Shabbat 143a — the Talmud in English

And we explain:

There,

the intestines were ready for the cat at twilight, because Rava had intended to slaughter this wild duck on the Festival, and

since

he knew

that the flesh of the intestines would spoil

by the end of the Festival and would not be fit for human consumption,

his mind was upon them

already

from the day before

to throw them to the cat.

And we say:

This too is logically evident, that Rava holds in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda.

For Rava taught: A woman may not enter

on the Festival

into the woodshed

designated for kindling,

to take a splinter from them

[a stick with which one stirs the wood of the bonfire], because the wood is designated for kindling, and when its designation is changed to use as a utensil, it becomes muktzeh because of nolad .

And a splinter that broke

on the Festival,

it is forbidden to kindle with it on the Festival. For one kindles with utensils, but one does not kindle with broken utensils.

For a broken utensil that broke on the Festival and from then on no longer serves the purpose for which it served at twilight is in the category of nolad; therefore it is muktzeh according to Rabbi Yehuda. But an intact utensil has not had its designation changed even when its owner wishes to kindle with it, and it is permitted to move it even not for the purpose of its ordinary use.

And we conclude:

Infer from it

that Rava holds in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda, who holds of muktzeh and nolad.

Mishna:

Beit Shammai say: One moves

by hand

from upon the table bones and peels

that are not fit for a dog , because they are not muktzeh.

And Beit Hillel say:

It is forbidden to move them by themselves; rather,

he removes the board

[the sheet placed upon the table]

in its entirety

which is a utensil , together with the bones and peels, and moves it to a place where they do not interfere with him,

and shakes it .

And according to everyone:

one moves from upon the table

by hand

crumbs

of bread

less than an olive-bulk

which are animal food,

and stalks

[pods]

of peas and stalks of lentils

from which they removed the peas and the lentils.

Because it is

[the stalk]

animal food,

and anything that can be used on Shabbat is not muktzeh, even though at twilight the object was not designated for this use .

A sponge,

if it has a skin

that serves as a

handle—

one may wipe with it

the board, because then there is no concern that the sponge will be squeezed ;

but if not—

one may not wipe with it,

because it is squeezed at the place where one holds it.

In either case, it may be moved

the sponge

on Shabbat,

and although a sponge without a handle is a utensil whose use is for a prohibited labor , it is permitted to move it for the sake of its use, to wipe with it when it is dry .

And

even though the sponge is a utensil—

it does not become susceptible to ritual impurity,

because it is not made of one of the materials that become susceptible to ritual impurity, such as a wooden or metal utensil, or a garment.

Gemara:

We learned in our Mishna: Beit Shammai say: One moves bones and peels from upon the table. And Beit Hillel say: He removes the board.

Rav Naḥman said: We do not have

this version in the Mishna, according to which Beit Shammai are lenient regarding muktzeh, like Rabbi Shimon, and Beit Hillel are stringent regarding muktzeh, like Rabbi Yehuda,

but

our version is reversed, according to which

Beit Shammai

are stringent and prohibit moving peels fit for an animal

in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda, while Beit Hillel

are lenient

in accordance with Rabbi Shimon.

We learned in the Mishna:

One moves crumbs from upon the table.

And we say:

This supports him

that it teaches “one moves” and not “one throws”—

Rabbi Yohanan.

For Rabbi Yohanan said: Crumbs that do not contain an olive-bulk—

it is forbidden to destroy them by hand .

We learned in the Mishna: One moves

stalks of peas ...

because it is animal food.

And the Gemara says: The Mishna is

according to whom? It is Rabbi Shimon, who does not hold of muktzeh.

For according to Rabbi Yehuda, the stalks are muktzeh, since only after the peas were removed from them on Shabbat did they become ready as animal food; but during the day—when the peas were still in them—they were subordinate to them and were considered ready for human food, and they are therefore in the category of nolad .

And we challenge:

Say the latter clause: A sponge, if it has a handle—

one may wipe with it, but if not—

one may not

wipe with it,

because through wiping the sponge is squeezed unintentionally. But

we have arrived at Rabbi Yehuda, who says: An unintentional act is forbidden,

and not at Rabbi Shimon!

And we explain:

In this matter, even Rabbi Shimon concedes.

For Abaye and Rava both say: Rabbi Shimon concedes in a case of “cut off its head and will it not die,”

and when one wipes with a sponge, it is inevitable that the sponge will be squeezed between the fingers .

The Gemara teaches the law of date pits according to Rabbi Yehuda , and how the amoraim conducted themselves with regard to them.

These pits of Aramaic dates are permitted to be moved

[pits of Aramaic dates are permitted to be moved], even though at twilight the dates were fit for human consumption and the pits were subordinate to them, while on Shabbat the pits are fit only for an animal; the pits are not in the category of nolad,

since they are fit

for an animal

along with their mothers,

because these dates are inferior, they are customarily given also to animals, and at twilight they were not excluded from animal food .

And

pits

of

dates

of the Persian variety,

since they are not fed to animals—

it is forbidden

to move their pits because of nolad.

Shmuel

would place the pits of Persian dates upon bread and

move them along with the bread .

ShRNM 387—

a mnemonic.

Shmuel follows his own position,

for he holds that this does not constitute contempt for food,

as Shmuel said: A person may do all his needs with bread.

Rava

would move them along with a vessel of water

[a bowl of water] .

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua,

would gather the pits until they became repulsive, and

he made them like a geraf shel re'i,

and moved them by themselves, for the law is that a geraf shel re'i and a vessel for urine may be taken out to the refuse heap, as it is stated in tractate Beitza [36b].

Rav Ashi said to Ameimar: Do they make a geraf shel re'i initially?

Is it not forbidden to cause oneself to have a repulsive object so that one can remove it?

Rav Sheshet

was stringent and

threw them with his tongue

toward the side of the table, and he did not take them with his hand and place them upon the table.

Rav Pappa threw them

with his hand toward

behind the bed

upon which he was reclining, and he did not place them upon the table, so that he would not need to shake them off the table.

They said about Rabbi Zechariah ben Avkulas that he would turn his face behind the bed and throw them

with his mouth.

We will return to you, chapter “One may carry his son.”