Shabbat 26a — the Talmud in English

Abaye said to him: ![](pamud.bmp "

precise page location")

Let the Master say

another reason,

because it flies,

for sparks fly from it and ignite the house, and he will be anxious about his property and come to extinguish it. [Tosafot].

And we explain:

One [reason], and furthermore,

he is stating an additional reason

.

One [reason], because it flies,

and there is a concern for a fire.

And furthermore, a decree lest he take some of it for his use.

That mother-in-law

[mother-in-law]

who hated

who was hating

her daughter-in-law.

She said to her

the mother-in-law:

Go, adorn yourself,

go and adorn yourself,

with balsam oil,

with balsam oil.

She went and adorned herself.

When she came

[when she came]

she said

to her

her mother-in-law:

Go, light a lamp,

light the lamp.

She went, hung up the lamp, and fire blew into it,

the fire caught in it

and consumed her —

and she was burned.

It is written in the Book of Jeremiah:

“And from the poor of the land

from the remainder of the inhabitants of the land [from those who had not been exiled],

Nebuzaradan, chief of the executioners, left,

so that they would be

for vinedressers and farmers.”

“Vinedressers” —

Rav Yosef taught: These are those who gather balsam

[and those who gathered were called “vinedressers”]

from Ein Gedi to Ramata

[a place-name].

“Farmers” —

these are the hunters of the chilazon, from the ladders of Tyre

[the ascent of the mountain]

to Haifa.

And they were called “farmers,” from the expression “winepresses,” for they wound the chilazon in order to extract its blood [similar to the operation of the winepress — with grapes]. And Nebuzaradan left them so that they would supply him with balsam and chilazon for the king’s garments.

The Sages taught:

One may not light a lamp

with

oil

of tevel

that is

impure

[and all the more so, pure tevel]

on

a

weekday,

and it is unnecessary to say

that one may not light with it

on Shabbat.

Similarly, one may not light with white naphtha on

a

weekday. And it is unnecessary to say

that one may not light with it

on Shabbat.

And we raise an objection concerning it:

Granted, white naphtha

one may not light with it,

because it flies

and there is danger in lighting it.

But impure tevel —

what is the reason

that one may not light with it?

And we explain:

The verse says: “And I, behold, I have given you

the charge of My terumot.”

“My terumot” — the plural expression implies. For

the verse is speaking of two terumot: one pure teruma and one impure teruma.

And it teaches you:

Just as with pure teruma, you have no

use or benefit from it

except from the time of its lifting —

separation

and onward, so too with impure teruma, you have no

permission to use it,

except from the time of its lifting and onward.

But before the separation, while it is still tevel, you cannot use it.

As for the matter itself, Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: One may not light with balsam.

And as we explained above, because we are concerned lest he take some of it for his use, and because of the concern that he will ignite the house.

And Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar would likewise say

an additional reason why one may not light with balsam: because

the balsam is not

oil that comes from the fruit,

but

it is

sap that drips from the kataf trees

[the name of the tree], and since it is from the tree, it is like tar, which does not draw along after the wick.

[Another explanation in Rashi: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar is not explaining an additional reason why one may not light with balsam; rather, it is an independent statement].

Rabbi Yishmael says: Any

oil

that comes from the tree —

one may not light with it.

Rabbi Yishmael ben Beroka says:

One may light only

with

oil

that comes from the fruit,

to exclude fish oil. [And see Rashash].

Rabbi Tarfon says: One may light only with olive oil!

Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri stood on his feet and said:

According to your words, that one lights only with olive oil,

what will the people of Babylonia do, who have only sesame oil?

And

likewise —

what will the people of Media do, who have only nut oil?

And what will the people of Alexandria do, who have only radish oil?

And will they not light the Shabbat lamp?

And what will the people of Cappadocia do, who have neither this nor that,

who do not have any oil that comes from the fruit,

but only naphtha

and will they not light the Shabbat lamp?

[And this question applies also to Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka, who said that one lights only with what comes from the fruit].

Rather, you have no

thing to disqualify for lighting

except what the Sages said

in our Mishna; these are the types of oil with which

one may not light

with them.

And one may light with fish oil,

despite the fact that it resembles milk-fat and does not come from the fruit.

And

one may also light

with tar,

despite the fact that it is produced from pitch.

Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: One may light with oil of unripe pumpkins, and with naphtha.

Sumakhos says: Anything that comes from the flesh —

one may not light with it, except fish oil.

And we raise an objection concerning it:

Sumakhos —

is this not the first tanna!?

[The reference is to the words of Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri, who disqualified lighting with the oils enumerated in the Mishna, and likewise one may not light with milk-fat, which comes from the flesh, while he permitted lighting with fish oil].

And we explain:

There is a difference between them

in this matter

that

said

Rav Bruna said in the name of Rav [above, 21a: One puts any amount of oil into melted milk-fat and melted fish entrails and lights].

[One of them holds: melted milk-fat is permitted through mixtures, but fish oil is permitted even by itself.

One of them holds: fish oil is permitted when another type is mixed into it, but milk-fat is entirely forbidden. [And Tosafot, s.v. “There is a difference,” disagree].

And they are not identified,

who said this and who said that.

It was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Any

thing

that comes from the tree,

such as hemp and cotton —

it is not subject to the measure of three by three

fingers, which is the measure of a garment for receiving impurity [apart from impurity of trampling, whose measure is three handbreadths].

And

likewise,

one roofs with it

the sukka, since it does not receive impurity.

[But with something that receives impurity, one may not roof with it, as we derive in Sukkah [12a] from a verse, for it is written: “You shall make the festival of Sukkot for yourself when you gather from your threshing floor and from your winepress,” that one must roof only with something resembling the refuse of the threshing floor and the winepress, which does not receive impurity].

Except for flax,

for although it is called a tree, it receives impurity, and one may not roof with it.

which, although it is called a tree, is susceptible to ritual impurity, and therefore may not be used for roofing.