Shabbat 151a — the Talmud in English

but this cannot be established in this way. If so, what is

this

that he says

“Everything for which I am entitled to make a statement, I am permitted to wait until nightfall for”?

But the hiring of laborers and the bringing of produce are matters regarding which he is not entitled to make a statement on Shabbat. And on the contrary,

“Everything regarding which I am not entitled to make a statement, I am not permitted to wait until nightfall for,” is what he should have said

to say.

Rather,

Abba Shaul

is referring to the latter clause.

For it teaches there:

“But he may wait until nightfall

in order

to guard

his produce,

and

in the course of this he

brings produce in his hand.”

And Abba Shaul came and made a general rule from it, to permit every similar matter regarding which making a statement is permitted.

But it is still difficult:

this “Everything for which I am entitled to wait until nightfall, I am entitled to make a statement regarding,” is what he should have said

to say. For the permission to wait until nightfall was already stated explicitly by the first tanna. But the permission to make a statement was not taught. And how can he make the permission to wait until nightfall that was taught dependent on the permission to make a statement that was not taught? He should have said the reverse.

And we answer:

In fact,

Abba Shaul

is referring to the latter clause.

And as for what is difficult for you—this permission to make a statement was not mentioned at all in the words of the first tanna, and how does Abba Shaul make the permission to wait until nightfall dependent on it?—it is not difficult. For the permission to make a statement concerning guarding produce was obvious to the first tanna and Abba Shaul.

And Abba Shaul is referring to this.

For

thus

said Rav Yehuda in the name of Shmuel: It is permitted for a person to say to his fellow, “Guard produce for me

of

that

is found

within your techum

[within your Shabbat boundary] and it is outside my boundary,

and I shall guard produce for you

of

that

is found

within my boundary.

Thus, this statement is permitted on Shabbat. For even the guarding itself is permitted.

And Abba Shaul says to the first tanna: Do you not concede that it is permitted

for

a person to say to his fellow, “Guard produce for me that is within your boundary, and I shall guard produce for you that is within my boundary?”

And because of this, it is also permitted to wait until nightfall in order to guard the produce. It follows that everything regarding which making a statement is permitted is permitted regarding guarding. And why did you state specifically that one may wait until nightfall in order to guard? You should have included it and said: Everything regarding which making a statement is permitted is permitted regarding waiting until nightfall. For from this one would also infer that one may wait until nightfall at the boundary to attend to the affairs of a bride and of the dead, as we shall learn below.

And furthermore we inquire: And

say

Abba Shaul:

“Everything for which I am entitled to make a statement, I am permitted to wait until nightfall for,”

and no more.

The “general rule”

that Abba Shaul stated—

what does it come to include?

And we answer:

It comes to include that which the Sages taught: One may not wait until nightfall at the boundary in order to bring

on Saturday night

an animal

that is found outside the boundary.

And if

the

animal

was standing outside the boundary,

he

calls to it

from his place that is within the boundary,

and it comes

by itself. For he is not warned regarding the boundaries of his animal [Rashi, above 53b].

Abba Shaul stated a general rule: Everything for which I am entitled to make a statement, I am permitted to wait until nightfall for.

Therefore,

one may wait until nightfall to attend to the affairs of a bride and the affairs of the dead, to bring him a coffin and shrouds.

For making a statement concerning them is also permitted, as we say below.

And he teaches us a novelty with this. Not only is it permitted to wait until nightfall for something that he is permitted to tell his fellow to do on Shabbat itself [such as telling his fellow to guard produce that is within his boundary], but even regarding things that he is permitted to tell his fellow to do only on Saturday night, it is permitted to wait until nightfall. Such as attending to the affairs of a bride, which are prohibited to perform on Shabbat itself. And it is permitted to mention them on Shabbat only in order to perform them on Saturday night. [Tosafot.] And this is what Abba Shaul’s “general rule” in the Mishna comes to include.

And they say to him

to the agent on Shabbat:

Go

tomorrow

to such-and-such a place,

and bring from there the needs of the dead.

And if you do not find [them] in such-and-such a place, bring [them] from such-and-such a place.

And if

you did not find [them] for one hundred, bring [them] for two hundred.

Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda says:

It is permitted for him to say to his fellow, “Bring the needs of the dead,”

provided that he does not mention to him

the

amount of the purchase.

And he disputes the first tanna, who permits even mentioning the amount of the purchase.

Mishna:

One may wait until nightfall at the boundary

[one approaches and walks on Shabbat until the end of the boundary permitted on Shabbat], in order to leave on Saturday night

to attend to the affairs of a bride and the affairs of the dead, to bring him a coffin and shrouds.

And its reason will be explained in the Gemara.

A gentile who brought flutes on Shabbat

from outside the boundary,

a Jew may not eulogize with them

forever. And it is a penalty. For whenever a gentile performed work on Shabbat for a Jew, and it is evident that he performed it for him, it is prohibited for a Jew to benefit from it forever. And here too, it is evident that they were brought for the Jew, since flutes are brought only for a dead Jew.

And one does not eulogize with these flutes after Shabbat,

unless they came

through the gentile on Shabbat

from a nearby place

that is within the boundary. And although in this case too the gentile performed the work of carrying and transferring for the Jew, they are not prohibited for this reason, because whenever he brought them from a nearby place, their bringing does not benefit the Jew so greatly on Saturday night. And in this case he is not considered to have benefited from the work of the gentile [Tosafot].

