Shabbat 19a (יט.) — the Talmud in English

Rabbi Yehuda says:

Babylonian kutah and all types of kutah may not be sold

to them

thirty days before Passover.

For he holds in accordance with Beit Shammai, that a person is warned that his leaven may not remain in the world, even after it has come into the possession of a gentile. And kutah is not made to be eaten by itself, but only to dip food in it. Therefore, it does not get consumed until a considerable amount of time has passed. And thirty days before Passover is the time when they begin expounding the laws of Passover, and at that time the warning concerning the mitzvot of the Passover festival takes effect. From then onward, he is obligated to prevent our leaven from remaining in the world during Passover.

The Sages taught: One may place

on Shabbat

food before a dog

in the courtyard.

And if

it took it

for food

and went out

into the public domain,

one need not attend to it

to prevent it from going out.

Similarly, one may place food before a gentile in the courtyard.

And if

he took it and went out, one need not attend to him.

This applies specifically to food, because he is accustomed to eating it immediately. But it is forbidden to give him other objects even on the eve of Shabbat if he will take them out on Shabbat, according to Beit Shammai. And certainly it is forbidden on Shabbat itself, as it is forbidden even according to Beit Hillel.

And we raised a difficulty concerning this:

This additional teaching—

why do I need it

to teach us this with regard to a gentile, after it has already taught us the same with regard to a dog? Is this

not the same thing

as the previous case?

And we answer: If it had not taught the case of “a gentile,”

it might have been said

that specifically

this one

[the dog], whose sustenance

is incumbent upon him

—upon the owner—so that it is permitted to trouble oneself on Shabbat with providing its food. But

this one

[the gentile],

whose

food is

not incumbent

upon the Jew, it would be forbidden to trouble oneself on Shabbat with providing his food [just as we find that it is forbidden to trouble oneself with providing the food of an animal, because its food is not incumbent upon you].

It teaches us

that it is permitted, because he is considered to some extent as one whose food is incumbent upon you. For one provides for the poor of the gentiles together with the poor of Israel, because of the ways of peace [Tosafot].

The Sages taught: A person may not rent his utensils to a gentile on the eve of Shabbat

because it appears that he is renting them to him for Shabbat. And even when he is not renting them specifically for Shabbat, but is renting them for a week or a month, and the rent for Shabbat is included within that larger sum, it is forbidden. This is because it appears that he is taking payment for use on Shabbat [Tosafot].

But

on

the day

four

or

on

the day

five it is permitted

to rent them to him. For it does not appear that he is renting them for Shabbat or taking payment for Shabbat, since it is not close to Shabbat, and he is not renting them specifically for Shabbat, but as part of a larger rental period [Tosafot].

Similarly, one may not send letters by the hand of a gentile

on

the eve of Shabbat,

because this is like instructing him to carry it on his behalf on Shabbat, and “instructing a gentile is a rabbinic prohibition.”

And

on

the day

four and on

the day

five it is permitted

to send it with him.

They said concerning Rabbi Yosei the Priest—and some say concerning Rabbi Yosei the Pious—that

he was stringent with himself and would not send anything by a gentile even during the other days of the week, and

his handwritten document was never found in the hand of a gentile.

This was because he was concerned lest the gentile carry it on Shabbat.

The Sages taught: One may not send a letter by a gentile on the eve of Shabbat unless he establishes a fixed payment for him

—the Jew to the gentile—

money

as payment for his agency. In that case, even if the gentile carries it on Shabbat, he is not considered to be doing so on behalf of the Jew, but in order to earn his payment; he is laboring for his own sake.

Beit Shammai say:

One may not send a letter with a gentile unless there remains enough time during the day

for the gentile to reach

the

house

of the person to whom it was sent before Shabbat.

And Beit Hillel say:

One may send it even when there remains time only

for the gentile to reach

the

house adjacent to the wall of

the city to which the letter was sent. It is not necessary for it to reach the recipient’s own house.

And we are astonished:

But

the beraita is discussing a case in which he

established

a payment for him for his agency, and in such a case Beit Hillel permits it under all circumstances, even without reaching the house adjacent to the wall, as it teaches in the first clause: “unless he establishes a fixed payment” [and this is also evident from the Mishna, where Beit Hillel permitted giving an item to a gentile as a contractor to perform work on Shabbat, such as “hides to a tanner” and utensils to a launderer, when he establishes a payment for him]!?

Rav Sheshet said: This is what it means:

One may not send a letter by a gentile unless he establishes a payment for him.

And if he did not establish a fixed payment,

and he is laboring on behalf of the Jew—

Beit Shammai say: Until he reaches his house.

And Beit Hillel say: Until he reaches the house adjacent to the wall.

The distinction between establishing a fixed payment and not establishing one was stated specifically with regard to Beit Hillel. But according to Beit Shammai, even when a fixed payment was established, one may send it only with enough time for it to reach the recipient’s house. For they prohibit giving a gentile work even as a contractor, as is demonstrated by the Mishna concerning “utensils to a tanner.” Tosafot.

And we raise a further objection: How can it teach that without establishing a fixed payment it is permitted “with enough time for it to reach his house,” when

you said in the first clause, ‘One may not send’?

This implies that it is forbidden in every case.

And we answer: It is not difficult.

