Shabbat 116b — the Talmud in English

that he was taking a name

that he was concerned to publicize his good name

that he does not accept a bribe,

but he would accept it in secret.

They sought to mock him.

Rabban Gamliel and his sister Ima Shalom wished to ridicule him.

She brought him

Ima Shalom

a golden lamp,

she brought him a golden lamp as a bribe,

and went before him.

And she came before him.

She said to him: I desire

my wish is

that it be divided for me

that they give me a share as an heiress,

among the property of the women’s household,

among the property that comes to the women’s share in the inheritance.

He said to them: Divide it,

and give her her share as an heiress.

He said to him,

Rabban Gamliel:

It is written for us

in our Torah:

where there is a son,

where there is a son, only he inherits, whereas

a daughter

the daughter

does not inherit;

she does not inherit.

He said to him: From the day that you were exiled from your land,

from the day that you were exiled from your land,

the Torah of Moses was taken away from you,

the Torah of Moses was taken away from you,

and another book was given to you.

And another book was given to you.

And it is written in it: A son and a daughter —

inherit as one.

On the following day, he again brought him,

Rabban Gamliel

a Libyan donkey.

A Libyan donkey, which is valuable.

He said to them: I continued

and read

to the end of the book

to the end of the other book that was given to you,

and

I found that

it was written in it: I

the author of this book,

did not come to subtract from the Torah of Moses, nor did I come to add to the Torah of Moses.

For I did not come to change the laws of the Torah,

and it is written in it

in the book of Moses:

where there is a son —

«там, где есть сын» —

a daughter does not inherit.

She said to him,

Ima Shalom:

Give light, give light,

shine your light

like a lamp,

like the golden lamp that I gave you, and judge in my favor.

Rabban Gamliel said to her: The donkey has come,

the Libyan donkey that I gave you,

and it kicked

and kicked

the lamp,

the golden lamp. And they did so in order to publicize his disgrace.

We learned in the Mishna:

And for what reason do they not read

the Writings?

Rav said: They taught

that they do not read the Writings

only during the time of the beit-midrash, the house of study.

But when it is not the time of the house of study —

they read.

And Shmuel said: “Even when it is not the time of the house of study, one may not read.”

And we challenged this:

Is that so? But Nehardea was Shmuel’s place, and in Nehardea they would conclude the order

they were accustomed to read

the Writings during

the time of

the afternoon prayer of Shabbat!

Rather, if it was stated, it was stated as follows:

Rav said: They taught only in a place

where the sage delivers a sermon, in

house of study; but when not in the house of study —

they read.

And Shmuel said: “Whether in the house of study or not in the house of study, during the time of the house of study —

they do not read,

because it causes him to refrain from going to listen.

When it is not the time of the house of study —

they read.

And Shmuel follows his own reasoning, for in Nehardea they would conclude the order of the Writings during the afternoon prayer of Shabbat.

And the afternoon prayer is not the time of the sermon.

Rav Ashi said:

Actually, as we said initially,

that according to Shmuel they do not read at all.

And Shmuel follows Rabbi Nehemiah.

As it was taught in a beraita: Although they said that the Sacred Writings may not be read —

but they may study them and expound them.

If one requires a verse —

he brings it and looks in it.

Rabbi Nehemiah said: For what reason did they say that the Sacred Writings may not be read —

so that they will say: With the Sacred Writings one may not read, and all the more so with ordinary documents .

Since this is the reason for the prohibition, there is no distinction at all between the time of the house of study and any other time.

And Shmuel himself held like Rabbi Nehemiah, but he instituted in Nehardea according to the Sages that one may not read during the sermon, but outside the time of the sermon one may read.

Mishna:

They save the cover of a Torah scroll together with the scroll

. And the cover of the phylacteries together with the phylacteries, even though there are

coins inside them.

And to where may one rescue them?

To an alleyway that is not open through.

Ben Beteira says: Even to one that is open through.