If

they made for him

the gentiles, for a gentile dead person, on Shabbat,

a coffin

[and likewise if they made it for sale], or if they

dug a grave for him, a Jew may be buried in it.

Since they did not make this for the needs of the Jew.

And if

they made the coffin or dug the grave

for

a

Jewish dead person, he may not be buried in it forever.

For anything that was made on Shabbat for the needs of a Jew is prohibited for benefit.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: “Unless they came from a nearby place.”

And we inquire:

What is “from a nearby place”?

Rav said: From an actually nearby place.

For it is known to us with certainty that they came from within the boundary. For example, we saw that the flutes had previously been in his house, which was within the boundary.

And Shmuel said:

Even if he brought them from outside the city, and it is not known to us with certainty that they came from within the boundary—so long as it is not known with certainty that they came from outside the boundary, it is permitted to eulogize with them immediately on Saturday night. For

we are concerned

[that is, we attribute it in a lenient direction. And we find the expression “we are concerned” also in a lenient sense. Rashi]

lest they spent the night outside the wall,

near the city wall, within the Shabbat boundary.

Rava said: The Mishna is precise in accordance with Shmuel. For

this

is what it teaches: “They made a coffin for him and dug a grave for him, a Jew may be buried in it.”

And although ordinarily it is made, and it is not known whether it was made for a Jew or for a gentile, it is permitted for benefit.

It follows that in a case of uncertainty it is permitted

for benefit. For in a case of uncertain prohibition of benefit from work on Shabbat, we follow the lenient ruling.

And here too,

where it is uncertain to us whether they came from outside the boundary or not,

in a case of uncertainty it is permitted.

And a beraita was taught in accordance with Rav: For the Sages taught: A city in which Jews and gentiles dwell, and there was in it a bathhouse that was heated on Shabbat—

if the majority

of the residents of the city are

gentiles, at the conclusion of Shabbat

[on Saturday night]

he bathes

in it, the Jew

immediately.

And although it was heated on Shabbat by the gentiles, it is not considered to have been heated for the needs of the Jew, since the majority are gentiles.

And if the majority

of the residents of the city are

Jews,

the Jew may not bathe immediately at the conclusion of Shabbat, but

must wait until

there passes a period in which there is

enough time for hot water to be heated.

For after this time he no longer benefits from the heating that was done on Shabbat. For even if they had begun heating at the conclusion of Shabbat, the hot water would already have been ready for him by then.

And even if the residents of the city are

half

Jews

and half

gentiles, he must likewise wait until after Shabbat,

until there is enough time for hot water to be heated.

And half-and-half is considered an uncertainty whether it was heated for the Jew or for the gentiles. It follows that an uncertain prohibition of benefit from work on Shabbat is also prohibited, in accordance with Rav.

[And if you say: What is different about flutes that were brought on Shabbat, concerning which we prohibit eulogizing with them forever, whereas regarding the bathhouse, even where it was heated for the needs of the Jew, we prohibit it only until the time passes in which there is enough time to heat it after Shabbat?

And one can say that regarding the flutes, it is evident that they were brought for the needs of a Jew. But regarding the bathhouse, it is not so evident that it was for the needs of a Jew, since there are also gentiles in the city. Rashi.]

Rabbi Yehuda says: In a small bath—

if there is in it

in the city an important person of the

government

[the authority],

he bathes in it

the Jew

immediately

at the conclusion of Shabbat. For one may attribute it and say that the bathhouse was heated for that important person after the departure of Shabbat, by means of many slaves and kettles.

And we inquire:

What is “government”?

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav Yitzchak, son of Rav Yehuda: If there is in it an important person who has ten slaves who heat ten kettles for him at one time in a small bath, it is permitted to bathe in it

at the conclusion of Shabbat. For since they can heat it in a short time, one may attribute it and say that it was heated on Saturday night and not on Shabbat.

We learned in the Mishna:

“They made a coffin for him and dug a grave for him,”

a Jew may be buried in it.

And we inquire:

And why

may he be buried immediately at the conclusion of Shabbat? And although it should not be prohibited forever, because it is not evident that it was made for the Jew, nevertheless

here too he should wait

after Shabbat for a period of time in which there is

enough time for the work to be performed

to make the coffin and dig the grave. For perhaps the coffin and the grave were indeed made for the Jew. And if he buries in it immediately, it emerges that he benefits from the work of the gentile that was performed for him on Shabbat.

Ulla said:

In what case are we dealing here?

With

a grave that is

standing on the main road

[the king’s road]. For it is not the practice of Jews to be buried there, and it is evident that they dug it for a gentile dead person.

And we ask again:

That works for a grave,

but

what is there to say regarding a coffin?

For we must be concerned lest they made it for a Jew.

Rav Abbahu said:

In what case are we dealing here?

With the coffin

lying

on his grave,

the grave of the gentile that was dug on the main road. Since the grave was certainly made for the gentile, it is evident that the coffin too was made for that same gentile.

Mishna:

They perform all the needs of the dead

on Shabbat. And it proceeds to explain:

They anoint

him with oil,

and they wash him

with water,

provided that they do not move a limb in him.

For it is forbidden to raise the hand or foot of the dead, or to move his eyelashes, because of the prohibition of muktze.