Shabbat 127a (קכז.) — the Talmud in English

And Shmuel said:

This is the meaning of the Mishna: One may clear away

four and five,

and the tanna used this wording,

as people say,

that at first one states a smaller number and then repeats it with a larger number.

But

if he needs

more than four or five

even many more

may also be cleared away, unlike Rav Hisda, who is concerned about exertion.

And what

does he mean by

“But one may not clear away the storehouse”?

It means

that he may not finish

clearing it

entirely, lest he come to level hollows. [The Bah does not have these words.]

]

But he may begin

taking from the storehouse on Shabbat.

And

the Mishna,

whose opinion is it? It is

Rabbi Shimon's, who does not maintain

a prohibition of

muktze

with regard to something a person set aside in his mind when it is fit for consumption.

The Sages taught: One may not begin with a storehouse,

because of the prohibition of muktze [Ran]. And according to the ruling that follows Rabbi Shimon, who does not recognize muktze, the reason it is prohibited is either the exertion involved or conduct characteristic of a weekday [Beit Yosef and Bah, section 333].

But he may make a path through it so that he can enter and leave.

And it initially occurred to us that he takes the grain or straw by hand in order to make a path.

And we ask: How can he

make a path through it

with his hands?

But did you not say

that

one may not begin

clearing a storehouse on Shabbat because the straw or grain in it is muktze?

And we explain:

This is what he is saying: He makes a path through it

by clearing it

with his feet,

as he walks

when entering and leaving,

which is moving an object indirectly, and is permitted on Shabbat.

[According to the explanation of the Hazon Ish, the reason for the permission is not that he clears it with his foot rather than with his hand, since movement with one's body is also considered movement. Rather, it is because he clears it in the course of walking, and not directly.]

The Sages taught: Grain

that is

piled,

which was certainly set aside for storage,

when he began taking from it

for food on the eve of Shabbat —

he may take from it

also

on Shabbat.

But if not,

if he did not begin taking from it on the eve of Shabbat —

he may not take from it on Shabbat, the words of Rabbi Shimon.

And

Rabbi Aha permits.

And we ask:

In which direction is this statement going?

Where does this teaching lead? For everywhere Rabbi Shimon does not recognize muktze, whereas here the opposite is stated: Rabbi Shimon is the one who is stringent concerning muktze.

And we answer:

Rather, say

this: It is prohibited to take from it on Shabbat,

the words of Rabbi Aha.

He is the one who prohibits it.

And Rabbi Shimon permits,

in accordance with his view that he does not recognize muktze.

The tanna taught: What

is the

measure of piled grain

that is considered to have been set aside for storage, since this measure clearly indicates that it is intended for storage? —

A lethekh,

half a kor [fifteen se'a].

The Gemara relates that concerning the measure of piled grain stated in the beraita, the Sages were uncertain:

Rav Nahumi bar Zekharya asked Abaye: The measure of piled grain —

how much

is it?

He said to him,

Abaye:

They said

in the beraita that

the measure of piled grain

is

a lethekh.

They raised a dilemma: This four and five baskets of which

the tanna of the Mishna says that one may clear away:

Is it specifically

four or five

baskets,

yes,

only this number of basketfuls may he clear away, but

more,

meaning that he fills smaller baskets and makes more trips,

no,

it is not permitted?

And if we say that this is the correct interpretation, we learn from it:

Apparently, reducing the number of trips is preferable,

and therefore he should take one full, large basket each time, even though it is heavy.

Or perhaps,

if he comes to clear away using small baskets, he is permitted to do so, even though he will make more trips, because

reducing

the weight of the

load is preferable.

[This uncertainty follows the opinion of Rav Hisda, who says that five is specifically the limit.]

Come and hear: For it was taught

in one beraita:

One may clear away even four or five baskets of wine jugs and oil jugs.

And it was taught in another beraita: One may clear away wine jugs and oil jugs even

holds: Reducing the walking is preferable,

in ten or fifteen [trips].

It initially occurred to us that this second tanna maintains that one may take them even in ten or fifteen trips using small baskets, indicating that one may increase the number of trips.

Is it not that they disagree about this: One

the tanna of the first beraita

maintains: Reducing the number of trips is preferable,

and therefore one clears away only in four or five trips, using large baskets.

And the other,

the tanna of the second beraita,

maintains: Reducing the weight of the load is preferable,

and therefore one may clear them away even in ten or fifteen trips?

And we reject this:

No. Everyone

maintains that

reducing the number of trips is preferable.

And do you think

that when the tanna says

“in ten or fifteen” he is referring

to baskets

of the small variety,

is referring

to them, and that is why you concluded that the tannaim disagree?

It is not so.

