Shabbat 34b — the Talmud in English

And Rava said: ![](pamud.bmp "

exact location of the folio")

Why did they say that one may not insulate with something that adds heat

such as olive-press refuse [olive waste after its pressing] and manure,

even before daytime—

a decree lest he insulate in embers

[which are ash mixed with coals], because

there is a coal in it.

Abaye said to him: Let him insulate

even in embers that contain a coal—what of it!? For before daytime there is no concern lest he come to stoke the pot, since at that time he is indeed permitted to heat it!?

Rava said to him:

A decree lest

he insulate before daytime a pot that has not yet cooked completely, and

stoke the coals

after dark, so that it will cook on Shabbat. Therefore they decreed that one may not insulate before daytime even a pot that has cooked completely.

And we find in the Mishna below that the Sages decreed that one may not leave a pot on the fire, even if it has cooked completely, until he rakes away the coals or until he covers them [spreads ash over them], so that he will not come to stoke the coals. Therefore it is forbidden to insulate in embers that contain a coal. And the Sages decreed that one may not insulate with anything that adds heat, even when there is no coal there, so that people will not come to insulate in embers.

The Sages taught:

bein ha-shmashot

is—

a.

A doubt

whether it contains both

from the day and

also

from the night.

b.

A doubt whether it is entirely from the day.

c.

A doubt whether it is entirely from the night.

And therefore,

we impose upon it the stringencies of both days.

As will be explained below.

And what is “bein ha-shmashot”?—

From when the sun sets, for as long as the eastern face is reddening,

when the redness of the sun is visible in the clouds.

When it has darkened,

become black, the

lower

part of the sky

and

still

has not darkened

the

upper

part, because of the sun’s rays of light directed upward—this is

bein ha-shmashot.

And only when

it has darkened,

become black, also the

upper part, which is level with the lower part—

this is night, the words of Rabbi Judah.

Rabbi Nehemiah says:

The length of the period of bein ha-shmashot is

the time for a person to walk half a mil from when the sun sets,

and then it is night.

Rabbi Yose says: Bein ha-shmashot

is an extremely short period,

like the blink of an eye,

like the time of a relaxed blinking of the eye.

This one,

the night,

enters, and this one,

the day,

leaves.

And it is impossible to determine it,

because of the short period. Before that, it is fully day.

The Master said: We impose upon it,

upon bein ha-shmashot,

the stringencies of both days.

For what halakhic matter?

Rav Huna, son of Rav Joshua, said: With regard to the impurity

of a zav.

A “zav” is a person from whose body zavah issued twice, on one day or on two consecutive days. He is impure until seven clean days without zavah have passed over him; then he immerses in spring water [living water], and becomes pure.

Likewise, if zavah issued only once, but the issuing of the zavah continued during a period that included two consecutive days—for example, if the zavah issued near the end of the day and continued until the night belonging to the following day—this is considered as though he saw two sightings on two consecutive days. He is therefore impure because of zavah.

And if he saw three sightings of zavah on one day, or on two days, or on three consecutive days, he is liable for the offering of a zav, and he is forbidden to enter the Temple and to eat sacrificial meat until he brings his offering.

For we learned:

One who

saw

zavah on

two days, during bein ha-shmashot,

for example, when he saw the first zavah during the bein ha-shmashot after the first day and the second during the bein ha-shmashot after the second day—

he is

in doubt with regard to impurity.

For, on the one hand, it is possible that the two sightings were on two consecutive days, on the first day and on the second day, and he became impure.

For it is possible that the bein ha-shmashot of the first day was entirely from the first day, and the bein ha-shmashot of the second day was entirely from the second day, and it follows that he saw two sightings of zavah on two consecutive days.

Likewise, it is possible that the bein ha-shmashot after the first day was already the night of the second day, whereas the bein ha-shmashot after the second day was also the second day, and it follows that he saw two sightings on one day.

On the other hand, it is possible that he saw the two sightings on two nonconsecutive days: the bein ha-shmashot after the first day was the first day, while the bein ha-shmashot after the second day was already the night of the third day. It follows that the second day was a day clean of a sighting, which separated between the two days of the sighting, and he does not thereby become a zav.

And

likewise, he is in doubt with regard to liability

for an offering.

For it is also possible that the first sighting was on the first day, whereas the second was both on the second day and on the third day, and it is considered as two sightings on two consecutive days. It follows that he saw three sightings on three consecutive days, and he is liable for an offering.

And since the matter is doubtful, he brings a bird sin-offering brought because of doubt. That sin-offering is pinioned, and its blood is sprinkled on the altar, but it is not eaten. For perhaps he is not a zav who is liable for an offering, and it is carrion, since it was pinioned in the manner of a bird-offering and was not slaughtered in the manner of an unconsecrated bird.

And if he

saw

one sighting on

one day during bein ha-shmashot—

he is

in doubt with regard to impurity.

For perhaps the sighting occurred both on the preceding day and on the night of the following day, and it is considered as two sightings. Or perhaps it was one sighting on one day בלבד.

And now the Gemara explains the time of bein ha-shmashot mentioned in the beraita:

And we raised it as a difficulty:

This itself is difficult.

You said: What is bein ha-shmashot?—

From when the sun sets, for as long as the eastern face is reddening.

And it apparently means the period during which even the lower part of the dome of the firmament has not yet darkened.

But

when the eastern face is not reddening, and already

the lower part has darkened, and

although it still

has not darkened the upper part—

it is night.

And

if

the tanna had then repeated,

in the continuation of the beraita:

The lower part has darkened but the upper part has not darkened—

is it bein ha-shmashot!?

Rabba said that Rav Judah said that Samuel said: Join them,

connect them together,

and teach

as follows: a.

What is bein ha-shmashot?—

From when the sun sets, for as long as the eastern face is reddening.

b.

And the lower part has darkened and

still

the upper part has not darkened—

this too is bein ha-shmashot.

b.

The upper part has darkened and is level with the lower part—

night.

And Rav Yosef said that Rav Judah said that Samuel said: This is what it teaches:

a.

From when the sun sets, for as long as the eastern face is reddening—

day.

b.

The lower part has darkened but the upper part has not darkened—

bein ha-shmashot.

c.

The upper part has darkened and is level with the lower part—

night.

And they follow,

Rabba, who lengthens the time of bein ha-shmashot and includes in it also the time of “from when the sun sets for as long as the eastern face is reddening,” and Rav Yosef, who shortens the time of bein ha-shmashot and limits it only to the time when the lower part has darkened but not the upper part—

their own approaches.

For it was stated: The measure of bein ha-shmashot—

how much is it?

Rabba said that Rav Judah said that Samuel said:

The walking time of

three parts of a mil.

And we raised it as a difficulty:

What are three parts of a mil?

If you say three halves of a mil,

three half-mils—if so,

let him say: a mil and a half.

Rather, three thirds of a mil,

three one-third-mils—if so,

let him say: a mil.

Rather: three quarters of a mil,

three quarters of the mil.

And Rav Yosef said that Rav Judah said that Samuel said:

The walking time of

two parts of a mil.

And we raised it as a difficulty:

What are two parts of a mil?

If you say two halves of a mil,

two half-mils—if so,

let him say: a mil.

But rather, two quarters of a mil—

if so,

let him say: half a mil.