Shabbat 122a (קכב.) — the Talmud in English

He said to him: Like those of your father’s household .

And Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said that Rabbi Hanina said: The wagons of Rabbi’s household

which were made for people to sit in and not for carrying loads

may be carried on Shabbat.

He said to him,

Rabbi Zeira asked him:

Rabbi Zeira

Is the permission to carry them specifically

with

wagons that are not heavy, which are

carried by one person,

or

even heavy ones, which can be carried only

by two people?

He said to him: Like those of your father’s household.

And Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: Rabbi Hanina permitted Rabbi’s household to drink wine

that had been brought to them

in a gentile’s wagons,

by a gentile, even if the wine was sealed

with a single seal

alone. There is no concern that the gentile may have poured it as an offering to idolatry.

And I do not know whether it is because he holds

Rabbi Hanina

in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer,

who permits wine sealed with a single seal for everyone,

or because

the gentile was subject to

the fear of the house of the Nasi,

since, because the gentile feared Rabbi’s household, as he was the Nasi, he would not dare pour it as an idolatrous offering, and therefore a single seal was sufficient. But with other people, the wine must have two seals.

Mishna:

a.

If a gentile kindled a lamp

on Shabbat,

a Jew may use its light.

But if he kindled it for a Jew,

it is prohibited

for a Jew to use it .

b.

If a gentile drew

on Shabbat

water

from a well located in a private domain, and took it out

to water his animal,

a Jew drinks after him

from it.

But if he drew the water for a Jew,

with water—

it is prohibited

for a Jew to use it .

c.

If a gentile made a ramp for descending on it

from a ship on Shabbat,

a Jew descends after him.

But if he made it for a Jew,

it is prohibited.

There was an incident involving Rabban Gamliel and the Elders, who were traveling on a ship, and a gentile made a ramp for descending on it, and Rabban Gamliel and the Elders descended on it .

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna three examples in which a gentile performed work on Shabbat, where there is a distinction depending on whether he performed the work for his own needs or for the needs of the Jew.

And it is necessary

for the Mishna to teach all three examples.

For had it taught us

only

a lamp,

we would have said that it is permitted for a Jew to benefit from it when the gentile made it for his own needs, because there would be no reason to decree lest the gentile perform additional work for the Jew as well,

because a lamp

that benefits

one

person, the gentile, is

a lamp

that illuminates also

a hundred

people.

But

with a gentile drawing

water,

there would be reason to say that

we should decree

not to benefit from the water, because

perhaps he will come to increase

the amount of water

for the sake of a Jew.

It teaches us that we do not issue such a decree.

This works for a lamp and water, but

a ramp—

why do I need it?

And we answer:

The incident involving Rabban Gamliel and the Elders teaches us this.

The Sages taught: If a gentile gathered grasses

for his own needs,

a Jew may feed

from what remains

after him.

But if he gathered them for a Jew,

—

it is prohibited .

If

a gentile drew

water

from a private domain into a public domain in order

to water the animal

of the gentile,

a Jew may water his animal after him. But if a gentile drew water for a Jew,

the gentile having drawn the water

it is prohibited.

When are these matters said,

that it is permitted to use something that a gentile did for himself on Shabbat?

When he is not acquainted with him,

the Jew.

But

if the gentile

is acquainted with him,

the Jew,

it is prohibited,

because he also acts for the sake of the Jew whom he knows, and not for himself alone.

And we challenge this:

Is that so? But Rav Huna said that Rabbi Hanina said: A person may place his animal

to graze

upon grasses on Shabbat,

and there is no concern lest he come to reap for it.

But he may not

place it

upon

food that is

muktze on Shabbat,

lest he take the muktze in his hand and feed it to the animal.

If so, this is difficult: How can a Jew place his animal upon grasses that a gentile gathered on Shabbat for the gentile’s needs? Those grasses, having been detached on Shabbat, are muktze, and there is concern that the Jew may take some of the muktze grasses in order to feed them to his animal!?

And we answer: Here we are dealing with a case in which the Jew does not place his animal upon the grasses, but

stands in front of it,

blocking its path,

and it goes

on its own to the place of the grasses

and eats .

Thus there is no concern that he will take them in his hand and feed them to the animal.

The master said: When are these matters said—

when he is not acquainted with him; but when he is acquainted with him—

it is prohibited.

And we challenge this:

But Rabban Gamliel,

who came with the gentile on the ship,

was acquainted with him!

For they had come together on the ship .

Abaye said:

At the time he made the ramp,

it was in his absence .

Rava said: You may even say

that he made it

in his presence—

the law of the ramp is like the law of a lamp, concerning which it is said:

A lamp for one

is a lamp for a hundred.

But when the gentile knows the Jew and gathers grasses, it is prohibited to benefit from them, since he increases his gathering for the sake of the Jew .

The Gemara raises an objection: Rabban Gamliel said to them: Since he made it in our absence,

the gentile

let us descend by it!

Rabban Gamliel did not rely on the permission of “a lamp for one is a lamp for a hundred” to permit using it even when it was made in his presence!

And we answer:

Say instead: Since he made it

the gentile [even if he had made it in our presence

let us descend by it.]

Come and hear: A city in which Jews and gentiles reside, and there was a bathhouse in it that was heated on Shabbat.

If the majority are gentiles

in the city,

it is permitted to bathe in it immediately

when Shabbat ends.

If the majority are Jews

in the city,

he must wait

on Saturday night

until the water has become hot!

Why do we not permit this based on “heating for one is heating for a hundred,” and permit bathing even when the majority are Jews, since the gentiles, who are the minority, are also being heated for?

And we answer:

There, when they heat

the bathhouse,

they heat it with the majority in mind,

and it turns out that they heat it only for the sake of the Jews.

Come and hear: A lamp kindled at a gathering

of people.

If the majority are gentiles

there,

it is permitted

for a Jew

to use its light .

But if the majority are Jews

there,

it is prohibited.

If they are half and half,

it is prohibited.

This proves that we do not apply the permission of “a lamp for one is a lamp for a hundred” here. Since the majority are Jews, the gentile kindled it also for them, and this prohibits its use even in a case in which “a lamp for one is a lamp for a hundred” would otherwise apply.