Shabbat

If he is reading a scroll on a threshold, and it rolls out of his hand,  he may rewind it to himself.  If one is reading on the top of a roof,  and the scroll rolls out of his hand, — before it comes within ten handbreadths [of the ground] he may wind it back himself;  if it comes within ten handbreadths, he must turn the written side inwards.  Now, we pondered thereon: why must he turn the written side inwards, surely it did not come to rest?  and Raba answered: This refers to a sloping wall.  Yet may it not be urged that Raba said this [only] of a scroll, whose nature it is to rest [where it falls]; but is it the nature of water to rest?  Rather, said Raba, [R. Johanan spoke of a case] where he collected [the rain] from the top of a [water] hole. 'A hole'! But then it is obvious? — You might argue, Water upon water is not at rest;  [therefore] he [R. Johanan] informs us [that it is]. Now Raba follows his opinion. For Raba said: Water [lying] upon water, that is its [natural] rest; a nut upon water, that is not its [natural] rest.  Raba propounded: If a nut [lies] in a vessel, and the vessel floats on water,  do we regard the nut, which is at rest,  or the vessel, which is not at rest, since it is unstable? The question stands over. In respect to oil floating upon wine R. Johanan b. Nuri and the Rabbis differ. For we learnt: If oil is floating upon wine  and a tebul yom  touches the oil, he disqualifies the oil only. R. Johanan b. Nuri said: Both are attached to each other. R. Abin said in R. Elai's name in the name of R. Johanan: If one is laden with food and drink and goes in and out all day,  he is liable only when he stands still.  Said Abaye: Providing that he stands still to rest.  How do you know it? — Because a Master said: Within four cubits, if he stops to rest, he is exempt; to shoulder his burden, he is liable. Beyond four cubits, if he stops to rest, he is liable; to rearrange his burden, he is exempt.  What does he [R. Johanan] inform us — that the original removal was not for this purpose?  But R. Johanan stated it once. For R. Safra said in R. Ammi's name in R. Johanan's name: If one is carrying articles from corner to corner [in private ground] and then changes his mind and carries them out, he is exempt, because his original removal was not for this purpose? — It is dependent on Amoraim: one stated it in the former version; the other stated it in the latter version. Our Rabbis taught: If one carries [an article] from a shop to an open space via a colonnade,  he is liable; but Ben 'Azzai holds him not liable. As for Ben 'Azzai, it is well: he holds that walking is like standing.  But according to the Rabbis, granted that they hold that walking is not like standing, yet where do we find liability for such a case?  — Said R. Safra in the name of R. Ammi in R. Johanan's name: