knot

On the day after, being supplied by them with provision for their journey, they went away, and on the evening of that day arrived at another town, in which they were celebrating a marriage; but, by the arts of accursed Satan and the work of enchanters, the bride had become dumb, and could not speak a word. And after the Lady Mary entered the town, carrying her son the Lord Christ, that dumb bride saw her, and stretched out her hands towards the Lord Christ, and drew Him to her, and took Him into her arms, and held Him close and kissed Him, and leaned over Him, moving His body back and forwards. Immediately the knot of her tongue was loosened, and her ears were opened; and she gave thanks and praise to God, because He had restored her to health. And that night the inhabitants of that town exulted with joy, and thought that God and His angels had come down to them.

O my son! loose not a sealed knot, nor untie it, and seal not a loosened knot.

O my son! loose not a sealed knot, nor untie it, and seal not a loosened knot.

But as for us, we have no skill in this, unless it be Nadan, his sister's son, for he taught him all his wisdom and learning and knowledge. Call him to thee, perchance he may untie this hard knot.'

Then he took two little lads, and spent every day sacrificing lambs and feeding the eagles and the boys, and making the boys ride on the backs of the eagles, and he bound them with a firm knot, and tied the cable to the feet of the eagles, and let them soar upwards little by little every day, to a distance of ten cubits, till they grew accustomed and were educated to it; and they rose all the length of the rope till they reached the sky; the boys being on their backs. Then he drew them to himself.

And Sennacherib the king said, 'Take him, I have given him to thee.' And Haiqar took Nadan, his sister's son, and bound his hands with chains of iron, and took him to his dwelling, and put a heavy fetter on his feet, and tied it with a tight knot, and after binding him thus he cast him into a dark room, beside the retiring-place, and appointed Nebu-hal as sentinel over him to give him a loaf of bread and a little water every day.

These are the knots for which a person is liable? Camel-drivers’ knots and sailors’ knots. And just as one is guilty for tying them, so one is guilty for untying them. Rabbi Meir says: any knot which one can untie with one hand they are not liable for it.

You have some knots for which one is not liable like [one is] for camel-drivers’ knots and sailors’ knots. A woman may tie up the opening of her chemise, the strings of her hair-net and of her belt, the laces of her shoes or sandals, leather-bottles of wine and oil, and a meat dish. Rabbi Elazar ben Ya’akov says: one may tie [a rope] in front of an animal, that it should not go out. One may tie a bucket [over a well] with a belt but not with a rope; Rabbi Judah permits it. Rabbi Judah stated a general rule: any knot that is not permanent one is not liable for it.

A reed for olives, if it has a knot on its top, is susceptible to impurity; if not, it is not susceptible to impurity. In both cases it may be handled on Shabbat.

If there was a hole in the "eye" of an oven, the minimum size [for it to leave the category of being tightly closed] is the circumference of a burning spindle staff that can enter and come out [without being extinguished]. Rabbi Judah says: one that is not burning. If the hole appeared at its side, the minimum size must be that of the circumference of a spindle staff that can enter and come out while it is not burning. Rabbi Judah says: while burning. Rabbi Shimon says: if the hole is in the middle its size must be such that a spindle staff can enter it, but if it was at the side it need only be such as the spindle staff cannot actually enter. And similarly he used to rule concerning the stopper of a jar in which a hole appeared: the minimum size is the circumference of the second knot in an oat stalk. If the hole was in the middle the stalk should be able to enter, and if at the side it need not be able to enter. And similarly he used to rule concerning large stone jars in the stoppers of which appeared a hole. The minimum size is the circumference of the second knot in a reed. If the hole was in the middle the reed must be able to enter it, and if it was at the side the reed need not be able to enter it. When is this so? When the jars were made for wine, but if they were made for other liquids, if they have even the smallest hole, they are unclean. When is this so? When the holes were not made by a person, but if they were made by a person, if they have even the smallest hole, they are unclean. If a hole appeared [in other vessels its prescribed size ] is as follows: if the vessel was used for food, [the hole must be one] through which olives can fall out; if for liquids, one that lets out liquids; If for either, the greater restriction is imposed [even with regard to the issue of] a tightly fitting cover [the size of the hole need only be] one that admits a liquid.

