Shabbat 39b — the Talmud in English

Rav Hisda said: ![](pamud.bmp "

precise location of the folio")

From the incident that the people of Tiberias carried out,

who placed a pipe of cold water, while it was still day, inside the hot springs of Tiberias,

and the Sages prohibited them

from drinking and bathing in the water, it may be proved that

the placing-in-insulation [

was prohibited]

with something that increases heat, even while it was still day.

For the people of Tiberias insulated the pipe together with the water inside the hot springs of Tiberias, and the Sages prohibited them because of the concern lest one insulate in embers and stir the coals.

Ulla said,

even though the Sages prohibited the water that had been heated in the pipe,

the halakha is like the people of Tiberias,

and it is permitted to drink and bathe in the water of the pipe.

Rav Naḥman said to him

to Ulla,

they have already broken

the people of Tiberias their pipes,

because they acknowledged the words of the Sages.

We learned in the Mishna:

The incident that the people of Tiberias carried out

and brought a pipe of cold water into a channel of hot water. The Sages said to them: If [this was done] on Shabbat, [the water is] like water that was heated on Shabbat, and it is prohibited for drinking and bathing. And if [it was done] on a Festival, [the water is] like water that was heated on a Festival, and it is permitted for drinking but prohibited for bathing.

In the discussion of bathing, a distinction must be made between several matters:

a. On a Festival, as a matter of law, it is permitted to heat water over a fire for drinking, and the tannaim dispute whether it was also permitted to heat [water] for bathing. But on Shabbat it is prohibited to heat water over a fire and its derivatives for drinking, and all the more so for bathing.

b. Water that was heated on the eve of Shabbat is not prohibited as a matter of fundamental law, but only because of the “decree of the bathhouse,” as will be explained below, 40a. But water that was heated on Shabbat itself has the status of “an act performed on Shabbat,” and is prohibited for drinking and bathing.

c. There is a distinction between the act of “bathing,” which comes to cleanse the body of its filth and is carried out by immersion in water, and the act of “rinsing,” which is merely pouring water over the body in passing, and this is not the manner of bathing.

And the Gemara discusses:

What is ‘bathing’?

How did they bathe with the pipe in the hot springs of Tiberias?

If you say [it means] bathing the entire body

and not merely bathing his face, hands, and feet, or mere rinsing, but a complete bathing, and they prohibited it to them because the water had become heated on Shabbat—

then there is a difficulty from the words of the Sages in the Mishna: “If [this was done] on Shabbat, [the water is] like water that was heated on Shabbat,” and we should infer:

Rather,

specifically

water that was heated on Shabbat is prohibited

for bathing with it on Shabbat;

but water that was heated on the eve of Shabbat is permitted

for bathing his entire body with it on Shabbat.

If so, it is difficult:

But it was taught

in a beraita:

Water that was heated on the eve of Shabbat, on the following day

on Shabbat,

he bathes his face, hands, and feet with it, but not his entire body. Thus, even if it was heated on the eve of Shabbat, bathing the entire body with it is prohibited. How, then, do we say in our Mishna that bathing the entire body was prohibited because the water was heated on Shabbat? Even if it was heated on the eve of Shabbat, bathing with it is prohibited.

It is therefore clear that even if the water was heated on the eve of Shabbat, bathing one’s entire body with it is prohibited. How, then, can we say that in our Mishna bathing the entire body was prohibited because the water had been heated on Shabbat, when bathing is prohibited even if the water was heated on the eve of Shabbat?

Rather,

necessarily, what the Sages prohibited them from doing—bathing in water heated on Shabbat—means even bathing

his face, hands, and feet

in hot water. From here it should be inferred that if the water was heated on the eve of Shabbat, bathing his face, hands, and feet with it is permitted.

If so,

say the latter clause:

if

on a Festival,

then they are

like water that was heated on a Festival, and are prohibited for bathing but permitted for drinking.

And if in the first clause bathing his face, hands, and feet in water that became heated on Shabbat [through the pipe that had been placed on the eve of Shabbat] was prohibited, then it is logical that what is stated in the latter clause concerning a Festival, “and are prohibited for bathing,” refers to the prohibition of bathing his face, hands, and feet.

Accordingly, this is difficult:

Shall we say that we learned an anonymous [Mishna]

in our Mishna

in accordance with Beit Shammai,

who hold that it is prohibited to heat water on a Festival for bathing his face, hands, and feet?

For we learned: Beit Shammai say, a person may not heat hot water for his feet

on a Festival, because the Torah permitted cooking for the needs of food, and bathing his feet is not included in the needs of food.

Unless

that water is

fit

and designated

for drinking;

then, since he heated it for drinking, it is permitted to bathe his face, hands, and feet with what remains.

And Beit Hillel permit

heating water for bathing his face, hands, and feet.

