Shabbat

One may not carry out an infant, a lulab,  or a Scroll of the Law into the street;  but Beth Hillel permit it.  But perhaps you know  Beth Shammai [to rule thus only in respect of] carrying out; do you know them [to rule likewise in respect of] handling? — Is then handling itself not [forbidden on account of] carrying out? Now, Rab too holds this [view] of Raba. For Rab said: [Moving] a hoe lest it be stolen is unnecessary handling, and is forbidden.  Thus only when it is in order that it should not be stolen, but if it is required for itself or its place is required, it is permitted. But that is not so? For R. Kahana visited Rab's house, whereupon he ordered, Bring a log of wood  for Kahana to sit. [Now] surely that was to imply that a thing whose function is for a forbidden purpose  [may be handled] only when required itself,  but not [merely] when its place is required? — This is what he said to them: Remove the log from Kahana's presence.  Alternatively, there it was [moved] from the sun to the shade. R. Mari b. Rachel  had some pillows  lying in the sun. He went to Raba and asked him, May these be moved? — It is permitted replied he.  [But] I have others?  — They are of use for guests. I have [some] for guests too? — You have revealed your opinion that you agree with Rabbah,  observed he: to all others it is permitted, but to you it is forbidden. R. Abba said in the name of R. Hiyya b. Ashi in Rab's name: Table brushes  [made] of cloth may be handled on the Sabbath, but not [those made] of palm[-twigs];  R. Eleazar maintained: Even [those made] of palm[-twigs]. What are we discussing: Shall we say [where they are handled] when required in themselves or their place is required, shall Rab rule here 'but not [those made] of palm[-twigs]'? Surely Rab agrees with Raba?  Again, if it means from the sun to the shade, shall R. Eleazar rule here 'even [those made] of palms'?  — In truth [it means] from the sun to the shade: say, And thus did R. Eleazar rule. MISHNAH. ALL UTENSILS WHICH MAY BE HANDLED ON THE SABBATH, THEIR FRAGMENTS MAY BE HANDLED TOO,  PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT THEY CAN PERFORM SOMETHING IN THE NATURE OF WORK. [THUS]: THE FRAGMENTS OF A KNEADING TROUGH [THAT CAN BE USED] TO COVER THE MOUTH OF A BARREL THEREWITH, [AND] THE FRAGMENTS OF A GLASS, TO COVER THEREWITH THE MOUTH OF A CRUSE. R. JUDAH MAINTAINED: PROVIDED THAT THEY CAN PERFORM SOMETHING IN THE NATURE OF THEIR OWN [FORMER] WORK;  [THUS:] THE FRAGMENTS OF A KNEADING TROUGH, TO POUR A THICK MASS THEREIN;  OR OF A GLASS, TO POUR OIL THEREIN. GEMARA. Rab Judah said in Samuel's name: The controversy is only if they were broken from the eve of the Sabbath, one Master holding: Only [provided they are fit for] something in the nature of their own [former] work, but not for something in the nature of a different work; whereas the other Master holds: Even [if fit] for something in the nature of a different work. But if they are broken on the Sabbath, all agree that they are permitted,  since they are mukan  in virtue of their origin. R. Zutra objected: 'We may heat [an oven] with utensils, but not with fragments of utensils'  Now when were these broken? Shall we say that they were broken from the eve of the Festival, then they are simply pieces of wood.  Hence it must surely be on the Festival, yet he teaches, 'We may heat with utensils, but not with fragments of utensils'?  — Rather if stated, it was thus stated: Rab Judah said in Samuel's name: The controversy is only if they are broken on the Sabbath, one Master holding that they are mukan, whilst the other Master holds that they are nolad.  But [if broken] on Sabbath eve, all hold that they are permitted, since they were mukan for work from the day time. One [Baraitha] taught: We may heat with utensils, but not with fragments of utensils; another was taught: Just as we may heat with utensils, so may we heat with fragments of utensils: whilst a third taught: We may heat neither with utensils nor with fragments of utensils. One agrees with R. Judah, one with R. Simeon, and the last with R. Nehemiah. R. Nahman said: The bricks that are left over from a building may be handled, since they are fit to sit on.  [But] if he places them in rows, then he has certainly set them apart. R. Nahman said in Samuel's name: A small shard may be moved about in a courtyard, but not in a karmelith.  But R. Nahman [giving] his own [view] maintained: Even In a karmelith,  but not in the street; whereas Raba said: Even in the street.  Now, Raba is consistent with his view. For Raba was walking in the manor of Mahoza,  when his shoes become soiled with clay; [so] his attendant came, took a shard, and wiped it off. The Rabbis (his disciples] rebuked him.  Said he, It is not enough that they have not learnt — they would even teach! If it were in a courtyard, would it not be fit for covering a utensil? Here too I have a use for it. Rab Judah said in Samuel's name: The bung of a barrel which is broken in pieces may be handled on the Sabbath. It was taught likewise: If a bung is broken in pieces [both] it and the fragments thereof may be handled on the Sabbath. But one must not trim a fragment thereof to cover a vessel or support the legs of a bed  therewith; but if one throws it away on the dung heap, it is forbidden.  R. Papa demurred: If so, if one throws away his robe, is that too prohibited?  Rather said R. Papa: