Shabbat 155b — the Talmud in English

Come and hear:

we learned:

one cuts ![](pamud.bmp "

exact page location")

the pumpkins

[that are detached]

before the animal.

And although they stand ready for human consumption, they do not become forbidden for animal consumption on account of muktze.

And

so one cuts

the carcass before the dogs.

And we raised it:

What, is it not

with

pumpkins

soft ones that it is speaking?

Comparable to a carcass. Just as a carcass

which is

soft

even before its cutting,

so too

with

pumpkins that

are

soft

from the outset it is speaking.

And although they are food without cutting, it is permitted to cut them.

Apparently, we trouble ourselves with food

on Shabbat.

And this is a refutation of Rav Yehuda,

who said: We make food into food, but we do not trouble ourselves with food.

And we answer:

Rav Yehuda could say to you: No,

it is not speaking in this manner. Rather, it is speaking of hard pumpkins, which without cutting are not fit for animal consumption. And even

with a carcass

which is

comparable

to these

pumpkins

it is speaking.

Just as pumpkins are hard

[hard],

so too a carcass is hard

[hard]. And since they are not fit without cutting, it is permitted to cut them. For we make food into food.

And

we raised it:

How can you find

a carcass that would not be fit for dogs because of its hardness?

And we answer: It can be found

with the flesh of an elephant

[the carcass of elephants].

Alternatively:

with what are we dealing here?

With small puppies

[puppies of dogs]

small ones.

For every hard carcass is difficult for them to eat. And it is not considered food for them without cutting.

Come and hear: Rav Hanan of Nehardea taught: One breaks up

[crumbles]

straw and aspasta, and mixes

them together, and places them before the animal so that it will eat. For it does not crave straw by itself. And since he mixes them one with the other, it will eat the straw as well on account of the aspasta.

But straw and aspasta, as they are, are also fit for its consumption. And even so, we permit breaking them up and mixing them.

Apparently, we trouble ourselves with food.

And this is difficult for Rav Yehuda, who said: We do not trouble ourselves.

And we answer: We are dealing with straw and aspasta that are not fit without breaking up and mixing. With

straw

it can be found

with rotten straw

[hard straw. Ramban], which the animal eats only with a mixture of aspasta. And even the

aspasta

requires breaking up, because it is speaking

of small calves

[small calves], for whom the aspasta is difficult to chew, and it is necessary to soften it.

Mishna:

One may not stuff the camel

on Shabbat. “

Stuffing” is when one pushes a great deal of food into the animal’s throat against its will, until it becomes like a manger inside its intestines. And it is forbidden by rabbinic decree, lest one come to crushing legumes or kneading flour and the like [Maimonides, chapter 21, law 35].

And

also

one may not force-feed

it [one pushes barley into its throat] on Shabbat; and although one does not push it with as much force as in “stuffing,” it is likewise forbidden.

But one may make it swallow

it on Shabbat. And in the Gemara it will be explained what “making it swallow” is.

And

likewise

one may not force-feed the calves

on Shabbat. “

Force-feeding” is when one pushes food into their intestines, to a place from which they can no longer bring the food back up.

But one may make them swallow

it on Shabbat.

And one may pick food into chickens’ mouths

on Shabbat. “

Picking” means “making swallow.” But with chickens it is called “picking.”

And one may give water to bran

on Shabbat for the animal’s food.

But one may not knead

[knead] the bran with water.

And one may not give

on Shabbat

water before bees, or before pigeons that are in the dovecot.

And the reason is explained in the Gemara.

But one may give

water

before geese and chickens, and before house pigeons

[house pigeons]. And they are called this according to their place [Rashi. And Maimonides, in his Commentary on the Mishna, explained that they are called so after Herod, who raised them in his palace].

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: One may not stuff the camel.

And we raised it:

What does “one may not stuff” mean?

Rav Yehuda said: One does not make a manger for it inside its intestines,

by compressing a great deal of food into it.

And we wonder: Is it possible that

there is such a thing,

that its intestines expand like a manger?

And we answer: Yes. It is possible that this should happen in reality.

As Rav Yirmeya of Difti said: I myself saw that Arab

[Arabian],

fed

[fed] his camel

a kur

[a kur of provisions],

and

further

loaded

on its back a load of

a kur

of provisions for its consumption, apart from its other load.

