Shabbat 120a — the Talmud in English

And this stumbling-block is under your hand. ![](pamud.bmp "

exact location of the page")

Words,

the hidden reasons of the Torah,

upon which people cannot stand

to state them clearly and according to halakha

unless they stumble over them

in that they say them several times in a distorted form, if they

are under your hand—

You shall be an officer for us.

You shall be a leader for us and teach us Torah.

And the prophet Isaiah describes the answer of the man from whom they had asked to teach them:

“He shall swear on that day, saying: I shall not be a bandager.”

“There is no ‘he shall swear’ except an expression of an oath .

And so it is,

the verse in the Ten Commandments

says: “You shall not take the Name of the Lord

your God in vain,” which is the prohibition against a false oath.

“I shall not be a bandager”—

I shall not be,

I am not accustomed to be

among

those who are

confine themselves in the house of study.

“And in my house there is neither bread nor a garment”—

for I have neither Scripture, nor Mishna, nor Gemara in my possession.

And from here it is proved that indeed trustworthy people remained in Jerusalem, who say the truth!?

And we answer:

And from where

is it that because he is a truthful man he answers them that he does not know?

Perhaps

it is different there, for if he had said to them, “I have learned,”

that he knows how to study and teach,

they would have said to him: “Tell us!”

Tell us and teach us what you know!

But it is still possible to challenge this: His words prove that he was a trustworthy person. He could have avoided admitting that he had not attended the house of study.

He should have said:

he could have said

“I learned and forgot,”

that he had learned and forgotten.

And if so,

what

is this that he said,

“I shall not be a bandager”—

that

at all

studied in the house of study at all? This proves that trustworthy people remained.

And we answer:

It is not difficult.

Here—

with regard to words of Torah,

trustworthy people indeed remained.

Here—

with regard to business dealings,

they did not remain, and to them the verse referred.

Mishna:

The Sages permitted one to

rescue

from the fire

a basket full of loaves—

even though it contains one hundred meals—and a cake

large

of pressed figs,

even though it contains food for many meals,

and a barrel of wine.

And he says

also

to others: “Come and rescue for yourselves,”

for the needs of your meal .

And if they were astute,

they make an accounting with him after Shabbat,

for the wages of their labor, before they give him what they rescued .

To where may they rescue them,

the foods?

To a shared courtyard.

This is a special permission to rescue from the fire, but concerning other things they issued a decree not to rescue them, lest he come to extinguish the fire.

Ben Beteira says:

They may rescue

even to

a courtyard

that is not

shared.

And there,

[to the shared courtyard according to the first tanna, and according to Ben Beteira even to a courtyard that is not shared],

he takes out all his utensils of use

required for his needs on Shabbat itself,

and

he likewise

puts on everything that he can put on, and wraps himself in everything that he can wrap himself in,

and takes it out .

Rabbi Yose says:

He puts on at most

eighteen garments,

certain garments, as will be explained in the Gemara, and he is not permitted to remove them and put on and take out other garments.

He removes them,

and puts them on again,

other garments,

and takes them out .

And he says to others: “Come and rescue with me.”

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna that they may rescue a basket full of loaves.

And we raise a difficulty:

But was it not taught in the first clause

that they rescue

three meals, and no more!?

Rav Huna said: It is not difficult.

Here,

our Mishna—

where he comes to rescue,

in one basket at one time; he may rescue that one basket even though it contains many loaves.

Here,

in the first clause, where it is permitted to rescue only food for three meals, it is speaking

where he comes to fold,

to gather and join several baskets together in order to take them all out together, food for three meals, since each basket entails a separate exertion. Therefore:

If he comes to rescue—

he rescues all of them. If he comes to fold—

he folds only food for three meals.

Rav Abba bar Zavda said in the name of Rav: Both this and that—

are where he comes to fold, and it is not difficult.

Here—

to that same courtyard,

it is permitted even for many loaves, because this does not involve great exertion.

Here—

to another courtyard,

it is permitted only for food for three meals, because of the exertion involved.

Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua raised a question: He spread out his cloak and folded it,

and gathered food

and placed it

in the cloak,

and

again

folded,

gathered food

and placed it

in the cloak, and together they amounted to more than food for three meals—

what [is the law]?

Is it

like one who comes to rescue,

for he takes them out when they are wrapped in one cloak, and thus he is like one who rescues in one basket?

Or

perhaps, since he exerts himself gathering them into the cloak,

it is like one who comes to fold.

Come and hear

from what Rava said: Rav Shizvi misled

misled

Rav Hisda and expounded,

before him, a halakha that was not correct, and Rav Hisda accepted it from him.