If there was a hole in the "eye" of an oven, the minimum size [for it to leave the category of being tightly closed] is the circumference of a burning spindle staff that can enter and come out [without being extinguished]. Rabbi Judah says: one that is not burning. If the hole appeared at its side, the minimum size must be that of the circumference of a spindle staff that can enter and come out while it is not burning. Rabbi Judah says: while burning. Rabbi Shimon says: if the hole is in the middle its size must be such that a spindle staff can enter it, but if it was at the side it need only be such as the spindle staff cannot actually enter. And similarly he used to rule concerning the stopper of a jar in which a hole appeared: the minimum size is the circumference of the second knot in an oat stalk. If the hole was in the middle the stalk should be able to enter, and if at the side it need not be able to enter. And similarly he used to rule concerning large stone jars in the stoppers of which appeared a hole. The minimum size is the circumference of the second knot in a reed. If the hole was in the middle the reed must be able to enter it, and if it was at the side the reed need not be able to enter it. When is this so? When the jars were made for wine, but if they were made for other liquids, if they have even the smallest hole, they are unclean. When is this so? When the holes were not made by a person, but if they were made by a person, if they have even the smallest hole, they are unclean. If a hole appeared [in other vessels its prescribed size ] is as follows: if the vessel was used for food, [the hole must be one] through which olives can fall out; if for liquids, one that lets out liquids; If for either, the greater restriction is imposed [even with regard to the issue of] a tightly fitting cover [the size of the hole need only be] one that admits a liquid.

One who dismantles a bed in order that he might immerse it and [while doing so] touches the ropes remains clean. When does the rope begin to constitute a connective with the bed? As soon as three rows of meshes of it have been knotted. And [if another rope was tied to this one] and a person touches it: If from the knot inwards he becomes unclean; But if from the knot outwards he remains clean. As to the loose ends of the knot, any one that touches that part which is needed for it becomes unclean. And how much is needed for it? Rabbi Judah says: three fingerbreadths.

One who dismantles a bed in order that he might immerse it and [while doing so] touches the ropes remains clean. When does the rope begin to constitute a connective with the bed? As soon as three rows of meshes of it have been knotted. And [if another rope was tied to this one] and a person touches it: If from the knot inwards he becomes unclean; But if from the knot outwards he remains clean. As to the loose ends of the knot, any one that touches that part which is needed for it becomes unclean. And how much is needed for it? Rabbi Judah says: three fingerbreadths.

One who dismantles a bed in order that he might immerse it and [while doing so] touches the ropes remains clean. When does the rope begin to constitute a connective with the bed? As soon as three rows of meshes of it have been knotted. And [if another rope was tied to this one] and a person touches it: If from the knot inwards he becomes unclean; But if from the knot outwards he remains clean. As to the loose ends of the knot, any one that touches that part which is needed for it becomes unclean. And how much is needed for it? Rabbi Judah says: three fingerbreadths.

A sandal, one of whose holes was broken but was then fixed, retains its midras uncleanness. If a second hole was broken and it was fixed, it is free from midras uncleanness but is unclean from contact with midras. If the second hole was broken before the first could be mended, it is clean. If its heel was torn off, or if its toe-piece was removed, or if it was torn in two, it becomes clean. A heel-less slipper that was torn anywhere becomes clean. A shoe that was damaged becomes clean if it cannot contain the greater part of the foot. A shoe that is still on the last: Rabbi Eliezer says: it is insusceptible to uncleanness, But the sages say that it is susceptible. All water skins whose holes have been tied up are insusceptible to uncleanness, except for Arabian ones. Rabbi Meir says: if they are tied up for a while, they are clean; but if they are tied with a permanent knot they are unclean. Rabbi Yose says: all tied up water skins are clean.

[A piece of cloth] three [handbreadths] square that was torn: if he put it on a chair, and his skin touches the chair, it is pure; And if not, it remains impure. [A piece of cloth] three [fingerbreadths] square one thread of which was worn away, or in which a knot was found, or in which two threads ran alongside each other, is pure. [A piece of cloth] three [fingerbreadths] square that was thrown on the rubbish heap becomes pure. If he brought it back, it it becomes susceptible to uncleanness. Throwing it away always renders it pure and taking it back renders it susceptible to uncleanness, except when it is of purple or fine crimson. Rabbi Eliezer says: a patch of new cloth is also subject to the same law. Rabbi Shimon says: all these materials become pure; they were mentioned only in connection with the return of lost property.

The following require that water shall enter inside them: The knot in an undergarment which is tied to the shoulder. The hem of a sheet must be stretched out. And the knot of head tefillin if it is not fastened tightly, Or of the arm-tefillin if it moves up and down. And the laces of a sandal. Clothes which are immersed when they have just been washed must be kept immersed until they bubble up; But if they are immersed when already dry, they must be kept immersed until they throw up bubbles and then cease to bubble up.

