Parallel
שבת 49
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
But the Rabbis imposed a preventive measure in respect of defilement, when they are not in use, on account of defilement when they are in use; and in respect of sprinkling, when they are in use, on account of when they are not in use. WHEN THEY ARE MOIST. The Scholars propounded: Naturally moist, or artificially moist? — Come and hear: [WE MAY NOT STORE …] IN STRAW, GRAPE-SKINS, FLOCKING OR HERBAGE WHEN THEY ARE MOIST. Now, if you say [that it means] artificially moistened, it is well; but if you say, naturally moist, how can flocking be naturally moist? — [It is possible] in the case of wool plucked from between the flanks. And as to what R. Oshaia taught: We may store [food] in a dry cloth and in dry produce, but not in a damp cloth or moist produce, — how is naturally damp cloth possible? — In the case of- wool plucked from between the flanks. MISHNAH. WE MAY STORE [FOOD] IN, GARMENTS, PRODUCE, DOVES' WINGS, CARPENTERS' SAWDUST AND THOROUGHLY BEATEN HATCHELLED FLAX. R. JUDAH FORBIDS [STORING] IN FINE, BUT PERMITS [IT] IN COARSE [BEATEN FLAX]. GEMARA. R. Jannai said: Tefillin demand a pure body, like Elisha, the man of wings. What does this mean? — Abaye said: That one must not pass wind while wearing them; Raba said: That one must not sleep in them. And why is he called the man of wings'? Because the wicked Roman government once proclaimed a decree against Israel that whoever donned tefillin should have his brains pierced through; yet Elisha put them on and went out into the streets. [When] a quaestor saw him, he fled before him, whereupon he gave pursuit. As he overtook him he [Elisha] removed them from his head and held them in his hand. 'What is that in your hand?' he demanded. 'The wings of a dove,' was his reply. He stretched out his hand and lo! they were the wings of a dove. Therefore he is called 'Elisha the man of the wings'. And why the wings of a dove rather than that of other birds? Because the Congregation of Israel is likened to a dove, as it is said, as the wings of a dove covered with silver: just as a dove is protected by its wings, so is Israel protected by the precepts. IN CARPENTERS' SAWDUST, etc. The scholars propounded: Does R. Judah refer to carpenters' sawdust or to hatchelled flax? Come and hear: R. Judah said: Fine hatchelled flax is like foliage. This proves that he refers to hatchelled flax. This proves it. MISHNAH. WE MAY STORE [FOOD] IN FRESH HIDES, AND THEY MAY BE HANDLED; IN WOOL SHEARINGS, BUT THEY MAY NOT BE HANDLED. WHAT THEN IS DONE? THE LID [OF THE POT] IS LIFTED, AND THEY [THE SHEARINGS] FALL OFF OF THEIR OWN ACCORD. R. ELEAZAR B. AZARIAH SAID: THE BASKET IS LIFTED ON ONE SIDE AND [THE FOOD] IS REMOVED, LEST ONE LIFT [THE LID OF THE POT] AND BE UNABLE TO REPLACE IT. BUT THE SAGES SAY: ONE MAY TAKE AND REPLACE [IT]. GEMARA. R. Jonathan b. Akinai and R. Jonathan b. Eleazar were sitting, and R. Hanina b. Hama sat with them and it was asked: Did we learn, FRESH HIDES belonging to a private individual, but those of an artisan, since he is particular about them may not be handled; or perhaps, we learnt about those of an artisan, and all the more so those of a private individual? — Said R. Jonathan b. Eleazar to them: It stands to reason that we learnt about those belonging to a private individual, but as for those of an artisan, he is particular about them. Thereupon R. Hanina b. Hama observed to them: Thus did R. Ishmael b. R. Jose say:
—
My father was a hide worker, and he would say: Fetch hides and that we may sit on them. An objection is raised: Boards belonging to a householder may be handled; those of an artisan may not be handled; but if one intended to place bread upon them for guests, in both cases they may be handled? — Boards are different, for one is [certainly] particular about them. Come and hear: Hides, whether tanned or not, may be.handled on the Sabbath, 'tanned' being specified only in respect to uncleanness. Now surely, no distinction is drawn whether they belong to a householder or an artisan? — No: [It means those] of a householder. But what of those of an artisan? They may not be handled? If so, when it is taught, "'tanned" being specified only in respect to uncleanness,' let a distinction be drawn and taught in that itself: [viz.,] when is that said? [Only] of those belonging to a householder, but not concerning those of an artisan? — The whole deals with those of a householder. This is dependent on Tannaim: Hides of a private individual may be handled, but those of an artisan may not: R. Jose maintained: Either the one or the other may be handled. Again they sat and pondered: Regarding what we learnt, The principal categories of labour are forty less one, — to what do they correspond? — Said R. Hanina b. Hama to them: To the forms of labour in the Tabernacle. R. Jonathan son of R. Eleazar said to them, Thus did R. Simeon b. R. Jose b. Lakonia say: They correspond to [the words] 'work' [melakah], 'his work' [melakto], and 'the work of' [meleketh], which are [written] thirty-nine times in the Torah. R. Joseph asked: Is 'and he went into the house to do his work' included in this number, or not? — Said Abaye to him, Then let a Scroll of the Torah be brought and we will count! Did not Rabbah b. Bar Hanah say in R. Johanan's name: They did not stir thence until they brought a Scroll of the Torah and counted them? The reason that I am doubtful, replied he, is because it is written, for the work they had was sufficient: is that of the number, while this is [to be interpreted] in accordance with the view that he entered to perform his business; or perhaps and he went into the house to do his work' is of the number, while this 'for the work they had was sufficient' is meant thus: their business was completed? The question stands over. It was taught as the opinion that it corresponds to the forms of labour in the Tabernacle. For it was taught: Liability is incurred only for work of which the same was performed in the Tabernacle. They sowed, hence ye must not sow; they reaped, hence ye must not reap; they lifted up the boards from the ground to the waggon, hence ye must not carry in from a public to a private domain; they lowered the boards from the waggon to the ground, hence ye must not carry out from a private to a public domain; they transported [boards, etc.,] from waggon to waggon, hence ye must not carry from one private to another private domain. 'From one private to another private domain'- what [wrong] is done? Abaye and Raba both explained — others say, R. Adda b. Ahabah: It means from one private to another private domain via public ground. IN WOOL SHEARINGS, BUT THEY MAY NOT BE HANDLED. Raba said: They learnt this only where one had not stored [food] in them; but if one had stored food in them [on that Sabbath], they may be handled. A certain student of one day's standing refuted Raba: WE MAY STORE [FOOD] [H] IN WOOL SHEARINGS, BUT THEY MAY NOT BE HANDLED. WHAT THEN IS DONE?
—