Shabbat 121b — the Talmud in English

For Rav Yehuda and Rav Yirmeya bar Abba ![](pamud.bmp "

precise page location")

they brought couches,

beds on which to sit. But

for Rav Hanan bar Rava they did not bring one

and instead seated him on the ground.

He encountered him,

Rav Hanan, who was angry because they had seated him on the ground, encountered Rav Avin when he was

teaching it to his son,

teaching his son our Mishna, in these words: “And one overturns a bowl

over the excrement of a small child—

because of the small child,”

so that he should not strike it and become soiled.

He said to him,

Rav Hanan said to Rav Avin [as stated, Rav Hanan was angry with him], in a tone of mockery:

Avin the fool—

teaching foolishness to his son.

For why is it necessary to overturn a utensil over the excrement in order to prevent the soiling of the small child

? Is it not itself,

the excrement, not muktze. Rather, it is

prepared for

the eating of

dogs,

and if so, it is permitted to remove it from the place, and there is no need to overturn a bowl over it.

And if you would say that it was not fit for it,

the excrement was not prepared

from the day before,

at the onset of Shabbat, since it was born only on Shabbat, and it is therefore muktze.

It is impossible to say so.

For

was it not taught: Rivers that flow,

whose waters flow,

and springs that gush forth—

whose waters were outside the Shabbat boundary at the onset of Shabbat, and the waters flowed and reached the city on Shabbat, they do not acquire shevita at the place where they were at the onset of Shabbat, since flowing waters do not acquire a place of shevita. Therefore, when one draws the water into vessels, from then on the law of their shevita with regard to the Shabbat boundary

is that they are like the feet of any person

who draws them, for the Shabbat boundary established for the person who drew them is also the boundary of the water.

And it is proven that it is permitted to move the water, and we do not say that it is muktze because it was not prepared here on the eve of Shabbat, since a person’s mind is upon this water that will come on Shabbat.

The same law applies to the excrement of a small child: since a person’s mind is upon it that it will come, it is considered among that which is prepared to feed to dogs, and it is not muktze.

Rav Avin said to Rav Hanan:

But then how should I teach it,

the Mishna?

Rav Hanan said to him:

Say:

“One overturns a bowl

over the excrement of chickens,”

which is not fit for dogs to eat [and it is muktze and cannot be removed]—

because of the small child,

so that he should not strike it and become soiled.

And we challenge this:

Let him derive it from the fact that it is geraf shel re’i,

which it is permitted to remove because of its repulsiveness.

And if you would say

to answer that only

a geraf shel re’i,

that is, only excrement found in an earthenware vessel,

by virtue of the vessel,

by virtue of the earthenware vessel in which it is found,

yes,

indeed it is permitted to move it. But

it itself,

the refuse itself, that is, the excrement on its own—

no,

it may not be moved.

And here we are dealing with a case in which the excrement was not placed in a vessel, and therefore it cannot be removed by the law of geraf shel re’i.

It is impossible to say this. For,

there was that mouse,

which is as repulsive as excrement,

that was found in the isparmekei

among the spices

of Rav Ashi.

And he said to them,

Rav Ashi said:

Take it by its hair,

by its tail,

and remove it,

and remove it, although the mouse was not in a vessel.

And we resolve: Here we are dealing with a case in which the excrement did not require removal, since it was

in a refuse heap.

They needed only to cover it so that the infant would not strike it.

And we wonder:

And

why would

a small child in

a place of

refuse

be there, what would he be doing there?

What is he doing there?

And we resolve: Indeed, we are not dealing with excrement lying in a refuse heap, but with excrement found

in a courtyard,

in which a small child is commonly found.

And we challenge:

A courtyard also

should permit its removal, for

it is a geraf shel re’i!

And we resolve: The Mishna is speaking

of a refuse heap in the courtyard,

from which there is no need to remove the excrement.

We learned in the Mishna:

And

one overturns the bowl

over a scorpion

so that

it should not bite.

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: All harmful creatures

that kill a person

are killed on Shabbat.

And the Gemara understood that this applies even when they are not pursuing him and do not endanger him, since killing them is a labor that is not needed for its own purpose, because he has no need for the harmful creatures to be dead [and this is not similar to slaughtering an animal, where he desires the removal of its soul because he wants to eat it after slaughter]. Rather, his entire intention in killing them is so that they should not harm him. And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi holds that one is exempt for it, and its prohibition is only rabbinic; and with regard to killing harmful creatures, they did not decree.

Rav Yosef raised an objection:

We learned in a beraita:

Five

harmful creatures

are killed on Shabbat,

because they are liable to kill.

And these are they: the fly in the land of Egypt, the hornet in Nineveh, the scorpion in Hadyaiv, the snake in the Land of Israel, and a mad dog everywhere.

And we ask:

Who is it?

Who is the tanna who taught this beraita?

If you say Rabbi Yehuda—

he said that one is liable for a labor that is not needed for its own purpose!

