Shabbat 22a — the Talmud in English

Rav Kahana said: Rav Natan bar Minyomi expounded in the name of Rabbi Tanḥum: ![](pamud.bmp "

")

a Hanukkah lamp that one placed

at a height of

more than twenty cubits—

is invalid.

And one must extinguish it and light it again. Tosafot, subsection “Lamp.”

And the law of a Hanukkah lamp is

like the

law of

a sukkah

whose roofing is higher than twenty cubits, which is invalid.

And like the

law of

a mavoi,

which cannot be rendered permitted by means of a crossbeam that is higher than twenty cubits.

And Rav Kahana said: Rav Natan bar Minyomi expounded in the name of Rav Tanḥum: what is

the explanation of the verse

that is written, “And the pit was empty—

there was no water in it.”

For

from the implication of what is stated, “And the pit was empty,”

is it so that

I do not know that there was no water in it?

Rather, why does the verse say, “There was no water in it”?

To teach us that only

water was not in it, but snakes and scorpions were in it.

Rabba said: It is a mitzva to place the Hanukkah lamp within a handbreadth of the doorway

of his house, so that it will be recognizable that the lamp belongs to the master of the house.

And we raised this:

And where does he place it?

On which side of the doorway does he place it?

Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said: On the

side of

the right

of one entering the house.

Rav Shmuel of Difti said: On the

side of

the left

of one entering the house.

And his reason is:

so that the Hanukkah lamp will be on the left and the mezuzah on the right,

and he will be surrounded by mitzvot.

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav Asi: It is forbidden to count

to count

coins opposite a Hanukkah lamp.

When I stated

this halakha

before Shmuel, he said to me: Is a lamp

of Hanukkah—

does it have sanctity

such that even incidental use of it is forbidden, such as counting coins by its light?

Rav Yosef challenged

that which Shmuel said, that with an object through which one performs a mitzva but which has no sanctity, there is no need to treat it with honor:

is blood

of the slaughter of a wild animal or bird—

does it have sanctity?!

And nevertheless the halakha was stated concerning it that one must not cover it in a disgraceful manner.

For it was taught:

it is written, “And he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth.” And we expound:

“And he shall pour out and cover”

with what,

in the same manner

that he poured out

the blood, in that manner

he shall cover

it. Just as slaughter is performed by means of the hand, so too the covering of the blood must be performed by hand—

that he should not cover it with his foot

because this is not a manner of honor.

And the reason for the matter is, so that

mitzvot should not be contemptible to him,

and covering with the foot is a disgraceful manner.

They asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi: What is the law concerning making use

making use

of the decorations of a sukkah

fruits hung in the sukkah for decoration, during

all seven

days of the festival of Sukkot?

He said to them: Surely the Sages said

the Sages:

It is forbidden to count

to count

coins opposite a Hanukkah lamp.

And just as with a Hanukkah lamp it is forbidden to use its light, so too the decorations of a sukkah are forbidden for use throughout the seven days.

Rav Yosef said: Master of Abraham!

An expression of astonishment.

How

does

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi hang a halakha

that was taught,

which was explicitly taught in the Tosefta—

on a

halakha

that was not taught,

which was not stated explicitly, but was learned from another place.

For the prohibition against using the decorations of the

sukkah—

was taught,

whereas the prohibition against using a

Hanukkah lamp—

was not taught.

For it was taught:

If he

roofed it

for the sukkah

according to its halakha, and decorated it

with decorations of a sukkah

with tapestries

woven sheets,

and with painted sheets, and he hung in it walnuts, peaches, almonds and pomegranates, and clusters of

clusters

grapes,

and crowns of ears of grain,

or he placed

wines

or

oils and fine flour

fine flour, in glass cups, and hung them for decoration.

With regard to all these:

it is forbidden to make use

to use

of them—

until the conclusion of the last festival day

of Sukkot.