The following require that water shall enter inside them: The knot in an undergarment which is tied to the shoulder. The hem of a sheet must be stretched out. And the knot of head tefillin if it is not fastened tightly, Or of the arm-tefillin if it moves up and down. And the laces of a sandal. Clothes which are immersed when they have just been washed must be kept immersed until they bubble up; But if they are immersed when already dry, they must be kept immersed until they throw up bubbles and then cease to bubble up.

A thread drawn through by means of a needle, even it if has a knot on each side, is no connection for cloth. The thread is a connection for cloth but not for the needle. Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose both say, only if it is knotted on both sides. The words of the rabbis disagree since Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Jeremiah said in the name of Rav: He who straightens out the sides on the Sabbath is guilty because of sewing. He should have said “because of sewing and making knots.”

Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaul stated: Fibers about which he thought the day before he is permitted to move. Rebbi Yose ben Shaul stated: A group of beams about which he thought the day before he is permitted to move. Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Jacob bar Idi, Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose. My father was a worker in raw hides. He told us, make a knot of the heads of shearings and you will be permitted to move them tomorrow. Ḥizqiah said, even if one made a tie. Rav said, palm branches which one cut to lie on them do not need to be tied, for tents they have to be tied. Rav Abba bar Ḥana said, both for lying down and for tents it needs tying. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, the tying of Rav for tents is not the same as the tying of Rav Abba bar Ḥana for vessels. The tying of Rav for tents, only if he ties down all thorns. The tying of Rav Abba bar Ḥana for vessels, if only the appellation of “vessel” applies. If you would say, only if he ties down all thorns, there would be no greater production than this.

HALAKHAH: Mishnah. “A donkey may go out with its saddle cloth,” etc. Samuel said, if it was tied to it from before the Sabbath. Ḥanin from Gophtia said before Samuel, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi does not act like this. He told him, Rav uses kleisterin, as it was stated: rams go out with kleisterin. Rebbi Aḥa bar Papa objected before Rebbi Zeˋira: But was it not stated: a rope tied to a cow may be tied to the feeding trough, the feeding trough may be tied to a cow. One understands a cow’s may be tied to the feeding trough. May from the feeding trough be tied to a cow? Would he not use the animal’s sides on the Sabbath? Rebbi Abba said, explain it for knots which are not permanent. Rebbi Yose said, is there a difference for sides of an animal whether the knot is permanent or not permanent? Rebbi Shammai said, explain it following Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar, as it was stated, Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, it is permitted to use the sides of an animal on the Sabbath. There is no difference between sides of an animal and sides of a tree. Rebbi Mana said, I confirmed it if he connects rope to rope.

“He who weaves two rows, who hits two threads, who ties, and who unties.” What tying was in the Tabernacle? They were tying down the ropes. But was this not temporarily? Rebbi Yose says, because they were camping and travelling by the Word, was it like temporarily? Rebbi Yose [ben Rebbi Abun] said, since the Holy One, praise to Him, has promised them that he will bring them into the Land, it is as if it were (temporary) [permanent]. Rebbi Phineas said, they learned it from the gobelin sewers. If [a thread] broke, he was tying it. If it broke again, it was impossible to make many knots but he would untie the first one. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, an expert tailor merges the two heads. And where was this said? As Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina said, they learned it from the weavers of the gobelins. What is the reason? The length of one gobelin, that it should be an entity. If [a thread] broke, he was tying it. When he came to the weave, he untied it and brought it in. Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of (Rav) [Rebbi] Ḥuna: Even on its warp there was neither knot nor connection.

Rebbi Ḥanina said, not until it comes down an entire side. Rebbi Yannai said, say to Rebbi Ḥanina, get out and read! Did we not state, “if the two ends appear on the same side”? That means, only if it goes up and down and up. And did we not state, “Rebbi Jehudah says, only if there are three needle stitches”? That means that [the thread] goes down, and up, and down. But so and so. A thread drawn through by means of a needle, even if it has a knot on each side, is no connection for cloth. The thread is a connection for cloth but not for the needle. Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose both say, only if it is knotted on both sides. The words of the rabbis disagree since Rebbi Abba, Rav Jeremiah said in the name of Rav: He who straightens out the sides on the Sabbath is liable because of sewing. He should have said, because of sewing and tying knots.