We learned in the Mishna:

One may not force-feed

the calves, but one may make them swallow.

And we raised it:

What is “force-feeding,”

which is forbidden,

and what is “making swallow,”

which is permitted?

Rav Yehuda said: “Force-feeding”

is when one pushes food into the animal up to

the place where

it already

cannot bring it back up

and expel it. And

“making swallow”

is when one pushes it

to the place where

it can still

bring it back up

.

And Rav Hisda said: Both this and that

[force-feeding and making swallow] are pushing

to the place where it cannot bring back up

the food. Rather,

“force-feeding”

is pushing

with a utensil.

And

“making swallow”

is pushing

by hand.

Rav Yosef raised an objection: One may pick food into chickens’ mouths

on Shabbat.

And it is unnecessary to say that one may feed them by hand

food.

And one may not feed by hand the pigeons of the dovecot or the pigeons of the attic, and it is unnecessary to say that one may not pick food into their mouths

.

And we raised it:

What is “picking,” and what is

“feeding by hand”?

If you say, “picking”

is

that one supplies it

to the chicken, and puts food

into its mouth by hand,

and

“feeding by hand”

is

that one throws it before it

and it eats by itself—this implies that for the pigeons of the dovecot and the pigeons of the attic,

which it teaches regarding them “one may not feed by hand,”

even

throwing before them

so that they will eat by themselves

is also not permitted. We do not throw—this cannot be said. For it is obvious that it is permitted to place food before them, since there is no exertion in this.

permitted. This cannot be said, for surely it is obvious that one may place food before them, since this entails no exertion.

Rather, is it not

that both “feeding by hand” and “picking” mean supplying food to the chicken by hand. Rather,

“picking”

is when one pushes food into its throat up to

the place where it cannot bring it back up

. And

“feeding by hand”

is when one pushes it

to the place where

it can still

bring it back up

.

And since we permit “picking” with chickens, although it is to a place where they cannot bring it back up, apparently it is also permitted to do this with an animal.

It follows that “force-feeding”

which we forbid with an animal is forbidden specifically because it was

with a utensil.

But by hand, this is “making swallow,” and it is permitted even to a place from which it cannot bring it back up. That is, “making swallow” is “picking.”

And this is a refutation of Rav Yehuda,

according to whom the “making swallow” that we permit is specifically to a place from which it can bring it back up.

And we answer:

Rav Yehuda could say to you: In truth,

“picking”

means

supplying it by hand.

And

“feeding by hand”

means

throwing it before them. And both are to a place from which it can bring it back up.

И

And

as for

what is difficult for you,

why

the pigeons of the dovecot and the pigeons of the attic

—we do not even throw before them? This is not difficult. For specifically

these

[chickens],

whose food is upon you,

it is permitted to place food before them. But

these

[the pigeons of the dovecot and the attic]

whose food is not upon you,

for their food is available to them in the field; therefore it is forbidden even to place it before them.

As it was taught:

One gives

on Shabbat

food before a dog, but one does not give food before a pig.

And what is the difference between this one and that one? —

This one

[the dog]

has its food upon you. And this one

[the pig]

does not have its food upon you.

For it is forbidden to raise them. As we hold: Cursed is a Jew who raises pigs.

Rav Ashi said: The Mishna also proves

this. For it teaches:

“One may not give water before bees and before pigeons that are in the dovecot. But one may give before geese

and

before chickens and before house pigeons.”

What is the reason? Is it not because these

[chickens]

have their food upon you, whereas these

[bees and pigeons of the dovecot]

do not have their food upon you?

Apparently, it is entirely forbidden to place food before living creatures whose food is not upon you.

And we reject this:

But according to your reasoning,

if it is because their food is not upon you,

why specifically “water”

? Let it teach that

even wheat and barley also may not be given

before them.

Rather,

in truth, we can say that one feeds even living creatures whose food is not upon you. And

water is different,

for it is not given before them because

it is common in the marshes.

But food is not so readily available to them.

Rabbi Yona expounded at the entrance of the house of the prince: What

does it mean that it is written, “A righteous man knows the judgment of the poor”?

Its meaning is as follows:

The Holy One, blessed be He, knows regarding the dog that its provisions are scant.