And if he stipulated concerning them

before the beginning of the first festival day, and said that he was not separating himself from them and was not setting them aside for the needs of the sukkah, but was leaving himself the option of taking them and using them during twilight [which is the beginning of the first festival day]—

everything follows his stipulation.

And then he is permitted to use them during the days of the festival.

Thus we have explicitly learned in the Tosefta that it is forbidden to make use of a decoration of a sukkah [unless he stipulates in such a manner]. And if so, one cannot make the explicit law of sukkah dependent on the law that it is forbidden to count coins opposite a Hanukkah lamp.

Rather, Rav Yosef said:

Indeed, one is not learned from the other.

Rather,

the father of them all,

the source for all the places where the prohibition against using objects of a mitzva is stated is the covering of the

blood,

for we learned above that one is obligated to cover it by hand and not by foot, so that mitzvot should not be contemptible to him. And from here one can learn both with regard to sukkah and with regard to Hanukkah.

It was stated: Rav said: One may not light from one

Hanukkah lamp

to a

another Hanukkah lamp.

And Shmuel said: One may light

from lamp to lamp.

And afterward the Gemara explains in what manner one lights from lamp to lamp.

Rav said: One may not remove ritual fringes from one garment

old in order

to

tie them to a

garment

new, because of contempt for the first garment. [

But if the first one is not fit to be worn, it is permitted. Menahot 41b. And see further in

Tosafot, subsection

“Rav said”.]

And Shmuel said: One may remove

ritual fringes

from a garment

old

to a garment

new.

Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon disagreed concerning work performed on Shabbat unintentionally, such as one who drags a bench over the ground and, while dragging it, makes a furrow in the ground [which is a derivative of the labor of plowing—in a field, or a derivative of building—in a house]. Rabbi Yehuda forbids, and Rabbi Shimon permits. Rav and Shmuel disagreed concerning the halakhic ruling:

Rav said: The halakha is not in accordance with Rabbi Shimon with regard to dragging.

And Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Shimon with regard to dragging.

Abaye said: In all the matters of the master,

in all the deeds of Rabba bar Naḥmani—

he acted in accordance with Rav.

Since in every dispute concerning a prohibition, the halakha follows Rav [and some say that only in matters in which Rav and Shmuel disagreed concerning the laws of Shabbat did he rule in accordance with Rav. Ritba].

Except for these three, in which

Rabba bar Naḥmani

acted

in them

in accordance with Shmuel:

a.

One may light from lamp to lamp.

b.

And one may remove

ritual fringes

from garment to garment.

c.

And the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Shimon with regard to dragging.

For it was taught:

Rabbi Shimon says:

A person may drag a bed, a chair, or a bench, provided that he does not intend to make a furrow,

but rather that the furrow will be made on its own.

One of the Sages sat before Rav Adda bar Ahava and sat saying: The reason of Rav

who said that it is forbidden to light a Hanukkah lamp from one lamp to another

is because of contempt for a mitzva

Itself. For the splinter by means of which he transfers the flame is not an object of a mitzva; and when he lights it from a lamp of a mitzva, this is contempt for a mitzva.

Rav Adda bar Ahava said to them

Rav Adda bar Ahava:

Do not listen to him

[do not listen to him] with regard to what he said, that the reason of Rav is because of contempt for a mitzva.

Rather,

the reason of Rav

who prohibited lighting a lamp from a lamp is

because it diminishes a mitzva.

For it appears as though he takes light from the lamp of a mitzva and draws from its oil.

What is the difference between them,

between the two reasons?

And we explain: In a case

where he lights from lamp to lamp.

That is, he does not light one lamp from another by means of a splinter, but rather lights two lamps directly, one from the other.

The one who says

that the reason of Rav is

because of contempt for a mitzva,

holds that

from lamp to lamp—

one may light,

and there is no contempt for a mitzva in this.

The one who says

that the reason of Rav is

because

the lighting appears like

diminishing a mitzva,

holds that to light

from lamp to lamp is also forbidden,

because even from lamp to lamp it appears like diminishing a mitzva.