Shabbat 78a — the Talmud in English

And we reject this:

No!

Rather,

everyone agrees that for the small limb of a one-day-old small [animal]

one is not liable for carrying it out,

and the statement of Rabbi Yannai is not [valid].

And here they disagree about this: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar holds: the small limb of a large [animal] and the large limb of a one-day-old small [animal]

are equivalent,

for they have one measure. And one measures by either of them, whether by this or by that.

And Rabbi Natan holds: the small limb of a large [animal], yes,

only by it do we measure.

But

with

the large limb of a one-day-old small [animal], no,

we do not measure.

And we raised the matter:

What has been established?

In what did Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar and Rabbi Natan ultimately disagree?

Come and hear: for it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Oil—

[the measure is] enough to anoint the small limb of a one-day-old small [animal].

And if so, Rabbi Natan holds that [the measure is] either the small limb of a large [animal] or the large limb of a small [animal], as we said initially, and [the question concerning] Rabbi Yannai is a dispute among tannaim.

We learned in the Mishna:

Water: enough to rub with it the kilor.

Said

—he asked—

Abaye: Since

after all

every matter that is common and uncommon,

a thing suitable for two uses, one common and the other uncommon,

the Sages went

with regard to the measures of the labors of Shabbat

after the common use.

And even

leniently

do we proceed, when that measure which is common is greater than the other. For presumably it is designated for that, for the prevalent use.

And where

[both uses] are common and common,

where both uses are prevalent [and even if one is more prevalent, according to Meiri in the Mishna]—

the Sages went after the common [use] stringently,

after the more stringent of the two common uses.

Therefore,

wine,

which

its drinking is common,

whereas

its medicinal use is not common,

that they should use it to rub the kilor, although it is suitable for this, since it is also possible to rub with a woman’s milk and with water, and one is sparing with wine, which is expensive. Therefore,

the Sages went after its common drinking,

and although it is

leniently,

for its measure [enough to dilute a cup] is greater than the measure needed to rub the kilor.

And likewise,

milk

of an animal:

its eating is common,

whereas

its medicinal use is not common,

to rub the kilor with it, although it too is suitable for this, since it is also possible to rub with water. Therefore

the Sages went after its eating,

and although it is

leniently,

for the measure of a swallow is a greater measure than rubbing the kilor.

Honey: its eating is common,

and

its medicinal use

also

is common,

since no other liquid is suitable for a wound besides it. Therefore

the Sages went after

the measure of

its medicinal use,

since it is

stringently,

for the measure of enough to place on the wound is less than a quarter-log, which is the measure of all liquids.

Rather,

this is what I need to ask:

Water: since

after all

its drinking is common,

for most drinking is water, since wine serves only for a meal and not to quench thirst, whereas

its medicinal use is not common,

for other liquids too are suitable for the kilor, and if so,

what is the reason that the Sages went after its medicinal use,

and measured by enough to rub the kilor with them

stringently?

Why did they not measure by the greater measure, namely a quarter-log, which is the measure of drinking for all liquids?

And we answer:

Abaye said:

The Mishna

was taught in the Galilee,

which is a place of poor people who are careful about every unnecessary expenditure and spare wine and milk, and rub the kilor only with water. For them, the use of water for medicine is common. Therefore, we proceed after it stringently.

Rava said: Even if you say

the Mishna

[was taught] in other places,

it is also not difficult,

in accordance with Shmuel.

For Shmuel said: All liquids,

all the liquids with which one rubs the kilor,

heal

they heal the ailment of the eye.

And they form a screen,

and they create something like a screen over the eye, because a crust forms from them that prevents sight.

Except

for

water, which heals

for it heals

but does not form a screen,

for it does not crust over the eye. And therefore people prefer to use water for healing the eye, and its medicinal use is common.

We learned in the Mishna:

And all other liquids [have the measure of] a quarter-log.

The Sages taught: Blood, and

likewise

all types of liquids,

the measure for carrying them out is

a quarter-log.

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: There is a type of

blood

blood

of a certain living creature whose measure is less than a quarter-log, since it has a use

of enough to apply as eye makeup

to place it

on one eye

for healing.

For they apply eye makeup

to the eye with this particular blood

for

the eye ailment called

barakit.

And what is it,

what is that blood with which they apply eye makeup for barakit?—

The blood of a wild hen,

the wild hen.

Rabbi Shimon ben Gamaliel says: Blood—

enough to apply eye makeup with it to one eye, for they apply eye makeup for

the eye ailment called

yarod,

a spot on the eye.

And what is it,

from what blood do they apply eye makeup for yarod?—From

the blood of a bat,

a bat.

And your sign

to know which blood they apply as eye makeup for the different ailments is this: the blood of a living creature found

inside,

within, namely a bat, which is found inside the inhabited area, they put some of its blood

inside,

for the ailment of yarod, which is sunk inside the eye.

