Judah

who holds that one is liable for a labor that is not needed for its own purpose; and consequently there is no necessity to say that one who wounds and one who kindles differ from all the labors, for in their case too there are possible circumstances in which it is not damage, as we said above: when he needs it for his dog and when he needs its ashes. For even though with regard to the labor itself he causes damage, and it is a labor not needed for its own purpose, nevertheless he is liable for it; but for complete damage he is exempt even in the case of one who wounds and one who kindles.

The beraita is Rabbi Shimon

who holds that one is exempt for a labor that is not needed for its own purpose; and if so, it is impossible for there to be any case of wounding or kindling that is not damage. Even one who kindles wood for the purpose of cooking is considered to cause damage, for although it is an improvement with regard to others, nevertheless it is a labor not needed for its own purpose; therefore, one must say that one who wounds and one who kindles is liable even when causing damage.

And we explain:

What is the reason of Rabbi Shimon?

Since Scripture had to permit circumcision

on Shabbat [as we expounded: it is written, “And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised,” whereas it could have said “and on the eighth”; and from “on the day” we derive that it is even on Shabbat]. And circumcision is causing damage through wounding; it indicates

that one who wounds in general is liable

even when causing damage.

And since the Merciful One prohibited kindling concerning the daughter of a kohen

who committed adultery, whose punishment is burning, and we derive [in Yevamot 6b] that she is not burned on Shabbat,

infer from it: One who kindles in general is liable

even when causing damage.

And the Rashash asked: Why does he not derive it from the very labors of wounding and kindling, which were enumerated among the primary categories of labor because they were performed in the Tabernacle, and this is possible only when causing damage, as we said above?

And Rabbi Judah

can say to you:

There

in the case of circumcision and the daughter of a kohen,

it is an improvement, and in accordance with Rav Ashi, for Rav Ashi said: What difference is there to me between improving circumcision and improving a vessel

for in circumcision too, he improves the person. And likewise, in the case of the daughter of a kohen:

What difference is there to me between cooking a wick and cooking dyes

for the labor there is not kindling but cooking: they would cook a lead wick until it melted and place it in her mouth, and it is complete cooking and does not cause damage, but improves and completes the wick, like the cooking of dyes in the Tabernacle. But in the case of complete damage, one is exempt for wounding and kindling.

We learned in the Mishna:

The measure for whitening

is as the full width of a double sit.

Rav Yosef demonstrated—

double.

He would show with his fingers the distance between the middle finger and the index finger, and the measure is double that.

Rav Hiyya bar Ami demonstrated the simple measure.

Once, he showed the distance between the thumb and the index finger, which is twice that between the middle finger and the index finger.

Mishna:

Rabbi Judah says: One who traps a bird in a tower

which he placed in a chest,

and a deer in a house, is liable.

But a bird in a house is not yet considered trapped, since it can escape through the windows; and likewise, a deer that he brought into a garden or courtyard is not trapping.