And this is how he expounded to him concerning the beraita brought above [117b]: If a barrel broke at the top of the roof, he brings a vessel and places it beneath it in order to rescue what is leaking from the barrel:

“Provided that he does not bring a vessel that holds more than three meals!”

And from what Rava said—that Rav Shizvi misled Rav Hisda in this halakha—

infer from it:

that one who gathers food in one vessel, as here, where the liquid drips from the barrel into the vessel little by little,

is like one who comes to rescue,

since he does this in one vessel,

and it is properly permitted

to rescue more than three meals.

Rav Nahman bar Yitzhak said to Rava: What is the mistake?

That is, from where do you know that Rav Shizvi was mistaken in this halakha, so that you claim that he thereby misled Rav Hisda?

He said to him: For it is taught

in the beraita:

“Provided that he does not bring another vessel and catch [the liquid], or another vessel and combine [the liquid].”

And it should be inferred: Specifically,

it is another vessel that he may not

bring.

But in that vessel,

in that same vessel—

he rescues as much as he wishes,

he rescues as much as he wants.

We learned in the Mishna:

And

they rescue

a cake of pressed figs,

and make an accounting with him for their labor after Shabbat.

And we raise a difficulty: The

accounting

that they make with him—

what is its purpose?

Why should they make an accounting with him for the payment for their labor? For

they acquire from ownerless property

what they rescued, and they may take everything for themselves.

Rav Hisda said: They taught here a measure of piety,

to return it to him.

Rava said:

What, are these people

pious

—

the wage of Shabbat

payment for their labor on Shabbat

do they take

do they take? And although this is not a complete wage of Shabbat, since they acquire the object itself from ownerless property for themselves, nevertheless pious people must refrain even from such a wage.

Rather, Rava said: Here, we are dealing with a

rescuer who is a person

fearful of Heaven

but is not pious,

we are dealing [with him].

And he is not pleased

to benefit from

the money of

others,

who did not make it ownerless willingly, and therefore he returns it.

And

on the other hand,

he is also not pleased to exert himself for nothing .

And this is what he is saying: And if they were

those God-fearing people

astute

in the laws of Shabbat,

who knew that in such a case this is not a wage of Shabbat —

they make an accounting with him after Shabbat.

We learned in the Mishna:

And to where may they rescue,

and so forth. And he says to them, “Come and rescue for yourselves.”

And we raise a difficulty:

What is different here,

with regard to foods,

that it teaches “‘Come and rescue

for

yourselves’”?

And what is different here,

with regard to garments,

that it teaches “‘Come and rescue

with

me’”?

They said: With regard to foods it teaches, “for yourselves”—

because he is not entitled to them,

for from the foods it is fitting for him

only food for three meals.

But with regard to garments it teaches, “with me”—

because he is entitled to them,

for all the garments that they take out are fitting for him

for the entire day .

The Sages taught: He puts it on, carries it out, and takes it off. And he again

puts it on, carries it out, and takes it off, even throughout the entire day—

the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Yose says:

He puts on only

eighteen garments,

certain garments.

And these are the eighteen garments: a makturon, an onkeli,

and a punda. A linen kalbus, and a haluk, and afiliyot, and a ma'aforet, and two safarkin, and two shoes. And two anpila'ot, and two pargad, and a belt around his loins, and a hat on his head, and a scarf around his neck.

that a person is accustomed to putting on these garments together, and in the coldest places this is the manner of dressing, and therefore in this way it protects [the objects] from the fire; but more than these is considered a burden and is forbidden.

Mishna:

Rabbi Shimon ben Nanas says: They spread a skin

moist

of a kid upon a chest, a box, or a cabinet that the fire has seized,

because it

the moist skin of the kid only

is singed,

is singed and is not burned, and thereby it protects the chest so that it will not be burned.

And they make a partition

before the fire

with all vessels, whether full

of water

or empty, so that the fire will not

cross over .

Rabbi Yose forbids [using] new earthenware vessels full of water, because

new earthenware vessels

cannot withstand the fire, and they burst, and they extinguish

the water

the fire.

Gemara:

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: If a tallit is seized by the fire on one side—

they place upon it

water on the other side, and if it is extinguished—

it is extinguished.

He raises an objection

from what we learned in a beraita:

If a tallit is seized by the fire on one side—

he spreads it out and covers himself with it, and if it is extinguished—

it is extinguished. And similarly, if a Torah scroll is seized by the fire—

he spreads it out and reads from it, and if it is extinguished—

it is extinguished.

And it is explained that they permitted only spreading it out, but it was not permitted to pour water upon the garment in order to protect it.