They are not available to it, because a person does not take pity on it to give it much food.

Therefore

He made it so that

its food remains within its intestines,

and is not digested until

three days.

And as we learned:

A dog that ate from the flesh of a corpse and the dog died while it was inside a house—the house becomes impure with the impurity of a tent, because of the corpse-flesh inside the dog’s body.

[But as long as the dog is alive, the corpse-flesh inside it does not impart impurity, because impurity swallowed within living creatures does not impart impurity.]

And

how long does its food remain

[the corpse-flesh that it ate]

in its intestines

of the living creature before it died,

so that

the house

will be impure

with the impurity of a tent? —

With a dog,

until

three complete days. For until then the flesh that it ate still exists in its intestines. But afterward it has already been digested, and it is no longer present.

До этого времени съеденное мясо еще сохраняется в ее внутренностях. Но после этого оно уже переварилось и больше не существует как отдельный предмет.

But with birds and fish

that ate from the corpse-flesh, the flesh exists in their intestines only for the time required

for the

piece of flesh

to fall into fire and burn.

Rav Hamnuna said: Since it says that the Holy One, blessed be He, took account of the dog’s provisions,

it follows that it is proper conduct to throw a piece of meat

to throw a piece of meat

[to throw raw meat]

to a dog.

And how much

is the measure that one should throw before it?

Rav Mari said: A little

[a little] meat—he should give it, the measure of

its ear

[its ear] of the dog, and no more.

And a stick after it.

That is, after you have placed meat before it, strike it with a stick so that it will not become accustomed to you.

And these words

apply when it is proper conduct to place food before it

in the field

[in the field].

But in the city

[in the city]

not

should one give it anything if it is not his own dog, because

by

feeding it,

it comes

the dog

to become attached

to him.

Rav Pappa said: There is no one poorer

[poor]

than a dog.

For its provisions are not available.

And there is no one richer

[rich]

than a pig.

For every food is fit for it, and everywhere it finds something to eat. And people also place much food before it.

And we return to the dispute between Rav Yehuda and Rav Hisda: what is “force-feeding” and what is “making swallow”?

It was taught in accordance with Rav Yehuda: What is “force-feeding,” and what is “making swallow”?

“Force-feeding”—

she makes it lie down, and opens its mouth with a bit

[he puts a bit into its mouth so that it cannot close it],

and feeds it vetch and water at one time

while it is lying down. And the water causes the vetch to be swallowed into its throat against its will.

“Making swallow”—

she feeds it while standing

[when it is standing],

and gives it drink while standing. And she gives it vetch by itself and water by itself,

and not at one time.

And since it is not lying down, one cannot push [the food] so far into its throat, to a place from which it cannot bring the food back up, and this is in accordance with Rav Yehuda.

We learned in the Mishna:

One may pick food into chickens’ mouths,

and one gives water to bran, but one may not knead it.

Abaye said: I stated it before my master

[Rabba]:

The Mishna,

which holds that there is no prohibition of kneading in giving water to flour without kneading,

whose

is it?

And he said to me,

Rabba:

It is Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda.

For it was taught: If

one

person puts in the flour, and another puts into it

of the flour

the water, or if one first put in the water and afterward another put the flour into the water, the

one who put in

last is liable.

For putting flour into water or water into flour is its kneading. And there is in this an issue of “kneading,” even without mixing them together with his hands—these are the words of Rabbi.

Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda says: He is not liable

for kneading

until he kneads.

And we reject this:

Perhaps, Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda said only there

that we require kneading,

but with flour.

Because it

is something that can be kneaded.

And since this is its normal manner, as long as he has not kneaded it, this is not the manner of kneading.

But bran, which cannot be kneaded,

it is possible that

even Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda agrees

that putting in water alone is its kneading, since this is the manner of its labor.

And we answer:

It does not enter your mind

to distinguish between flour and bran.

For

this

was explicitly taught

that they also disagree with regard to bran.

For it was taught:

One may not give water to bran—

the words of Rabbi.

Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda says: One may give water to bran.

For as long as he does not knead it, there is no issue of “kneading.”

The Sages taught: One may not knead the keli

[flour of grain that was dried in an oven].

And some say: One may knead

the keli.

And we raised it:

Who

are

the “some who say”?