MISHNAH: The following are the knots for which one is liable: a camel driver’s knot and a mariner’s knot. Just as one is liable for knotting them so he is liable for untying them. Rebbi Meїr says, one is never liable for a knot which one can untie with one hand.

MISHNAH: The following are the knots for which one is liable: a camel driver’s knot and a mariner’s knot. Just as one is liable for knotting them so he is liable for untying them. Rebbi Meїr says, one is never liable for a knot which one can untie with one hand.

MISHNAH: The following are the knots for which one is liable: a camel driver’s knot and a mariner’s knot. Just as one is liable for knotting them so he is liable for untying them. Rebbi Meїr says, one is never liable for a knot which one can untie with one hand.

HALAKHAH: “The following are the knots,” etc. What tying was in the Tabernacle? They were tying down the ropes. But was this not temporary? Rebbi Yose says, because they were travelling and camping by the Word, was it not permanent? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, since the Holy One, praise to Him, has promised them that he will bring them into the Land, it is as if it were temporary. Rebbi Phineas said, they learned it from the gobelin needle-workers. If a thread broke, he was tying it. If it broke again, it was impossible to make many knots but he would untie the first one. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, an expert tailor merges the two heads. And where was this said? As Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, they learned it from the weavers of the gobelins. What is the reason? The length of one gobelin, that it should be an entity. If [a thread] broke, he was tying it. When he came to the weave, he untied it and brought it in. Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rav Ḥuna: Even on its warp there was neither knot nor connection.

MISHNAH: But there are knots for which one is not liable as one is for a camel driver’s knot and a mariner’s knot. A woman may knot the openings of her garment, and the threads of the hair net, of the belt, and laces of shoe and sandal, wine and oil skins, and of a meat pot. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob said, one may tie in front of an animal that it should not leave; one may tie a pail to a belt but not to a rope, but Rebbi Jehudah permits it. Rebbi Jehudah stated a principle: One is never liable for a knot which is not permanent.

MISHNAH: But there are knots for which one is not liable as one is for a camel driver’s knot and a mariner’s knot. A woman may knot the openings of her garment, and the threads of the hair net, of the belt, and laces of shoe and sandal, wine and oil skins, and of a meat pot. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob said, one may tie in front of an animal that it should not leave; one may tie a pail to a belt but not to a rope, but Rebbi Jehudah permits it. Rebbi Jehudah stated a principle: One is never liable for a knot which is not permanent.

MISHNAH: But there are knots for which one is not liable as one is for a camel driver’s knot and a mariner’s knot. A woman may knot the openings of her garment, and the threads of the hair net, of the belt, and laces of shoe and sandal, wine and oil skins, and of a meat pot. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob said, one may tie in front of an animal that it should not leave; one may tie a pail to a belt but not to a rope, but Rebbi Jehudah permits it. Rebbi Jehudah stated a principle: One is never liable for a knot which is not permanent.

MISHNAH: But there are knots for which one is not liable as one is for a camel driver’s knot and a mariner’s knot. A woman may knot the openings of her garment, and the threads of the hair net, of the belt, and laces of shoe and sandal, wine and oil skins, and of a meat pot. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob said, one may tie in front of an animal that it should not leave; one may tie a pail to a belt but not to a rope, but Rebbi Jehudah permits it. Rebbi Jehudah stated a principle: One is never liable for a knot which is not permanent.

HALAKHAH: 2. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, if one opens the hem which is connected to the garment. Rebbi Yose said, if one opens a [split] garment which is made like two sheets. If shoe or sandal laces were dislocated, one removes and returns them, only one may not knot them. If its nose was dislocated, there are Tannaim who state, it is permitted to put it back, and there are Tannaim who state, it is forbidden to put it back. They wanted to say, he who says that it is permitted, if there is one hole; he who says that it is forbidden, if there are two holes. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, in both cases it is following him who says that there are two holes. What about it? He who says that it is permitted, if they are loose; he who says that it is forbidden, if they are squeezed.

“To a belt but not to a rope, but Rebbi Jehudah permits it.” Therefore the rabbis do not? But because the earlier statement was in the name of Rebbi Jehudah, so also this is in the name of Rebbi Jehudah: “Rebbi Jehudah stated a principle: One is never liable for a knot which is not permanent.” Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: So is the Mishnah: One is never liable for a knot which is not permanent and which is temporary.

