Shabbat 47a (מז.) — the Talmud in English

Therefore,

leave the lamp, the oil, and the wick

—for the prohibition against moving them is

since it became

the base for

the

flame at the time the lamp was lit, and the flame is

an object prohibited

on Shabbat. And a base for muktze may not be moved, because the “base” is subordinate to the muktze object resting upon it; therefore, it is prohibited to move it just as it is prohibited to move the object itself. [See the first note on page 44a concerning why the flame is muktze].

Rabbi Zeira said that Rabbi Asi said that Rabbi Yohanan said that Rabbi Hanina said that Rabbi Romanos said: Rabbi permitted me to move a firepan

of frankincense

with

[together with]

its ashes!

For he permitted me to move the muktze ashes together with the firepan, which is not muktze.

Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Asi:

But

did Rabbi Yohanan really say this?

But we learned in the Mishna: A person may take his child with a stone in his hand, or a basket

[a basket]

with a stone in it.

And he need not be concerned about moving muktze.

And

concerning this

Rabba bar bar Hanna said that Rabbi Yohanan

said: Here,

we are dealing with a basket full of produce.

It is therefore a base for both a permitted object and a prohibited object, but the principal purpose of the base is for the produce, which is not muktze.

And now Rabbi Zeira analyzes the statement:

The reason

that one may move the bowl containing a stone is

that it contains produce. But if it does not contain produce

he may not

move it, since the basket is a base for the stone.

The Gemara employs the wording of the verse in Daniel, chapter 4:

Rabbi Asi was astonished

for

a single hour, and said: Here too,

it is not the case that the firepan was a base only for the ashes; rather,

it contains pieces

of frankincense suitable for smelling, which are not muktze. Therefore, one may move the firepan, and the ashes are moved incidentally along with it.

Abaye said: Pieces

in the house of Rabbi

, in Rabbi’s home, as he was wealthy—

are they considered significant?

If so, the ashes are not subordinate, and the moving applies to them as well.

And if you would say

they are suitable

for

the poor,

and therefore they are significant even in Rabbi’s home, and it is indeed permitted to move the firepan together with the ashes—

That cannot be said.

For

was it not taught in a beraita: The garments of the poor,

such as small pieces of woven material measuring only three by three fingerbreadths, are considered garments with regard to susceptibility to ritual impurity—only

for the poor!

The garments of the wealthy,

which measure three by three handbreadths, are considered garments with regard to ritual impurity also

for the wealthy.

But

garments

of the poor

for

the

wealthy are not

considered garments, and when they are in the possession of the wealthy, they are not susceptible to ritual impurity at all.

The same applies to the muktze status of the pieces of frankincense: their significance is nullified when they are in the possession of the wealthy.

Rather, Abaye said:

It was permitted to move the firepan,

just as

it was ruled with regard to an

agruf

for a vessel

of excrement

, a vessel for feces, which they permitted one to move despite its being muktze.

Rava said: There are two answers

to distinguish

in this matter

between the firepan containing ashes and the graf shel re'i:

One: The graf shel re'i

is repulsive, whereas this

firepan

is not repulsive.

And further: The graf shel re'i

is exposed

, as it is uncovered above, and therefore they permitted removing it.

And

if

this

firepan containing ashes were involved, even if we regard the dirty ashes as equivalent to excrement, there is still a distinction between it and a graf shel re'i, since it is

covered

, and there is no need to remove it from the premises.

Rather, Rava said: When we were in Rav Nahman’s house, we would move a kanuna

, a firepan containing pieces of wood that were muktze,

by means of the ashes

that it contained, since the ashes had been designated before Shabbat for covering.

And although there were pieces of wood upon it

, which were muktze, we were not concerned, just as one moves a basket containing a stone by means of the produce inside it.

They raised an objection: And Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon agree

, in their dispute concerning an old, repulsive lamp,

that if it contains

also

pieces of wick

—

it is prohibited to move it

Abaye said: They taught this in the Galilee,

where linen garments were not readily available and even pieces of wick were significant to the people there; therefore, there is no permission to move them incidentally along with the lamp.

Levi bar Shmuel found Rabbi Abba and Rav Huna bar Hiyya standing at the entrance to Rav Huna’s house.

He said to them: What is the law concerning reassembling a bed

that is designed to be dismantled,

belonging to the Tarkiyyim

, itinerant coppersmiths who travel from place to place and carry with them a dismantled bed,

on Shabbat?

They said to him: It is permitted

and this does not constitute the labor of striking with a hammer, by virtue of which any repair of a vessel is prohibited.

He came before Rav Yehuda, who said: Here is Rav and Shmuel, who both said: One who reassembles a bed belonging to the Tarkiyyim on Shabbat

—

is liable to bring a sin-offering!

For they hold that assembling the dismantled bed is considered the repair of a vessel.

They raised an objection: One who reassembles a lamp shaft that is designed to be dismantled

on Shabbat

—

is liable to bring a sin-offering.

A plasterer’s pole,

which is made of several parts—

he may not reassemble it. And if he reassembled it

—

he is exempt but it is prohibited,

since he regularly assembles and dismantles it. Rabbi Simai says: A keren

, a musical instrument that is

round

and into which flutes are inserted; since assembling and dismantling its flutes requires skilled craftsmanship, one who assembles it

is liable.

But

a simple keren

, whose flutes anyone can assemble and which is regularly assembled in this manner,

he is exempt

for assembling it.

But a bed belonging to the Tarkiyyim is similar to a lamp shaft, for whose assembly one is liable to bring a sin-offering. How, then, did Rabbi Abba and Rav Huna bar Hiyya permit assembling it on Shabbat? And we answer:

They expressed an opinion in accordance with this tanna.

As it was taught in a beraita: The bed frames,

small receptacles placed beneath the legs of a bed so that the legs would not rot,

and the legs,

the

legs of the bed, and

likewise

the boards of a skibos

, which are small pieces of wood placed in an arc over the center of a bow, at the place where the arrow is drawn, that have been removed from their positions—

he may not replace them. And if he replaced them

he is exempt ...