Shabbat 113a — the Talmud in English

What might you say?

exact page location

one of them—

from the ropes—

he will completely nullify

it, and he will take out the animal with difficulty, and it will be a permanent knot. [And according to the second explanation: perhaps he will untie only one of the knots, on one side of the opening].

It teaches us

that he unties everything.

Rav Yosef said that Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The halakha is according to Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.

Abaye said to him: The halakha—

by inference, do they disagree?

He said to him: What difference does it make to you?

He said to him:

And is it that

you thoroughly learn

the study of the Gemara—

a song

like mere singing

shall it be!?

That is to say, one must know in the study of the Gemara also the matters and the methods that are not practical halakha.

Mishna:

One ties the bucket

that is over the mouth of the well, in order to draw water with it,

with a belt,

with a belt strap, for the knot is not a permanent knot, since he needs the belt, and he will certainly remove it from there after drawing the water.

But not with a rope

that is destined to remain fixed there, and it is a permanent knot:

Rabbi Yehuda permits,

as will be explained in the Gemara.

Rabbi Yehuda stated a general principle: Any knot that is not permanent—

one is not liable for it.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna that one does not tie the bucket with a rope.

And we raised a question about it:

A rope—

what is it?

If you say an ordinary rope—

is it possible that

Rabbi Yehuda permits

tying it? But

it is a permanent knot!?

Rather, a weaver’s rope,

of weavers, which is destined to be removed.

That is to say, the Rabbis hold that we decree

regarding

a weaver’s rope

that one should not tie with it, even though it is not permanent,

due to an ordinary rope.

And Rabbi Yehuda holds that we do not decree.

And we raise a contradiction,

from a beraita in which the opposite is written:

If a bucket rope is torn

in its middle—

he should not tie it

to the rope itself on both sides at the place where it was torn,

but he should make a bow.

And Rabbi Yehuda says:

He should not tie and he should not make a loop of the two parts of the rope from the rope itself; rather, he should take the two ends of the rope, and

wrap around them

around its two ends

a funda

a hollow belt

or a belt,

a belt strap.

Provided that he does not make a loop with it

with the rope itself, lest he come to tie it.

For Rabbi Yehuda holds that they decreed concerning making a loop due to tying, while the Rabbis hold that they did not decree concerning making a loop due to tying.

The difficulty from Rabbi Yehuda against Rabbi Yehuda

is that he decreed concerning making a loop due to tying, but did not decree concerning a weaver’s rope due to an ordinary rope.

The difficulty from the Rabbis against the Rabbis

is that they decreed concerning a weaver’s rope due to an ordinary rope, but did not decree concerning making a loop due to tying.

And we answer:

The difficulty from the Rabbis against the Rabbis is not difficult.

For

a rope

ordinary

with a rope

of weavers

is confused,

and they will come to permit tying every rope.

But

a loop with tying—

is not confused.

The difficulty from Rabbi Yehuda against Rabbi Yehuda

also

is not difficult.

For in fact, according to Rabbi Yehuda, they did not decree.

And

there

concerning making a loop—

it is not because a loop is confused with tying

that it is forbidden to make a loop.

Rather,

Rabbi Yehuda holds that

a loop itself—

is tying.

Rabbi Abba said that Rav Hiyya bar Ashi said that Rav said: A person may bring a rope from his house and tie it

on one side

to the cow and

on the other side

to the manger.

And he need not be concerned lest one of the knots not be untied and it become a permanent knot.

Rabbi Aḥa Arikha, who is Rabbi Aḥa bar Pappa, raised an objection to Rabbi Abba:

A rope that is in the manger—

he ties it to the cow, and

a rope

that is on the cow—

he ties it to the manger,

so that he will certainly untie the knot.

Provided that he does not bring a rope from his house and tie it to the cow and to the manger,

for perhaps he will untie only one of the knots.

And we answer:

There, it is an ordinary rope;

we are concerned lest he not untie both knots.

Here—

it is a weaver’s rope,

for he will certainly untie both of them.

And since the Gemara dealt with a rope of weavers, it brought additional laws dealing with the tools of weavers.

Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The tools of weaving

are not muktze, and

it is permitted to move them on Shabbat

for a permitted use, since they are not intended solely for the work of weaving.

They asked Rav Yehuda: The upper weight and the lower weight

[see the illustration at the end of the book], which people do not move because of their weight—

what is it

to move them on Shabbat? Shall we say that they are considered like utensils whose work is only for a prohibition, which it is forbidden to move?

At times Rav Yehuda answered them,

“Yes,”

meaning that it is permitted to move them,

and

at times he answered them,

“No,”

and prohibited it to them.

And

the matter was

slack,

their permission was loose because of the uncertainty,

in his hands.