“To a belt but not to a rope, but Rebbi Jehudah permits it.” Therefore the rabbis do not? But because the earlier statement was in the name of Rebbi Jehudah, so also this is in the name of Rebbi Jehudah: “Rebbi Jehudah stated a principle: One is never liable for a knot which is not permanent.” Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: So is the Mishnah: One is never liable for a knot which is not permanent and which is temporary.

MISHNAH: If a stick used to stir olives has a knot at its top it is an object of impurity, otherwise it is impervious to impurity. In any case it may be used on the Sabbath.

"And I will take away My hand, and thou shalt see My back" (Exod. xxxiii. 23). Rab Hanna b. Bizna said in the name of R. Simeon Hasida : This teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, showed Moses the knot of the Tefillin.

Our Rabbis taught: If it binding became undone on the Festival, he may bind it as one binds vegetables. But why [should this be necessary]? Let him make a proper loop? [This statement is] according to R. Judah who says that a loop is to be considered a proper knot.

Does a cedar produce young shoots? Do we not read in a Baraita: He who buys a tree from his neighbor in order to fell it, must cut it a hand-breadth above the ground; if the tree is a virgin-sycamore, he must cut it three hand-breadths above the ground; and if it is a truncated sycamore, he must cut it two hand-breadths above ground; if he buys reeds and vine, he must cut them above the knot; in case of palm-trees and cedars he may dig deep in the ground and uproot them, because they do not produce young shoots! Answer. In the passage above (of R. Ḥiyya) reference is had to different kinds of cedars, which is in keeping with a statement of Rabbah b. R. Huna; for Rabbah b. R. Huna said that it was taught in the School of Rab: There are ten kinds of cedars, as it is said (Is., 41. 19): "I will plant in the wilderness the cedar, the acacia-tree, and the myrtle, and the oil-tree; I will set in the desert the cypress, the plane-tree and the larch together."

III. (1) Weightier rules hold in hallowed things than in a heave-offering; for we may cleanse vessels in the midst of vessels for a heave-offering but not for hallowed things. The outsides and the inside and the place for laying hold are reckoned as distinct in the heave-offering but not in the hallowed things. He that takes up that which has been made unclean by pressure may offer the heave-offering but not the hallowed things. The garments of those that eat the heave-offering are unclean through pressure with regard to hallowed things. The manner of the heave-offering is not as the manner of the hallowed things. For in the case of hallowed things one loosens a knot and wipes and cleanses and afterwards ties up again, but in the case of a heave-offering he ties up and afterwards cleanses.

In hallowed things. What is the reason of the prohibition? R. Ela said, Because the weight of the vessel interposes. But seeing that in a later case it is on account of the interposition, the first case cannot be on account of an interposition. For we are taught in the later case, And the manner of the heave-offering is not as the manner of the hallowed things. For in the case of hallowed things one looses a knot and wipes and cleanses and afterwards ties up again, but in the case of a heave-offering he ties up and afterwards cleanses. Nay, but both the earlier and later cases are because of interposition, and it was necessary that they should be separately mentioned, for if he had taught us the first only, I should say, This is the reason for the prohibition with reference to the hallowed things, viz., because of the vessel's weight, which actually exists. But in the latter case, where the vessel's weight is not an element, I should say, In regard to hallowed things also there is in this case no disqualifying interposition. And if he had taught us the latter only, I should say, This is the reason for the prohibition with reference to hallowed things, because

a knot in water is drawn tighter, while in the former case the water makes the vessel to swim, and so there is no interposition. Thus it was necessary that they should be separately mentioned. Rabbi Ela is consistent with himself. For R. Ela said that R. Chănina bar Papa said, Ten degrees of superior excellence are taught here. The first five refer alike to hallowed things, and to ordinary things which are treated with observance of the laws of purification belonging to hallowed things; the later refer to hallowed things, but not to ordinary things, which are treated with observance of the laws of purification belonging to hallowed things. What is the reason? Because the former five involve an essential impurity arising out of the Law, our Rabbis have decided that they apply as well to hallowed things, as to ordinary things which are treated with observance of the laws of purification belonging to hallowed things. Because the later ones involve no essential impurity arising out of the Law, our Rabbis have decided that they apply to hallowed things; but to ordinary things which are treated with observance of the laws of purification belonging to hallowed things our Rabbis have decided that they do not apply.

Its handle should be one handsbreadth. etc.: Abaye said Learn from here that everyone has a strap made for him. Rava said to him, if so then we would need many different straps. Rather, said Rava, There was an [adjustable] knot. When they need to they would tighten it, when they needed to, they would loosen it.