Rather, is it not—

Rabbi Shimon?

And

it is proven that only

these

five harmful creatures

are permitted

to kill. But other

harmful creatures—

no!

Rabbi Yirmeya said: And who can tell us that this

beraita, which Rav Yosef taught and which is not taught in the Tosefta of Rabbi Hiyya and Rav Oshaya,

is a properly formulated one,

such that it may be used to raise a difficulty?

Perhaps the

beraita

is corrupted?

Rav Yosef said: I teach it,

as part of the collection of beraitot that I teach.

And I raised it as an objection

to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi.

And I myself resolve it—

that here we are speaking

of when they pursue,

the harmful creatures

him,

when it is clear that they are pursuing him in order to kill him,

and

it is then permitted to kill all harmful creatures—according to

everyone.

A tanna taught before Rava bar Rav Huna: One who kills snakes and scorpions on Shabbat,

when they are not pursuing him—

the spirit of the pious does not approve of him.

He said to him: And those pious men

who are particular—

the spirit of the Sages does not approve of them.

For in the end the harmful creatures will cause harm when they are angered.

And this disagrees with Rav Huna.

For Rav Huna saw a certain man killing a hornet,

a hornet.

He said to him: Is it possible that

“Did you

you have finished them

and completed the killing

of all of them,

the hornets? There are many of them remaining, so what have you accomplished by killing this one?

The Sages taught: If snakes and scorpions happened upon him,

then if

he killed them—

it is known that they happened upon him in order that he kill them.

If he did not kill them—

it is known that they happened upon him in order to kill him,

and the Holy One, blessed be He, showed him that he had sinned; rather,

a miracle was performed for him from Heaven.

Ulla said, and some say Rabbah bar bar Hanna said that Rabbi Yohanan said: When they hissed at him,

when the snake hisses in its anger, this is a sign that it wants to bite and kill; and if the snake did so, the person has a sign from Heaven that he sinned.

Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Once a

snake

fell into the b eit-midrash, and a certain Netyoti stood up [a

Israelite, so called after his place, “Netivot”]

and killed it.

Rabbi said: He encountered it

a snake—a person

like it.

It was raised as a dilemma before them:

What was Rabbi’s intention—was he condemning his act or praising him?

Was it:

“He encountered it like it”—

he acted well,

since the snake has the status of a pursuer, and therefore the person became its pursuer, who is permitted to kill it?

Or not

did he act well, and Rabbi said it disparagingly: one who kills a snake is like it.

Come and hear: For Rabbi Abba, son of Rabbi Hiyya bar

Abba, and Rabbi Zeira were sitting in the entrance

at the doorway

of the house of Rabbi Yannai.

A matter arose among them, and they asked Rabbi Yannai:

What is the law concerning killing snakes and scorpions on Shabbat?

He said to them: A hornet,

which is not so likely to cause harm,

I kill—

a snake and a scorpion,

which are likely to cause harm,

all the more so

that I kill them!

And it is proven that it is permitted to kill them.

And we reject this:

Perhaps

he kills them only when he is walking on his way

in the ordinary course,

and steps on them in a manner in which he does not intend to step on them. And this is permitted even according to Rabbi Yehuda, because on Shabbat there is a permission concerning mele'khet maḥshevet, and Rabbi Yehuda holds that an unintended act on Shabbat is forbidden only rabbinically, and in the case of harmful creatures they did not decree.

For Rav Yehuda said: Spittle,

found on the ground, and it is forbidden to smear it and smooth it because of the principal labor of memare’aḥ [smoothing], and it is likewise forbidden to smear it because he levels the depressions in the grooves of the house, and it is forbidden because of building —

he steps on it

while walking

in the ordinary course.

And Rav Sheshet said: A snake, he steps on it

and kills it in the course of his walking

in the ordinary course.

And Rav Ketina said: A scorpion—

he steps on it in the ordinary course.

Abba bar Marta, who was Abba bar Manyumi, was being pursued for

money owed to them by people

of the house of the Exilarch.

They brought him,

they brought him before them, and they

were tormenting him.

There was spittle thrown,

there was spittle thrown on the ground on Shabbat.

The Exilarch said to them: Bring a vessel,

bring a utensil,

overturn it

and overturn it

over it,

over the spittle.

He said to them,

Abba bar Manyumi said to them:

You do not need to,

to overturn a vessel over the spittle. For

this is what Rav Yehuda said: Spittle—

he steps on it in the ordinary course.

He said to them,

the Exilarch said to the creditors of Abba bar Manyumi:

He is a tzurva me-rabbanan,

a Torah scholar,

he is.

Release him,

leave him!

Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said that Rabbi Hanina said: Candelabra,

lamps

of the house of Rabbi,

which are not made of sections—

it is permitted to move them on Shabbat.

He said to him,

Rabbi Zeira asked

him:

Was it specifically

with

the candelabra that

can be lifted with one hand

that he permitted?

Or

even with heavy candelabra that can be lifted only

with two hands?