Shabbat 123b — the Talmud in English

Rav Naḥman said: From where do I say it

that it is forbidden

?

For we learned — one may not make

exact page location")

an emetic on Shabbat

It is forbidden to drink liquids that cause him to vomit what he ate so that he will be able to eat much on Shabbat, for this is like improving a person. And we see from this that everything resembling improving a person on Shabbat is forbidden, and the same applies to arranging the bones of a baby, which is forbidden.

And Rav Sheshet

will say to you:

There

in the case of an emetic, it

is not customary

It is not customary to do this, and therefore it is considered improving on Shabbat.

Here,

in the case of arranging the bones of a baby, it

is customary

for him, and this is like feeding and giving drink to the baby, and it is permitted.

Rav Sheshet said: From where do I say it

that arranging the bones of a baby is permitted?

For we learned: A hand-needle

may be moved in order

to remove a thorn with it.

And we see from this that it is permitted to remove the thorn, for improving a person with something that is not medicinal, where there is no concern of grinding medicinal substances, is permitted; and the same applies to arranging the bones of a baby, which is permitted.

And Rav Naḥman

will say to you:

There,

the thorn is not attached to the body; rather, it is

placed

there, and removing it is not within the category of improving a person.

Here,

in the case of arranging the bones of a baby, they

are not placed

The bones are not lying there, but are attached, and arranging and attaching them resembles a labor.

Mishna:

The reed of olives. [

After the olives were harvested, they would place the olives in a vessel [a vat] so that they would become warm and soften, and their oil would be easy to extract. After some time, they would examine, by means of the oiliness that had accumulated on the reed designated for this purpose, whether the olives had softened and were fit to be taken to the oil press].

If it has a knot at its top

like a stopper of a reed, upon which the oil accumulates [and with which they would examine the oiliness of the olives].

It is susceptible to impurity

for through the knot it is considered a vessel.

But if not,

it is not considered a vessel and

it is not susceptible to impurity.

Whether so

that it has a knot,

or whether so

that it does not have a knot,

it may be taken on Shabbat,

for it is considered a vessel with regard to moving, since it is fit for turning over the olives with it.

Gemara:

And we raise the matter:

Why

is the reed susceptible to impurity where it has a knot? Granted even that it has the status of a vessel, nevertheless

it is a flat wooden vessel

a wooden vessel that has no receptacle. [And even if the reed is hollow, the hollow is not made to receive anything inside it, and this is not considered a vessel that has a receptacle].

And flat wooden vessels

we have established that

are not susceptible to impurity.

What is the reason

that they are not susceptible to impurity?

For we require it to resemble a sack.

As it is written in the section of Shemini: “of every wooden vessel, or garment, or skin, or sack”; wood is compared to a sack: just as a sack can be moved when full and when empty, for a sack has a receptacle, so too wood must have a receptacle.

And we answer:

A tanna taught in the name of Rabbi Neḥemya: When he turns over the olives, he turns it over and looks into it.

Since he turns over the reed, he sees the oil remaining beside the stopper and knows whether the olives are already fit for the oil press, and this is considered as though the reed has a receptacle. But if it has no knot, the oil is not visible in it, and the reed has no receptacle.

Mishna:

Rabbi Yose says: All vessels

whose work is for a forbidden purpose

may be taken

on Shabbat for their own use.

Except for the large saw

the saw

that is large,

with which beams are sawn,

and the plow-peg,

with which the furrow is made in the plow-field. For people are particular about these vessels, not to perform any other labor with them, and designate a place for them so that they will not be damaged. They are therefore set aside because of financial loss and may not be moved for their own use.

Gemara:

Rav Naḥman said: This ukhla of launderers

a tool of launderers that has holes, through which they sprinkle water onto the garments. [And some explain: a tool beneath which they place incense [spices], and through the holes the garments above it become perfumed].

resembles a plow-peg,

for people are also particular concerning it that it not be ruined, and its law is that of something set aside because of financial loss.

Abaye said: The sword of shoemakers

a knife of leather-workers,

and the knife of slaughterers,

a knife with which meat is chopped in the butcher shop,

and the hatchet of carpenters,

the carpenter’s adze,

resemble a plow-peg,

for a person is particular not to use them for other uses, and they are set aside because of financial loss.

The Sages taught:

At first [

in the days of Nehemiah, when they decreed concerning moving vessels after they saw that people were treating the prohibitions of Shabbat lightly, as we explain below],

they would say

only

three vessels may be taken on Shabbat.

As for the other vessels, they were set aside. ,

A cutter for a fig-cake —

a tool with which the fig-cake is cut.