Gemara:

The Sages taught: The fourteenth

of Nisan

that falls on Shabbat,

when the Passover offering is slaughtered on it —

they strip

the skin of the

Passover offering

beginning from its hind legs

until the chest,

so that they can remove its sacrificial fats and burn them on the altar on Shabbat, but beyond this they do not strip it,

the words of Rabbi Ishmael, son of Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka.

And the Sages say: They strip all of it.

And we considered the matter:

Granted, according to Rabbi Ishmael, son of Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka,

it is understandable that they strip only until the chest —

for it has been made

thereby

a need of Heaven,

since in such a state it is already possible to remove the sacrificial fats.

But according to the Sages —

what is the reason

that they permitted stripping all of it on Shabbat? After all, this is not a need of Heaven, and the labor of stripping skin is one of the principal labors?

Rabba bar bar Hana said that Rabbi Yohanan said: For the verse says [Proverbs 16]:

“Every work of the Lord

is for His purpose,”

for His honor. For every act done in the Temple that contains the honor of the Lord is permitted on Shabbat.

And here,

in the matter of stripping the entire skin on Shabbat —

what

“for His purpose”

of the Lord

is there?

Rav Yosef said:

in order

that it not become putrid,

the flesh of the offering, which becomes warm if they do not strip it of its skin. And it is not honor for the Lord that the food of those who eat from His table should be putrid.

Rava said:

in order

that the sacred offerings not lie like an animal carcass.

What is the difference between them?

There is a difference between them in a case where it is lying on a golden table,

if they placed the offering, which had not been completely stripped, on this golden table. The offering is not lying like a carcass, but it becomes putrid.

Alternatively —

a day of the north wind,

when a northern wind blows, so that the flesh of the offering does not become putrid, but it is lying like a carcass.

We further considered the matter:

And Rabbi Ishmael, son of Rabbi

Yohanan ben Beroka,

who prohibits stripping it entirely,

this “work of the Lord is for His purpose” —

what does he do with it?

That is, what honor of the Lord is there to which one must attend according to him?

And we answer: It teaches

that he should not remove the sacrificial fats

from the animal by making an incision in the side of the offering

before stripping the skin.

What is the reason?

Rav Huna, son of Rav Natan, said: Because of the strands

of wool that will become entangled in the sacrificial fats when he removes them through the incision.

Rav Hisda said that Mar Ukva said: What did the scholars answer —

those who dispute him —

to Rabbi Ishmael, son of Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka?

This is what they said to him: If they save

from the fire

the cover of the Torah scroll

even though there are coins in it,

together with the scroll,

because out of honor for the Lord they permit it even when that act also contains a need of an ordinary person [which is prohibited on Shabbat] —

shall we not strip

the

Passover offering

of its skin,

even though this contains the honor of the Lord, because its stripping would also involve an act for the need of an ordinary person!?

And we challenged this:

Are these comparable,

rescuing the scroll together with the cover that contains coins and stripping the entire skin?

There,

in the rescue of the scroll, the entire prohibition is

moving

the muktze, which is prohibited for an ordinary person only by rabbinic law.

Whereas

here,

stripping the skin is a principal

labor

of Torah law!

Rav Ashi said: In two matters

in two matters concerning the Passover offering

they dispute

the Sages with Rabbi Ishmael, son of Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka.

They dispute concerning moving

the offering together with its skin after its sacrificial fats have been removed, in the law of muktze, whose prohibition is rabbinic. According to Rabbi Ishmael, it is prohibited to move the Passover offering even from the sun to the shade, since its skin is muktze.

And they also dispute

concerning stripping the skin, which is a dispute

concerning a labor

of Torah law.

And this is what they said to him

with regard to the prohibition that Rabbi Ishmael imposed against moving the Passover offering:

If they save the cover of the Torah scroll together with the scroll,

despite moving the coins —

shall we not move the skin

of the offering

by virtue of the flesh,

since it is the honor of Heaven that the flesh not become putrid, and by virtue of moving the flesh of the offering we also move its skin?