It was stated: Rav Naḥman said that Shmuel said: It is permitted to move the tools of weaving on Shabbat, and even the upper weight and the lower weight, but not the posts.

Rava said to Rav Naḥman: What is different about the posts, that they may not

be moved?

If you say

because

they make holes

since when they are removed from the ground, he moves the earth in which they are stuck.

It is impossible to say this.

For the

holes

that remain in the ground—

come into being by themselves!

And the proof that one is not liable for holes made because of removing something from the ground is from that

which we learned:

One who buries turnips and radishes

in the earth in order to preserve them, without their taking root in it,

under a grapevine.

If some of their leaves are exposed—

this is not planting, and it is permitted to do this initially, and

he need not be concerned:

Neither because of prohibited mixtures

in a vineyard,

nor because of

planting in

the Sabbatical year,

nor because of

the obligation of

tithe.

And they may be removed

from the place where they were buried even

on Shabbat!

If so, why is it forbidden to remove the posts of the weaving tools?

Rav Naḥman said to him:

In a field

it is permitted to remove them because

he will not come to level holes,

and therefore they permitted him to do so initially.

But

here,

with the weaving posts that are

in a house—

he will come to level holes,

and they decreed that it is forbidden.

Rabbi Yoḥanan asked Rabbi Yehuda bar Leוואי: The tools of weaving,

the weaving machine [see the illustration at the end of the book, in the work of a weaver],

such as the upper weight and the lower weight—

what is it to move them on Shabbat?

He said to him: They may not be moved.

What is the reason?

Because they cannot be moved

due to their weight in order to use them for another permitted use. And they are utensils whose work is only for a prohibition.

Mishna:

a.

One folds the garments

the clothes on Shabbat when he removes them, so that they will not become wrinkled, and he folds and folds again

even four or five times,

provided that he does this in order to put them on again that same day, so that his folding will not be preparation from Shabbat for a weekday.

b.

And one makes the beds from the night of Shabbat for Shabbat.

But not

the beds

from Shabbat for the conclusion of Shabbat.

c.

Rabbi Yishmael says: One folds the garments, and one makes the beds—

from Yom Kippur

that occurs on the eve of Shabbat

for Shabbat.

And

likewise,

the fats of Shabbat are offered on Yom Kippur

that occurs on Sunday.

But not

are the fats of the sacrifices

of Yom Kippur offered on Shabbat.

Rabbi Akiva says: Not

the fats

of Shabbat are offered on Yom Kippur, and not

the fats

of Yom Kippur are offered on Shabbat.

Gemara:

The scholars of the house of Rabbi Yannai said: They taught

that one folds the garments

only with one person.

But with two people—

no,

they do not fold them, because through their combined strength they smooth out the wrinkles that have already formed, and it is forbidden to repair a utensil on Shabbat.

And with one person also—

we said

that one folds

only new garments,

which are stiff and do not become wrinkled.

But with old garments

that become wrinkled—

no,

they did not permit folding them, because by doing so he repairs their wrinkling.

And with new garments also, we said

that it is permitted to fold them

only white

garments;

but with colored garments,

whose folding repairs them—

no,

they did not permit it.

And we said

that with white garments they permitted folding

only when he has no

other garment

to change into.

But

if

he has

another garment

to change into—

no,

they did not permit folding even white garments.

It was taught: The household of Rabban Gamliel would not fold

even

their white garments, because they had garments to change into.

And since we dealt with the laws of garments on Shabbat, the Gemara brings another matter concerning wearing garments in honor of Shabbat.

Rav Huna said: If he has [a garment] to change into

from weekday garments into Shabbat garments—

he should change

in honor of Shabbat.

And if he does not have

a garment

to change into—

he should let down his garments

downward, like the custom of wealthy people who walk in long garments. And he should do this so that it will be recognizable in the form of his clothing, for the honor of Shabbat, as distinct from the form of his clothing on weekdays.

Rav Safra objected to this: But

his conduct like one of the wealthy

appears

to people

as arrogance,

like one who takes pride in what he does not have.

And we answer:

Since every day he does not act

in this manner,

and

only

today

for the honor of Shabbat

is he acting

in this manner— \-

he does not appear arrogant.

It is written [in Isaiah 58]:

“And you shall honor it, rather than following your ways,

pursuing your affairs and speaking words.” And we expound:

“And you shall honor it”—

that your Shabbat garment should not be like your weekday garment. And as Rabbi Yoḥanan, who called his garments

his clothing

“my honors,”

for they honor their wearer.

“Rather than following your ways”—

that your walking on Shabbat should not be like your walking on a weekday.

And as he explains it below.

“Pursuing your affairs”—

your affairs are forbidden

to engage in them. But

matters of Heaven are permitted

to engage in them, such as pledging charity to the poor and betrothing the children.