And a large spoon of a pot

a large spoon with which the scum was removed from the pot.

And a small knife that is on the table

with which food is cut at the table. These vessels are used frequently on Shabbat, and therefore they permitted moving them on Shabbat.

And when they saw that people had again become somewhat careful concerning the prohibition of Shabbat,

they permitted

further moving.

And they again permitted

additional vessels when they became more careful,

and they again permitted. [

And below we explain it].

Until they said: All vessels may be taken on Shabbat, except for the large saw and the plow-peg.

And we explain:

What does “they permitted, and they again permitted, and they again permitted” mean?

Abaye said: They permitted something whose work

whose principal use is on weekdays

is for a permitted purpose, for its own use,

but not for its place.

And they again permitted something whose work is for a permitted purpose

also

for its place,

when he needs to use the place where the vessel is lying.

And they again permitted

also

something whose work is for a forbidden purpose for its own use; but for its place, no,

they did not permit moving it, for this is not considered a need.

And still,

a small vessel that can be moved

with one hand, no —

it is permitted to move it, but a vessel that can be moved

with both hands, no,

they did not permit moving it.

Until they said: All vessels may be taken on Shabbat, even with two hands.

But a vessel whose work is for a forbidden purpose may not be moved for its place.

Rava said to him: Since “they permitted” is taught

in the beraita,

what difference is there between for its own use and for its place?

Just as they permitted it for its own use, so they permitted it for its place, for both are considered a need.

Rather, Rava said: They permitted something whose work is for a permitted purpose, both for its own use and for its place. And they again permitted

to move it also

from the sun to the shade,

so that the vessel would not be damaged, even though he does not need it now.

And they again permitted something whose work is for a forbidden purpose for its own use and for its place, but not,

but

from the sun to the shade, no.

And still,

specifically a vessel that can be moved

by one person, no,

but a large vessel that can be moved

by two people, no. Until they said: All vessels may be taken on Shabbat

and

even by two people.

Abaye raised an objection to Rava

We learned in a beraita:

A mortar: if there is garlic in it, it may be moved; but if not, it may not be moved.

And it is understandable according to Abaye: it can be established as referring to when he needs its place. But according to Rava, who says that even when he needs its place it is permitted to move it, why did the beraita prohibit moving it? And we answer:

Here, with what are we dealing,

in the beraita, when he moves it

from the sun to the shade,

for in this Rava agrees that a vessel whose work is for a forbidden purpose may not be moved from the sun to the shade.

He raised an objection:

We learned in a beraita, and Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai agree

that if he chopped on it —

on the anvil [which is a vessel designated for pounding forbidden things] —

meat

on a Festival,

it is forbidden to move it.

And we see that a vessel whose work is for a forbidden purpose is forbidden to move for its place.

And we answer:

Here too,

this beraita is speaking when he wishes to move the anvil

from the sun to the shade,

for in this Rava agrees that it is forbidden.

Rabbi Ḥanina said: This Mishna was taught in the days of Nehemiah son of Hacaliah,

the Mishna brought above, that at first they decreed and permitted only three vessels to be moved. And the reason was that they saw that people had treated the observance of Shabbat lightly, as

it is written

in the Book of Nehemiah:

“In those days I saw in Judah people treading winepresses on Shabbat and bringing in heaps.”

Rabbi Elazar said:

The Mishnayot concerning

the pegs, the rods, the glostera, and the mortar,

which were forbidden to move,

all of them were taught before the permission concerning vessels,

before vessels were permitted according to Abaye for their own use, and according to Rava even for their place,

were taught.

The pegs! For we learned

in tractate Menahot:

Not the arranging of the pegs,

which they would place in the arrangement of the bread of the Presence, between one loaf and another, in order to separate them so that the loaves would not become moldy,

nor their removal,

of the pegs from the old arrangement that had been arranged on the previous Shabbat,

overrides Shabbat.

For even though the arranging of the bread of the Presence was performed on Shabbat, nevertheless, on the eve of Shabbat the priest would enter and remove the pegs, and on Shabbat he would remove the old arrangement and arrange the new one without pegs, and at the close of Shabbat he would enter and place the pegs between the loaves.

And this Mishna, which prohibited moving these pegs despite the fact that their work is for a permitted purpose, was taught before the first permission, when even a vessel whose work is for a permitted purpose was forbidden to move for its own use.

The rods! For we learned

in tractate Pesahim:

Thin, smooth rods were there,

in the Temple courtyard, upon which they would spread the flesh of the Paschal offering when it fell on a weekday.

And he places it —

the reed —

on his shoulder and on the shoulder of his fellow, and he hangs

the Paschal offering

and strips it.