The blood of a

wild

rooster, the wild rooster, they put some of its blood

for the outside,

for the ailment of barakit, which protrudes over the eye.

In what case is this statement said,

that a particular measure of blood is required with regard to carrying out

when one carries out

to the public domain.

But when one sets aside

the blood, as it was important to him to preserve it, then even if it was less than the measure, and afterward he carried it out, even

in any amount—

he is liable.

Rabbi Shimon

bar Yohai disagrees with the view of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar and Rabbi Shimon ben Gamaliel, and

says:

In what case is this statement said,

that one is liable even for any amount of blood used for applying eye makeup,

when he sets aside

blood in such a measure and then carries it out again.

But when one carries out

that is, a person who did not set it aside and carried it out,

he is liable only for a quarter-log.

And the Sages concede to Rabbi Shimon: when one carries out waste liquids to the public domain,

when he did not set them aside,

their measure is a quarter-log.

For less than this they are not suitable for their use, namely, to knead mud with them.

The master said: In what case is this statement said? When one carries out.

But when one sets aside, [the measure is] any amount.

And we raised the matter:

Is one who sets aside not “one who carries out”?!

After all, without carrying out he is not liable?!

And we answer:

Abaye said: Here with what are we dealing? With a student

[such as an assistant to a carpenter called “a carpenter’s apprentice”],

to whom his master said

[the carpenter]:

“Go and clear a place for me for the meal!” He went and cleared it for him,

and meanwhile carried it out to the public domain.

Therefore,

a thing

that is

important to everyone,

which has a measure,

he is liable for it.

But

a thing that is not important to everyone,

which has no measure, then only

if his master set it aside is he liable for it,

even the student who did not set it aside. [And this tanna is Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar [who is the first tanna of the beraita], who said above [76a] that if one person set aside a thing, everyone is liable for it in any amount].

And if not,

his master did not set it aside,

he is not liable

for it, because it has no measure.

And this is the explanation of the beraita: In what case is a measure required? Specifically when one carries out—that is, with a thing whose status depends exclusively on the one who carries it out, for no other person had the thought concerning this object to make it important [and nor did the one who carries it out]. But when one sets aside—that is, with a thing for which it is possible to follow the thought of the one who set it aside, such as when another person set it aside—he is liable for it even if the one who carries it out carries it out in any amount. [

Rashi explains that Abaye could indeed have answered simply that it refers to the one who carries it out himself: only if he did not set it aside is a measure required, but if he himself set it aside, he is liable for it in any amount. Rather, since we have learned that this tanna holds that another person too is liable on the basis of the thought of the one who set it aside, he established the case as one in which the one who set it aside was another. And all the more so if he himself set it aside ] .

The master said: The Sages concede to Rabbi Shimon: when one carries out waste liquids to the public domain, their measure is a quarter-log.

And we raised the matter:

Waste liquids—

for what are they fit?

And we answer:

Rabbi Yirmeya said: To knead mud with them.

And we object:

But it was taught: Mud

the measure for carrying it out is

enough to make with it the mouth of a furnace,

to make the opening of the furnace of goldsmiths, through which the bellows are inserted. And with less than a quarter-log of water it is possible to knead mud for this purpose. And since with regard to carrying out mud, a measure of this amount is sufficient, so too with regard to carrying out waste liquids one should measure by the amount sufficient for kneading such mud. And why is a quarter-log required?

And we answer:

It is not difficult.

This

is mud

that is kneaded.

Mud that has already been kneaded is important even in the amount sufficient for the mouth of a furnace.

This

is mud

that is not kneaded.

Before the mud is kneaded, it is not important,

because a person does not trouble himself to knead mud

in a limited measure in order

to make the mouth of a furnace,

but he kneads more and uses the remaining mud for other purposes. Therefore, with regard to water, a quarter-log is required, which is the measure needed for kneading an amount of mud that a person troubles himself to knead.

Mishna:

One who carries out a rope,

its measure is

enough to make

from it

a handle for a basket,

a basket, to hold it by.

Reed fiber,

a thread—

enough to make a loop,

a hanging loop

for a sieve and a winnowing basket.

Rabbi Yehuda says:

The measure of reed fiber is

enough to take from it the measurement of a shoe for a small child.

To measure the foot of a small child with it, in order to show it to the shoemaker, so that he will know what shoe size he needs; and this measure is smaller than a loop.

Paper—

enough to write on it a customs-collector’s receipt,

a confirmation of payment of the customs duty. The practice was to write two large letters as a sign that the customs had already been paid.

And one who carries out a customs-collector’s receipt—

is liable

[to teach us that even if the customs-collector’s receipt was written on parchment, whose measure is greater, as explained below, nevertheless he is liable, since it serves as a customs-collector’s receipt. Tosafot, on 78b, s.v. “and one who carries out”].