Shabbat 117a (קיז.) — the Talmud in English

And we challenge this:

Is it comparable to

moving the bookcase in order to move the hide?

There,

in the case of the book—

the case

became a base for the

book, which is

an item that is permitted,

and therefore it is permitted to move it.

Here,

with regard to the hide—

the

hide

became a base for the

meat, which is

an item that is prohibited on Shabbat, since the meat of the Paschal offering may be eaten only in the evening, at the conclusion of Shabbat, when the Festival of Passover begins; therefore, it is prohibited to move it.

Rather, this is what they said to him: If one may save a bookcase together with the book, even though there are coins inside it,

which are muktzeh—

may we not move a hide on account of the meat?

And we challenge this:

Is it comparable?

There,

the case

became

a base for a prohibited item,

the coins,

and for a permitted item,

the book.

But here,

with regard to the hide—

all of it became a base

only

for the

meat, which is

a prohibited item!

Rather, this is what they said to him: If one brings a case containing coins from elsewhere in order to save a Torah scroll,

even though, at the time it is brought, it is a base only for a prohibited item—

may we not move a hide on account of the meat!?

And we inquire concerning this:

But this matter itself,

moving a case containing only coins for the purpose of saving a book—

from where do we know

that it is permitted to do this?

If you say that since,

just as in a case where

there are coins

in a case that contains a book,

the tanna did not

require that one

throw them out,

but may take the case together with the book, along with the coins inside it—

we may likewise bring an empty case containing coins in order to save a book.

Is it comparable?

There,

when there are coins with the book, we did not require that the coins be thrown out, because

in the meantime,

before he throws them out,

a fire might break out

in the book.

But here,

when he brings an empty case from elsewhere,

in the meantime,

while he must bring it in any event—

let him throw them out!

He can also turn the case over and shake the coins out of it.

Rather, Mar bar Rav Ashi said: Actually,

as we said initially.

They disagree only with regard to flaying, and they compared this to saving a case together with a book.

And as for what is difficult for you—that here it is moving, whereas here it is a labor—

here we are dealing with a case

where he does not need the hide, since he does not intend to flay for the sake of the hide, and in such a case it is not considered a labor by Torah law.

But didn’t Abaye and Rava both say: Rabbi Shimon concedes

that although he maintains that a labor performed on Shabbat without intent to perform the labor is permitted,

in a case of “cut off its head and it will not”

die!” This is an expression used by analogy: It is as though one says, “I will cut off the head of this animal, but I do not intend for it to die.” Rabbi Shimon concedes that when it is certain that his actions will result in a labor, it is prohibited even if he does not intend it.

And if so, when he flays, it should certainly be prohibited, since it is clear that he is flaying the hide?

And we answer:

He removes it in strips, cutting the hide into small pieces, which is not the usual manner of flaying.

Carrying an object on Shabbat from a private domain into a public domain is prohibited by Torah law. The Sages added a prohibition against places resembling a public domain, forbidding carrying objects into them and moving objects within them. "

A mavוי is a passageway leading into the public domain.

The mavוי is enclosed on its sides by partitions, with an opening at its end through which the residents of the houses go out into the public domain.

By Torah law it is considered a private domain by virtue of the partitions surrounding it. However, since it serves as a passageway for many people who live in the houses surrounding it to the public domain, the Sages decreed that objects may not be moved within it or carried into it.

This decree has two aspects:

First, since it is a place intended for public passage, it appears to be an independent private domain, distinct from a private individual’s domain. The Sages therefore decreed that on Shabbat one may not carry from one private domain to another, lest people err and permit carrying from a private domain into a public domain.

The second is that since it serves the people living around it as a passageway to the public domain, it itself appears like a public domain. If people were to move objects within it or carry objects into it, they might err and carry from a private domain into a public domain, mistakenly think that it is permitted to move objects in a public domain, or err and carry objects into it from the public domain [within four cubits].

An explanation of the rationale for these decrees appears in the writings of the early authorities at the beginning of tractate Eruvin.

The Sages also instituted means by which moving objects in a mavוי could be permitted, through adjustments that prevent the concerns on both levels.

a. They instituted “partnerships of the passageways”: All the residents of the mavוי contribute food and place it in one location, so that it is as though all the residents of the mavוי live in a single domain and do not each constitute a separate domain. Thus, carrying does not take place from one person’s domain into another’s.

b. A leḥi [a post] or a crossbeam is placed at the entrance of the mavוי, thereby separating it from the public domain. It is now a complete private domain, and there is no concern that people will come to compare it to a public domain.

We learned in the Mishna:

And to where may one save them—

to a mavוי that is not open at both ends. Ben Beteira says: Even to one that is open at both ends.

And we inquire concerning this:

What are the circumstances of a

mavוי that is

open at both ends,

and

what are the circumstances of a

mavוי that is

not open at both ends?

Rav Ḥisda said:

A mavוי that has

three partitions

on three of its sides,

and

on the fourth side

two leḥayim—

this is a mavוי that is not open at both ends.

A mavוי that has

three partitions and one leḥi—

this is a mavוי that is open at both ends.

And both—

the Rabbis and Ben Beteira—

agree with the view of Rabbi Eliezer.

As we learned in the Mishna: The preparation of a mavוי:

Beit Shammai say: A leḥi and a crossbeam.

And Beit Hillel say: Either a leḥi or a crossbeam.

Rabbi Eliezer says: Two leḥayim,

one on each side of the entrance.

Rabba said to him:

Does a mavוי that has

three partitions and one leḥi—

a mavוי—

do you call it “open at both ends”?

Furthermore, according to the Rabbis,

who say that one may save items to a mavוי that is not open at both ends—and we have now said that this is a mavוי with three partitions and two leḥayim, a mavוי properly closed—if so,

we should save into it

also

food and drink.

Yet from the wording of the Rabbis it appears that food may be saved only to a courtyard with an eruv, and not to a mavוי; only a book may be saved to a mavוי that is not open at both ends!

Rather, Rabba said: Two partitions,

one here and one there,

and two leḥayim

at the two ends of one of the partitions—

this is a mavוי that is not open at both ends.

Two partitions and one leḥi—

this is a mavוי that is open at both ends.

And both agree with the view of Rabbi Yehuda.

Ben Beteira permitted moving objects to a mavוי that has only two partitions and one leḥi.

As it is taught in a beraita: Moreover, Rabbi Yehuda said:

One who has two houses on opposite sides of a public domain—

he makes a leḥi here,

at the end of one house,

and a leḥi here,

at the other end of the other house.

Or

he makes

a crossbeam here and a crossbeam here—

and he carries and conducts business in the middle.

They said to him: One cannot join a public domain in this manner.

Abaye said to him: According to you as well, in accordance with the Rabbis, we should save into it

of the mavוי that is completely closed according to Rabbi Yehuda

food and drink!?