Shabbat 150a — the Talmud in English

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: This verse speaks of Babylonia. And this is what it says:

“This nation, which said”

to everyone:

“Measure”

silver coins and gold dinars

“and bring” .

This teaches that “mehadabeha” is an acronym for “measure and bring.”

And some say:

“Mehadabeha”—that it said to everyone:

“Bring very, very much, without measure.”

And after Nebuchadnezzar descended from his kingship, and dwelt seven years among beasts and animals and ate grass like them, he returned once again to his kingship. And he said

“And excessive greatness”

“You have added to me.”

That is to say, excessive greatness was added to me, more than in my first kingship.

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav Yirmeya bar Abba: This teaches that he rode

Nebuchadnezzar

upon a male lion, and tied a great serpent

large

to its head

of the lion, to serve it as a bridle . And this was the greatness that was added to him.

To fulfill that which is stated: “And also the beast of the field I gave him to serve him.”

Mishna:

A person may not hire workers on Shabbat.

And he may not even hire them for the needs of tomorrow. Because it is written: “From pursuing your affairs and speaking words.” Your affairs on Shabbat should not be like your affairs on weekdays .

For on Shabbat it is forbidden for us to speak, advise, or make efforts concerning any of the matters forbidden on Shabbat, even though we wish that it be done after Shabbat [Commentary on the Mishna by Rambam].

And

so

a person may not say to his fellow

on Shabbat,

“Hire workers for me.”

And in the Gemara it will be explained why this is needed.

One may not remain after dark at the Shabbat boundary in order to hire workers or to bring fruit.

That is to say, it is forbidden for a person to bring himself closer on Shabbat to the end of the permitted Shabbat boundary, in order to be there when night falls at the conclusion of Shabbat, and to approach as much as possible the place of the workers or the place of the orchard, which are outside the boundary, so that immediately at the conclusion of Shabbat he can leave the boundary, walk to that place, and hire workers or bring fruit. Since bringing the fruit or hiring the workers is forbidden on Shabbat, it is also forbidden to remain after dark for their sake .

But he may remain after dark

[he walks on Shabbat until the end of the boundary]

in order

to be close to the orchard located outside the boundary, so that he can leave there immediately at the conclusion of Shabbat

to guard

his fruit. For if the fruit were within the boundary, guarding it would be permitted on Shabbat . Therefore, it is also permitted to remain after dark for it.

And once he has already left at the conclusion of Shabbat for the orchard in order to guard his fruit, he may also

bring fruit in his hand.

And it is not called remaining after dark for the purpose of bringing the fruit. For his primary intention was not this, but rather the guarding.

Abba Shaul stated a principle: Any matter for which I am entitled

[permitted]

to say

on Shabbat to a gentile or to my fellow that he should do for me at the conclusion of Shabbat, I am also

entitled

to walk for its sake on Shabbat until the end of the boundary

and remain after dark for it,

in order to go to him immediately at the conclusion of Shabbat.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: “And similarly, a person may not say to his fellow, ‘Hire workers for me.’”

And we raise an objection concerning it: Since we learned, “A person may not hire workers,” it is obvious that he may not even say to his fellow.

For what difference is there between he and his fellow?

For since his fellow is also forbidden to do so, when he sends him he transgresses because of “before the blind you shall not place a stumbling block” .

Rav Pappa said:

The Mishna comes to teach us that it is forbidden to say even to a

gentile companion

that he should hire workers for him.

Rav Ashi challenged this:

This too is obvious. For

speech to a gentile

is forbidden because of

a rabbinic prohibition.

And Rabbi already stated without qualification above in the Mishna: “If a gentile comes to extinguish, one does not say to him, ‘Extinguish’” . For this too is forbidden because of “from pursuing your affairs and speaking words” .

Rather,

Rav Ashi said: Even if you say

that the Mishna is speaking

of an Israelite fellow, this

inference

it comes to teach us: A person may not say to his fellow, “Hire workers for me.” But a person may say to his fellow: “Do you

perhaps

appear likely to stay with me in the evening?”

And although both of them know that he intends to hire him for his work at the conclusion of Shabbat, it is permitted, since he does not explicitly state that he is inviting him for this purpose .

And whose opinion is the Mishna? It is in accordance with Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korha

is.

. For it was taught: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korha

says: A person may say to his fellow, “Do you appear likely to stay with me in the evening?”

Rabba bar bar Hana said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korha.

And Rabba bar bar Hana said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: What is the reason of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korha? —

Because of

that which is written: “From pursuing your affairs and speaking words.”

It implies that specifically

speech

of weekdays

is forbidden

on Shabbat. But

thought is permitted .

And since he does not state with his mouth that he is requesting to hire him, it is permitted .

Rav Aha bar Rav Huna raised a difficulty to Rava:

But

did Rabbi Yohanan say

that specifically

weekday speech

on Shabbat

is forbidden,

but

thought is permitted?

