Shabbat 127a — the Talmud in English

And Shmuel said:

This is the meaning of the Mishna: One clears away

four and five,

and the tanna used this expression,

as people say,

that at first they state a smaller number and then repeat a larger number.

But,

if he wishes

to clear more than four or five—

even much more also

he is permitted to clear away, and not as Rav Hisda, who is concerned about exertion.

And what

is he saying

“But not the storehouse”?

That is

that he should not finish

clearing it

entirely, lest he come to level hollows. [

The Bach does not have these words.]

But he may begin

to take from the storehouse on Shabbat.

And

the Mishna—

whose opinion is it?

It is Rabbi Shimon’s, who does not hold

a prohibition of

muktze

with regard to what a person sets aside in his mind, when it is an item fit for eating.

The Sages taught: One may not begin with the storehouse initially,

because of the prohibition of muktze [Ran]. And according to what we establish as the law, like Rabbi Shimon, who does not hold of muktze, the reason it is forbidden is either because of exertion or because of ordinary weekday activity [Beit Yosef and Bach, section 333].

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

And it might enter our minds that he takes the grain or the straw in his hand in order to make a path for himself.

And we raise a difficulty: How does he

make a path through it

with his hands?

But you said

that

one may not begin

to clear 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 when leaving,

for this is moving indirectly, which 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 and not with his hand, for 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 certainly was set aside for the storehouse—

when he began with it

to take from it for food on the eve of Shabbat—

it is permitted to take from it

also

on Shabbat.

And if not,

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

it is forbidden to take from it on Shabbat, the words of Rabbi Shimon.

And

Rabbi Aha permits.

And we raise a difficulty:

In which direction is this statement facing? For everywhere Rabbi Shimon does not hold of muktze, whereas here it is the opposite: Rabbi Shimon is the one who is stringent concerning muktze.

And we answer:

Rather, say this: It is forbidden to take from it on Shabbat,

the words of Rabbi Aha.

He is the one who forbids it.

And Rabbi Shimon permits,

in accordance with his position, that he does not hold of muktze.

The tanna taught: How much

is the

measure of piled grain,

which is considered to have been set aside for the storehouse, so that it is evident from this measure that it is intended for the storehouse?—

A lethekh,

half a kor [fifteen se’ah].

And the Gemara brings that concerning the measure of the piled grain explained in the beraita, the Sages were uncertain:

Rav Nahumi bar Zekharia 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.

It was asked of them: These four and five baskets, which

the tanna of the Mishna said that he is permitted to clear away the grain with them: Is it specifically

with four and five

baskets?

Yes,

he is permitted to clear away with baskets only this number of times, but

more,

that is, if he fills smaller baskets and goes more times,

not

is it permitted.

And if we say according to this side, we learn from it:

Apparently, reducing the walking is preferable,

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

Or perhaps, if he comes to clear away with small baskets, he is permitted, even though he will go more times, because

reducing

the weight of the

burden is preferable. [

And the uncertainty is according to Rav Hisda, who holds that five is specifically required.]

Come and hear: For it was taught

in a beraita

one thing: One clears away even four or five baskets of wine-jars and oil-jars.

And it was taught in another [beraita]: One clears away wine-jars and oil-jars even

with ten and with fifteen.

And it entered our minds that the tanna of the second beraita holds that he is permitted to take them even ten or fifteen times in small baskets, indicating that he is permitted to increase the walking.

Is it not that they disagree concerning this: One master

the tanna of the first beraita

holds: Reducing the walking is preferable,

and therefore he clears away only in four or five trips with large baskets.

And the other master,

the tanna of the second beraita,

holds: Reducing the burden is preferable,

and therefore he is permitted to clear them away even in ten or fifteen trips.

And we reject this:

No. Everyone

holds that

reducing the walking is preferable.

And do you think

that what the tanna said,

“with ten and with fifteen,”

is referring

to baskets

that are small,

and stands for this reason, so that you conclude that the tannaim disagree?

It is not so. Rather, this statement, “with ten and with fifteen,”

refers to the jars.

And there is no difficulty between these two beraitot, for—

This one,

the first beraita, which spoke of clearing the oil-jars and wine-jars in four or five baskets, deals with large jars,

which are taken

one by one

in

one basket.

And that one, which taught ten, deals with small jars,

which are taken

two by two, two jars in one basket.

And that one, which taught fifteen, deals with very small jars,

which are taken three by three, three jars in one basket.

And it deals with jars like

the jars of Harpania,

jars from a place called “Harpania,” which are small.

It was asked of them according to Rav Hisda: These four and five that the tanna said

he is permitted to clear away: Is it permitted only to this measure,

even though he has many guests?

Or perhaps, everything is according to the guests,

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

And if you should say, everything is according to the guests, we also ask:

Is it that

one person clears away for all of them?

Or perhaps, each person and 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

whole entire field.

and when there are many guests he may clear away more.

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

we still ask:

Does

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

whole field.

Learn from this: Everything is according to the guests.

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

And still it is asked of you: Is it that

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

Come and hear: From the earlier beraita, where we learned:

And Rabbi gathered

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

gathering

? Was that Rabbi’s practice, since he was the Nasi?

Rather, this is its meaning: Rabbi

commanded

the students,

and he gathered,

that is, they gathered,

and in fact each individual clears away for himself.

entire field.

Learn from this that everything depends on the number of guests.

Since there were many of them, he cleared away more than five baskets.

We learned in the Mishna: One clears away

because of the guests,

and because of the interruption of the beit-midrash.

Rabbi Yohanan said: Greater is welcoming guests than rising early for the beit-midrash.

And the proof is that the Mishna teaches:

“Because of the guests, and because of the interruption of the beit-midrash.”

And it implies that these were equated with one another.

And Rav Dimi of Nehardea said:

Welcoming guests is

greater than rising early for the beit-midrash.

And the proof is:

for it teaches

in the Mishna

“because of the guests, and

only

afterward

does it teach:

and because of the interruption of the beit-midrash.”

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

Rav Judah said in the name of Rav: Greater is welcoming

guests

than receiving the Presence of the Divine. For it is written

concerning Abraham:

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

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

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

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

the attribute of flesh and blood.

The attribute of flesh and blood: A lesser person cannot say to a greater person, “Wait until I come to you.” But concerning the Holy One, blessed be He, it is written: “And Abraham said

to the Holy One, blessed be He:

If now I have found

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

Rav Judah bar Shila said in the name of Rav Asi, who said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: Six things a person enjoys their fruits in this world, while the principal remains for him in the World to Come,

and these are they:

a.

Welcoming guests.

b.

Visiting the sick.

c.

Concentration in prayer,

directing his intention in his prayer.

d.

Rising early for the beit-midrash.

e.

Raising his sons for Torah study.

f.

Judging one’s fellow favorably.

And we raise a difficulty:

Is this so? Are all those enumerated 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 Peah:

“These are 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 they”:

Honoring father and mother, acts of kindness, bringing peace between one person and his fellow, and Torah study

is

equivalent to them all.

And we infer:

These, yes,

but

anything else, no,

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

1.

Welcoming guests.

2.

Visiting the sick.

3.

Careful attention to prayer,

concentrating on one's prayer.

4.

Rising early to go to the house of study.

5.

Raising one's sons for the study of Torah.

6.

Judging one's fellow favorably.

The Gemara asks:

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 they:

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

which is equal

to all of them.”

The Gemara infers:

These, yes.

But

nothing else, no;

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