Shabbat 64b — the Talmud in English

Because ![](pamud.bmp "

exact page location")

they led

their

eyes

enjoyed, by the appearance of the eye,

from the forbidden relation.

Rav Sheshet said: Why did the verse enumerate the ornaments that are outside

a ring

together with the ornaments that are inside

a kumaz?

To tell you:

Anyone who looks [when he intends to derive pleasure]

with the intention of deriving pleasure]

at a woman’s little finger

which is the place of a ring is

as though he were looking at the place of nakedness,

for concerning both of them they brought an offering of atonement for the seeing.

Mishna:

A woman may go out with hair-threads

which she braids her hair with

whether

the threads were detached

from

hair

her own, whether

the threads were

from

hair

of her fellow, whether

they were

from an animal

such as horsehair.

And

she may also go out

with a totefet,

a gold forehead ornament extending from ear to ear,

and with sarvitin,

an ornament that she wraps around her head and which extends only as far as the cheeks, hanging on her cheeks on either side,

when they are sewn

into her hairnet. They permitted her to go out with them, and they were not concerned that she might come to remove the hairnet from her head in the public domain, for she will not uncover her hair.

Anything that the Sages prohibited going out with into the public domain, it is prohibited to go out with it into an unjoined courtyard. Except for

a kavul,

which is a woolen cap on her head, with which she goes out,

and a foreign-hair wig into a courtyard

that is not joined, so that she will not become unattractive to her husband.

And likewise a woman may go out into the public domain

with a wad

that is in her ear,

when it is tied to her ear and is made to absorb the dirt and moisture of the ear; and since it is tied, they were not concerned lest it fall and she come to carry it four cubits in the public domain.

And with a wad

that is tied

in her sandal,

which she places there for comfort.

And with a wad that she prepared for her menstruation,

in that place, so that it will absorb the blood and it will not fall upon her and distress her .

And likewise a woman may go out

with pepper,

which a woman whose breath smells bad places in her mouth.

And with a salt wheel,

which she places in her mouth to cure her teeth,

and anything that is placed into her mouth

she may go out with.

And with these three remedies she may go out,

provided that she does not put them in initially on Shabbat,

but only while it is still day, for on Shabbat it is prohibited to take remedies, as a decree lest one come to grind medicinal substances on Shabbat .

And if it fell,

the remedy, on Shabbat, she may not replace it, for just as it is prohibited to put a remedy in initially on Shabbat, so too it is prohibited to replace it .

A prosthetic tooth,

which is

a golden tooth, Rabbi permits

going out with it,

but the Sages prohibit,

since this tooth differs from the other teeth, they were concerned lest people laugh at her because of it, and she remove this tooth and come to carry it four cubits in the public domain.

Gemara:

And it is necessary

for the Mishna to teach all three cases in which she is permitted to go out with hair-threads with which she braids her hair: whether they are her own, whether they belong to her fellow, and whether they belong to an animal.

Because

if it had taught us

only that she goes out with hair

of hers,

we would have erred and thought that the Sages permitted specifically her own hair

because it is not repulsive,

and people would not come to laugh at her and she would not come to remove it.

But

with hair of

her fellow, it is repulsive; say, they did not permit it,

lest people come to laugh at her and, because of this, she come to remove it. Therefore the Mishna also stated that it may belong to her fellow.

And if it had taught us that

with hair of

her fellow

it is permitted to go out, we would think that the Sages permitted specifically this because

it is of her kind,

and the matter is not recognizable and people would not come to laugh at her.

But

animal hair,

which

is not of her kind, say, they did not permit it

the Sages;

it is necessary

for the Mishna to teach that she also goes out with that belonging to an animal.

A tanna:

They permitted going out with hair-threads,

provided that a young woman does not go out

whose hairs are black

with

hair-threads

of an old woman,

which are white,

and

she may not go out

an old woman with

hair-threads

of a young woman,

whose hairs are black, concerning which the Sages were concerned that, because the matter is laughable, she would come to remove them.

And we raised a question concerning it:

Granted, an old woman with those of a young woman

needs to be taught, for even though

it is an enhancement for her,

they prohibited her from going out with them; but

a young woman with

threads

of an old woman—why

does the beraita need to say that she may not go out? It is obvious, for

it is a disgrace for her?

And we answer: Indeed, a young woman with those of an old woman is obvious, and the tanna need not teach it; but

since

because

he taught an old woman with those of a young woman, he also taught a young woman with those of an old woman.

We learned in the Mishna: She is permitted to go out

with a kavul and a foreign-hair wig into a courtyard.

Rav said: Anything that the Sages prohibited going out with

into the public domain, it is prohibited to go out with it into a courtyard,

lest she forget and go out with it into the public domain,

except for a kavul and a foreign-hair wig,

with which they permitted her to go out into a courtyard.

Rabbi Anani bar Sasson said in the name of Rabbi Yishmael: Everything—

all the ornaments are permitted in a courtyard—

like a kavul .

We learned

in the Mishna: She is permitted to go out

with a kavul and a foreign-hair wig into a courtyard.

And it is difficult:

Granted, according to Rav,

who prohibited going out with all the ornaments into a courtyard,

it is satisfactory,

the Mishna;

but according to Rabbi Anani bar Sasson it is difficult,

from the Mishna, for according to his words they permitted going out with all the ornaments, so why does the Mishna permit only with a kavul and a foreign-hair wig?

And we answer: After all,

in whose name did Rabbi Anani bar Sasson say it? In the name of Rabbi Yishmael bar Yosei!

And if so, it is not difficult, for

Rabbi Yishmael bar Yosei is a tanna and disagrees

with the Mishna.

And we raised a question concerning it:

And Rav,

who holds that with all the ornaments it is prohibited to go out into a courtyard,

what is different about these

a kavul and a foreign-hair wig, that they permitted going out with them into a courtyard?

Ulla said: So that she should not become unattractive

to her husband .

They permitted her some attractive ornaments, and the Rabbis were concerned about her becoming unattractive to her husband,

as it was taught

in a beraita:

It is written:

“And she shall be in her menstruation”—

the early elders

used to expound the verse according to its plain meaning, that she should be like one excommunicated and distanced from her husband; therefore

they said that she should not paint

the eyes of a menstruant woman

and should not apply pukus

red paint to her face,

and should not adorn herself with colored garments

during the days of her menstruation.

Until Rabbi Akiva came

and taught

not to prohibit this, because

if so, you make her unattractive

to her husband,

and her husband will consequently divorce her. Rather, what does “And she shall be in her menstruation” come to teach?

We expound it

in

the impurity of

her menstruation: she shall remain so until she enters the water

to immerse, and even though her seven days have passed and her flow has stopped, she is not pure until immersion.

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: Everywhere that the Sages prohibited

a prohibition and a decree, such as not going out on Shabbat

because of the appearance of the eye,

so that people should not suspect him of a prohibition, such as not going out in military garments [armor, helmet, and boots]

it is prohibited even in the innermost rooms

to wear it.

We learned: And

the animal may not go out

with a bell, even though

it is

stopped,

and it makes no sound, because it appears as though he is leading it to the marketplace to sell it, and therefore he hung a bell on it to beautify it.

And another [teaching] was taught

in a beraita:

He stops for it

for the animal

a bell on its neck, and walks with it in the courtyard,

because there is no appearance of the eye in a courtyard.

And it is difficult according to Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav, who said that everything prohibited because of the appearance of the eye is prohibited even in the innermost rooms: if so, why does the beraita permit walking with it in the courtyard when a bell is on its neck?

And we answer: This statement of Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav, that it is prohibited in the innermost rooms, is a dispute

of tannaim.