But according to this,

it follows

that Rabbi Yohanan held that

thought is not considered like speech.

And this cannot be said. For elsewhere Rabbi Yohanan holds that thought is considered like speech.

For

Rabba bar bar Hana said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: Everywhere it is permitted to think

about words of Torah,

except in a bathhouse and in a lavatory.

Because they are repulsive places. And since he says that even thought is forbidden, it follows that thought is considered like speech.

And we answer: Actually, thought is not considered like speech.

And there it is different,

with words of Torah, which are forbidden in a lavatory, because

we require: “And your camp shall be holy.”

For the verse says that the place of your encampment shall be in holiness, because Israel are constantly thinking words of Torah.

And

in the lavatory

there is none.

And it did not write there specifically “speech.” Therefore we also derive that thought is forbidden. But concerning weekday speech on Shabbat, it is written “and speaking words.” Therefore specifically speech is forbidden .

And we ask again:

Here,

with words of Torah,

it is also written

at the end of that verse,

“And he shall not see in you the nakedness of a matter.”

For here too “a matter” is written in the prohibition, implying speech. And if even thought is forbidden, it necessarily follows that thought is considered like speech. And let us then say the same regarding Shabbat.

And we answer: Actually, the prohibition of words of Torah in a lavatory does not depend on speech. And

that

“matter”

is needed for the teaching of Rav Yehuda.

For Rav Yehuda said: An unclothed gentile —

it is forbidden to recite the Shema opposite him.

And we raise a question concerning it:

Why specifically an unclothed gentile,

when

even an Israelite

who is unclothed

also

is forbidden to recite opposite him, because it is opposite nakedness?

And we answer:

It states the matter in the form of “it is not necessary.” It is not necessary to say an Israelite

who is unclothed, for it is obvious

that it is forbidden

to recite opposite him.

But a gentile,

I might have said that it is permitted to recite opposite him,

since it is written concerning him: “Whose flesh is the flesh of donkeys.”

And therefore

say

that it

is entirely acceptable

and is not considered nakedness.

It comes to teach us

that even an unclothed gentile is considered nakedness, and it is forbidden to recite opposite him.

And we ask:

And say this as well:

Since their flesh is like the flesh of donkeys, it is not called “nakedness.”

And we answer: It cannot be said so. For

the verse says

concerning Noah,

“And they did not see their father’s nakedness.”

It follows that even concerning the descendants of Noah it is called “nakedness.”

And this prohibition of uttering a sacred matter opposite nakedness, we derive from “And he shall not see in you the nakedness of a matter.”

And this prohibition applies only to speech, because “matter” is written concerning it. But thought is permitted, because thought is not considered like speech.

But a lavatory and a bathhouse, where words of Torah are forbidden because of “And your camp shall be holy,” are forbidden even in thought. For “speech” was not written concerning them specifically.

And we ask:

And speech

of weekdays on Shabbat

is it forbidden?

But Rav Hisda and Rav Hamnuna both said: Accounts of a mitzva may be calculated on Shabbat.

And

so

Rav Elazar said: Charity for the poor may be apportioned on Shabbat .

And

so

Rabbi Yaakov bar Idi said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: one may attend to saving life

[attend to matters in which there is danger to the public],

and attend to the needs of the public

[such as matters of governance]

on Shabbat.

And

so

Rav Shmuel bar Nahmani said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: one may go to theaters, circuses, and basilicas

[types of palaces], and gather there at the house of assembly,

in order to attend to the affairs of the public, on Shabbat.

And

so

the tanna of the school of Menashe taught: one may arrange matches concerning children

in order

to betroth

them,

on Shabbat. And

so one may negotiate and discuss with the teachers

concerning the child,

in order

to teach him Scripture, and to teach him a trade.

And all these contain an element of weekday speech. And even so, it is permitted to speak about them on Shabbat. But if we expound the verse, “from finding your business and speaking words,” to prohibit weekday speech, then it is prohibited by Torah law [Tosafot].

And we resolve: all these are different, because they are the needs of a mitzva. And specifically weekday speech concerning permitted matters is prohibited. For

the verse says, “from finding your business and speaking words”.

And we expound:

your businesses are prohibited,

but

the affairs of Heaven are permitted.

And even [speaking of] a child, to teach him a trade, is considered an affair of Heaven, because it is a mitzva to teach him a trade. For anyone who does not teach him a trade teaches him robbery.

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: accounts of a king,

that is, accounts in which he has no need whatsoever and which do not concern him [such as when he calculates how much expense must be incurred in order to build a house, while he is not currently engaged in building his house. And “king” is an acronym for “what is it to you,” meaning that you have no need for these accounts],

and

accounts

of no consequence,

even though previously he had a need for them, but now it no longer makes any difference to him [such as, “I spent such and such on the construction of this building”]—

it is permitted to calculate them on Shabbat.

It was also taught so: accounts of the past. And

so accounts

that will occur

to him

it is prohibited to calculate

on Shabbat.