Rather, this phrase, “in ten or fifteen,”

refers to jugs.

And there is no contradiction

between these two baraitot, because:

This one,

the first beraita, which speaks of clearing away wine and oil jugs in four or five baskets, is discussing large jugs,

which are taken

one

by one

jug

in a basket.

And this one,

which teaches ten, is discussing small jugs,

which are taken

two

at a time

in a basket.

And this one,

which teaches fifteen, is discussing extremely small jugs,

which are taken three at a time

in a single basket.

And

it is discussing jugs like

the jugs of Harpanya,

jugs from a place called Harpanya, which are small.

They raised a dilemma

according to Rav Hisda:

This four and five of which

the tanna says that one may clear them away:

Is one permitted only up to this measure,

even if he has very many guests?

Or perhaps, it all depends on the number of guests,

and when the guests are numerous he may clear away more.

And if you should say that it all depends on the number of guests,

we still have this question:

Is it the case that

one person clears away for all of them,

or perhaps, each person,

each one

clears away for himself.

Come and hear: For Rabba said in the name of Rabbi Hiyya: Once Rabbi went to a certain place and saw

that the

place

was

too cramped to

seat the

students there. And he went out to the field and found a field

that was

full of sheaves, and Rabbi gathered

the

entire field.

the entire field—apparently one person clears it all away for all of them. And we raise a difficulty: According to your reasoning, was Rabbi himself personally

And Rav Yosef said that Rav Hoshaya

said:

Once Rabbi Hiyya went to a certain place and saw a place

that was

too cramped to

seat the

students there, and Rabbi Hiyya gathered

the

entire field.

Learn from this that it all depends on the number of guests.

And since they are numerous, he clears away more than five baskets.

But you still have a question:

Is

one person to clear it all away, or perhaps each and every person clears away for himself?

Come and hear:

From the earlier beraita, where we learned:

And Rabbi gathered

the entire field; apparently, one person clears away for all of them.

And we ask:

According to your reasoning,

did

Rabbi personally

himself

gather,

as though this were Rabbi's usual practice, given that he was the Nasi?

Rather,

this is the meaning: Rabbi

instructed

the students,

and gathered,

meaning that they gathered,

but in fact each and every one cleared away for himself.

We learned in the Mishna: One clears away

We learned in the Mishna: One clears away

because of the guests,

and because of the disruption of the study hall.

Rabbi Yohanan said: Welcoming guests is as great as

Rabbi Elazar said: Come and see, unlike the attribute of the Holy One, blessed be He—

rising early for the study hall.

And the proof is that the Mishna teaches:

“Because of the guests, and because of the disruption of the study hall.”

This indicates that they are equated with one another.

And Rav Dimi of Nehardea said:

Welcoming guests is

greater than rising early for the study hall.

And the proof is:

It teaches

in the Mishna

“because of the guests, and

only afterward

it then

teaches:

“and because of the disruption of the study hall.”

Learn from the precedence given to welcoming guests that it is superior.

Rav Judah said in the name of Rav: Welcoming

guests

is greater

than receiving the Divine Presence.

As it is written

concerning Abraham:

“And he said: My Lord, if I have found favor in your eyes, please do not pass

from before your servant.” The meaning of the verse is that Abraham left the Divine Presence in order to welcome guests, and asked the Divine Presence to wait for him until he received the guests.

Learn from this that welcoming guests is greater than receiving the Divine Presence.

Rabbi Elazar said: Come and see, for the attribute of the Holy One, blessed be He, is unlike

the attribute of flesh and blood.

With flesh and blood, a junior cannot say to a senior, “Wait until I come to you.” But concerning the Holy One, blessed be He, it is written: “And he said

Abraham to the Almighty:

“If I have found

favor in your eyes, please do not pass from before your servant.”

Rabbi Judah bar Sheila said in the name of Rav Asi in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: A person enjoys the fruits of six things in this world, while the principal remains for him in the World to Come,

and these are:

a.

Welcoming guests.

b.

Visiting the sick.

c.

Devotion in prayer,

directing one's mind in prayer.

d.

Rising early for the study hall.

e.

Raising one's sons for Torah study.

f.

Judging one's fellow favorably.

And we challenge this:

Is that so?

Are all those listed here included among the things whose fruits a person enjoys in this world while the principal remains for him in the World to Come?

But we

learned

at the beginning of tractate Pe'a: “These are the things that a person performs and enjoys their fruits in this world, while the principal remains for him in the World to Come, and these are:

Honoring one's father and mother, acts of loving-kindness, making peace between one person and his fellow, and Torah study

which is equal

to them all.

And we infer:

These, yes.

But

anything else, no,

whereas Rav Asi in the name of Rabbi Yohanan listed things that we did not learn there.