This

teaching, which states “with enough time for it to reach his house” according to Beit Shammai, or “the house adjacent to the wall” according to Beit Hillel, is referring to a case

in which a post office has been established in the city

to which the letter was sent. The agent need not bring it to the recipient’s house, but only to the post office. This is what Beit Shammai mean by “his house.” And according to Beit Hillel, he need not even reach the post office; it is sufficient for him to reach the house adjacent to the wall of that city, since he can leave it there.

And

this

teaching, which states “one may not send,” is referring to a case

in which no post office has been established in the city.

The agent must bring the letter to the recipient’s house. And even if he can reach his house while it is still day, we do not rely on this, because perhaps he will not find him at home and will have to carry the letter after him on Shabbat.

The Sages taught: One may not set sail on a ship less than three days before Shabbat

if the voyage is destined to continue on Shabbat. And it is forbidden even within the Shabbat boundary, because of the decree against swimming. One may not swim on the surface of the water on Shabbat, due to a decree lest one make a swimming raft. But before the three days preceding Shabbat—that is, on Tuesday, it is permitted to set sail. Since they required him to set sail a considerable time before Shabbat, he has a distinguishing indication and will not come to make a swimming raft [Beit Yosef].

When does this apply?

When he sets sail

for an optional purpose. But

when he sets sail

for the sake of a mitzva, it is entirely permitted.

And

he may set sail by

stipulating

[with the gentile]

that he will rest

on Shabbat. And if the gentile ultimately does not fulfill the condition, the Jew

does not rest

but continues to sail with him,

according to Rabbi.

Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel says: It is not necessary

to stipulate with him. Rather, even without stipulating with him that he rest on Shabbat, he may set sail for the sake of a mitzva on the eve of Shabbat.

And from Tyre to Sidon,

which is only a one-day journey,

it is permitted even on the eve of Shabbat,

since he will reach his destination before Shabbat.

The Sages taught: One may not besiege gentile towns less than three days before Shabbat,

because the anxiety and fear of the heart caused by the siege abolish the mitzva of Shabbat delight, and one does not enjoy eating and drinking [Rambam].

And if they began

before then,

they do not stop

on Shabbat, because after three days the fear dissipates, and they can properly fulfill the mitzva of Shabbat delight.

And so too Shammai would say:

It is written: “And you shall build a siege against the city that wages war against you,

until it falls.”

This implies that one does not stop besieging

even on Shabbat.

We learned in the Mishna:

Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel said: It was the practice

of my ancestral household to give white garments to a gentile launderer three days before Shabbat.

It was taught: Rabbi Tzadok said: This was the practice of the household of Rabban Gamliel: They would give white garments to a gentile launderer three days before Shabbat. And

colored

garments

they gave

even on the eve of Shabbat. And from their words we learned that white garments are more difficult to launder than colored garments.

This is because the laundering of white garments continues for three days. And because they were stringent in accordance with Beit Shammai, who prohibited giving a gentile work to perform on Shabbat even when he established a fixed payment, they gave white garments to the launderer only three days before Shabbat, so that he would complete laundering them before Shabbat.

Abaye would give a certain dyed garment to the launderer

[the launderer].

He said to him,

the launderer:

How much do you want for it

to launder it?

He said to him: As for a white one

[as for a white garment].

He said to him,

Abaye:

The Sages have already preceded you

and taught us that white garments are more difficult to launder than colored garments, so it is impossible for the payment for laundering them to be equal.

Abaye said: One who gives a garment to a launderer

[the launderer]—

by measure

[with a measurement]

he should give it to him, and by measure he should take it back from him.

He should measure the garment when giving it and when receiving it, to check that its measurement remains as it was.

For if

it is greater [it has expanded],

he has damaged it

through laundering by

stretching it.

And if

it is smaller [it has shrunk],

he has damaged it

through

shrinking it

during its laundering.

We learned in the Mishna:

And both these and those

[Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel]

agree that one may load

the beam of the olive press and the circular press stones of the winepress.

And we raised a difficulty concerning this:

What is different about all the other

labors in the first clause,

that they decreed concerning them

that one may not begin them on the eve of Shabbat, so that one will not come to perform them on Shabbat,

and what is different about the beams of the olive press and the circular stones of the winepress, concerning which they did not decree

the same?

And we answer:

Those

in the first clause,

which

are Torah labor, and

if one performs them on Shabbat, he is liable

for them for a

sin-offering—

Beit Shammai decreed concerning them

on

the eve of Shabbat, just before nightfall.

But

the beams of the olive press and the circular

stones of the winepress, which

are prohibited only by rabbinic decree, and even

if one performs them on Shabbat

itself,

he is not liable for a sin-offering—

they did not decree

concerning them on the eve of Shabbat. There is no liability for a sin-offering in their case because before they are placed beneath the beam and the circular stones of the winepress, they are crushed and pressed somewhat, and even without the beam the liquids emerge on their own. They are loaded only so that more liquid will flow out.

And we raise the question:

Who

is the

tanna

who holds

that anything from which

liquids emerge

automatically—

is entirely permitted, and they did not decree concerning it, and the Mishna follows his view?

And the answer is:

Rav Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: It is Rabbi Yishmael.

As we learned: Garlic, and unripe grapes

[grapes before they ripened],

and unripe ears of grain

[ears of grain that did not ripen fully],

which one crushed

on the eve of Shabbat

while it was still day,

and afterward placed them beneath stones so that the liquid would continue to flow from them—

Rabbi Yishmael says: He may complete the process once night falls,

leaving them beneath the stones and completing the extraction of their liquid on Shabbat.