And according to this, it emerges that if we interpret the prohibition of washing in the Mishna as washing one’s face, hands, and feet, then the anonymous Mishna is according to Beit Shammai, who prohibited heating [water] for the purpose of washing one’s feet; and it is difficult: how could Rabbi have formulated an anonymous Mishna according to Beit Shammai!?

Rather,

Rav Ika bar Ḥananya said:

It is always prohibited to wash one’s entire body on Shabbat with hot water that was heated on the eve of Shabbat, and it is permitted to wash with it only one’s face, hands, and feet . And concerning washing on a Festival, the halakha is according to Beit Hillel, that it is permitted to heat [water] for the purpose of washing one’s face, hands, and feet.

But our Mishna is not speaking of washing, but of one who wishes

to rinse himself with them [

merely to rinse and not to wash

his entire body,

is what we are discussing]; and concerning this the Sages said to them: “If [it is prohibited] on Shabbat, like hot water that was heated on Shabbat,” and it is prohibited for rinsing; but if it was heated on the eve of Shabbat, rinsing the entire body with hot water is permitted.

And this tanna,

Rabbi Shimon,

is he

who permits rinsing oneself with hot water on Shabbat:

As it was taught: A person may not rinse his entire body

on Shabbat,

whether

with hot water

that was heated on the eve of Shabbat ,

or with cold water, the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Shimon permits

rinsing his entire body both with hot water and with cold water, because they enacted a decree only concerning washing with hot water, but not concerning rinsing .

Rabbi Yehuda says: With hot water it is prohibited

to rinse oneself, but

with cold water it is permitted.

And our Mishna is according to Rabbi Shimon, who permitted rinsing oneself with hot water that was heated on the eve of Shabbat; but when it was heated on Shabbat itself, it is prohibited to rinse oneself with it. Therefore, the Sages prohibited the people of Tiberias from rinsing themselves with hot water that was heated by the conduit on Shabbat.

Rav Ḥisda said: The disagreement

of Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda with Rabbi Shimon concerning rinsing with hot water heated on the eve of Shabbat [Rabbi Shimon permits, while Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Meir prohibit it] is when one takes hot water

in a vessel

and rinses himself. For then there is reason to be concerned that one who sees them rinsing themselves with hot water will conclude that it was heated on Shabbat, and will come to err and permit heating water on Shabbat .

But

if he rinses himself with hot water placed

in the ground,

such as the bathing pools of a bathhouse,

everyone agrees that it is permitted

to rinse himself with hot water that was heated on the eve of Shabbat, since it is customary to leave hot water in the ground for several days and they will not err and say that it was heated today. And we raise an objection:

But the incident involving the people of Tiberias

was in a situation in which they rinsed themselves with the hot springs of Tiberias, which were

in the ground, and the Sages prohibited them

from washing in them, like water heated on Shabbat; and it is proven that it is prohibited to rinse oneself with hot water in the ground . And the Gemara explains:

Rather, if it was stated, it was stated this way:

Rav Ḥisda said:

The disagreement

between Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Meir concerning rinsing with hot water heated on the eve of Shabbat is only when one rinses himself with hot water

in the ground;

Rabbi Shimon permits, while Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Meir prohibit;

but in a vessel, everyone agrees that it is prohibited

to rinse oneself, for one who sees him says: It was heated today, and will permit heating water on Shabbat .

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda,

who says that a person may rinse himself on Shabbat with cold water, but not with hot water, even if it was heated on the eve of Shabbat .

Rav Yosef said

to Rabba bar bar Ḥana: Did you

hear explicitly

from Rabbi Yoḥanan that the halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda,

or

perhaps he did not tell you this explicitly, but only

did you hear it by implication?

Did you learn that this is the halakha from one of the principles that Rabbi Yoḥanan stated?

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said to Rav Yosef:

What principle

do you have in mind? From which principle stated by Rabbi Yoḥanan do you think you inferred that the halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda?

Rav Yosef said to him:

For Rav Tanḥum said that Rav Yoḥanan said that Rav Yannai said that Rabbi said: Everywhere that you find two [

two tannaim]

who disagree,

who disagreed with one another,

and one,

a third tanna,

decides

between them—for example, in one matter he rules like the first tanna, and in another matter he rules like the second tanna—then

the halakha is according to the words of the deciding [tanna], [“deciding” from the language of making the pan of the scales heavier], because in every matter that he says, he has a tanna who supports his words, while the one who disagrees with him is one against two, and we follow the majority .

Except

for one disagreement in the Mishna, in which Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua disagreed above [29a] concerning the law of

“the leniencies of cloth scraps,”

and Rabbi Akiva decided between them.

For although Rabbi Eliezer is stringent and Rabbi Yehoshua is lenient, and Rabbi Akiva decides,

nevertheless

the halakha is not according to the words of

Rabbi Akiva, even though he is

the deciding [tanna.]

And the reason for the matter:

First, Rabbi Akiva is a student

in relation to those who disagree, and a student does not decide in place of his teacher.