mishnah

MISHNAH: If a cooking stove was heated with straw or stubbles one may put a dish on it, with olive cake or wood he should not put it on unless he emptied or covered it with ashes. The House of Shammai say, hot water but no dish, but the House of Hillel say, hot water and dish. The House of Shammai say one takes away but may not return it but the House of Hillel say one even may return.

HALAKHAH: “If a cooking stove was heated,” etc. So is the Mishnah: “one keeps a dish on it.” The Mishnah is Rebbi Jehudah’s, as it was stated: “If there were two coordinated cooking stoves, one emptied or covered with ashes, the other one neither emptied nor covered with ashes, one keeps on the one emptied or covered with ashes. What does one keep on it? The House of Shammai say, one does not keep anything on it. But the House of Hillel say, hot water but no dish. If he removed the hot water pot everybody agrees that he should not return it, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, the House of Shammai say, hot water but no dish; but the House of Hillel say, hot water and dish. If he removed the hot water pot, the House of Shammai say he should not return it, but the House of Hillel say, he may return it.”

HALAKHAH: “If a cooking stove was heated,” etc. So is the Mishnah: “one keeps a dish on it.” The Mishnah is Rebbi Jehudah’s, as it was stated: “If there were two coordinated cooking stoves, one emptied or covered with ashes, the other one neither emptied nor covered with ashes, one keeps on the one emptied or covered with ashes. What does one keep on it? The House of Shammai say, one does not keep anything on it. But the House of Hillel say, hot water but no dish. If he removed the hot water pot everybody agrees that he should not return it, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, the House of Shammai say, hot water but no dish; but the House of Hillel say, hot water and dish. If he removed the hot water pot, the House of Shammai say he should not return it, but the House of Hillel say, he may return it.”

As it was stated: “He who tithes or cooks on the Sabbath, if it was done unintentionally it may be eaten, intentionally it may not be eaten, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, unintentionally it may be eaten at the end of the Sabbath, intentionally it may not be eaten. Rebbi Joḥanan the Alexandrian said, unintentionally it may be eaten at the end of the Sabbath by others but not by himself, intentionally neither by him nor by others.” Samuel followed Rebbi Joḥanan the Alexandrian. When Rav was instructing his own group he said following Rebbi Meïr; in public he instructed following Rebbi Joḥanan the Alexandrian. Rebbi Simeon bar Karsana said, he explained to us following Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose, as it was stated: “Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose said in his father’s name, in any case where for an intentional sin one is liable for extirpation and an unintentional sin for a purification offering, if it was committed on the Sabbath unintentionally or intentionally, the result is forbidden both to him and to others. In any case where for an intentional sin one is not liable for extirpation and an unintentional sin no purification offering is due, if it was committed on the Sabbath unintentionally or intentionally, the result unintentional it may be eaten by others after the end of the Sabbath but not by him, intentionally neither by him nor by others.” They asked before Rebbi Joḥanan, what do you say? He said, I have only the Mishnah: “He who tithes or cooks on the Sabbath, if in error it may be eaten, if intentionally it may not be eaten.” Rav Ḥisda heard this and said, the Sabbaths have been permitted! Rav Huna in the name of Rav, and Rebbi Ḥiyya stated thus: “In earlier times they said, one who forgets some dish on his stove on the Sabbath, unintentionally it may be eaten, intentionally it may not be eaten. People were suspected that they left it intentionally and said, it was forgotten; they forbade it to them when it was forgotten.” And here, you say so? Rebbi Ila said, they were suspected to leave it on, they were not suspected to cook. They imposed a fine for forgetting but not for cooking.

MISHNAH: If an oven was heated with straw or stubbles one may not put anything inside it or on its back. If a single burner was heated with straw or stubbles it is like a cooking stove, with olive cake or wood it is like an oven.

HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “If an oven was heated with straw or stubbles,” etc. Bar Qappara stated: It is even forbidden to lean against it. Rebbi Shammai leaned against the air space of the oven. Rebbi Mana told him, did not Bar Qapprara state: It is even forbidden to lean against it?

MISHNAH: One may not put an egg next to the hot water container to make it soft boiled and he may not break it on tissue, but Rebbi Yose permits. One should not bury it in dust of roads that it should be roasted. What the people of Tiberias did was to divert a jet of cold water into a canal of hot water. The Sages told them if this is on a Sabbath this is like hot water which was heated on the Sabbath; it is forbidden for washing and drinking. But if it is on a holiday it is like water heated on the holiday; it is forbidden for washing but permitted for drinking. From a cleaned-out cooking vessel one drinks on the Sabbath; from an Antiochean vessel one does not drink even if it is cleaned out.

HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “One may not put an egg next to the hot water container,” etc. There, we have stated: “If a mashed apple is added to dough which soured, [the dough] is forbidden.” It was stated: Rebbi Yose permits it. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: They disagree when it becomes sour from the juice [of the apple]. But if it becomes sour from its solid substance it is permitted. Rebbi Yose follows his own opinion. Just as he says there, its souring is not clearly souring, so he says here, its cooking is not clearly cooking.

Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥuna, Rebbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ila: The Sages admit to Rebbi Simeon that a chair whose legs are stuck in mud one is permitted to move on the Sabbath. Since you are saying, it is permitted to move it, similarly it is permitted to return it. Rebbi Yose said, we also have stated: “and they may be removed on the Sabbath.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, this is Rebbi Simeon’s. Rebbi Yose said, a Mishnah says so, “one may not drag any implement except a carriage because it presses.”

There, they say, the sun is permitted, a derivative of the sun is forbidden. The rabbis here say, both the sun and derivatives of the sun are permitted. Our Mishnah disagrees with the rabbis here: “One should not bury it in dust of roads that it should be roasted.” There is a difference, because he makes a groove. If it had said “flour” it would have been correct. A baraita disagrees with the rabbis there, as it was stated: “Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, one soft-boils eggs on a boiling hot whitewashed roof but one does not soft-boil eggs in boiling hot dust.” What do the rabbis there do with this? They explain that they disagree with Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. In the opinion of the rabbis there, “what the people of Tiberias did.” In the opinion of the rabbis here the Mishnah was finished. “As to what the people of Tiberias did.”

There, they say, the sun is permitted, a derivative of the sun is forbidden. The rabbis here say, both the sun and derivatives of the sun are permitted. Our Mishnah disagrees with the rabbis here: “One should not bury it in dust of roads that it should be roasted.” There is a difference, because he makes a groove. If it had said “flour” it would have been correct. A baraita disagrees with the rabbis there, as it was stated: “Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, one soft-boils eggs on a boiling hot whitewashed roof but one does not soft-boil eggs in boiling hot dust.” What do the rabbis there do with this? They explain that they disagree with Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. In the opinion of the rabbis there, “what the people of Tiberias did.” In the opinion of the rabbis here the Mishnah was finished. “As to what the people of Tiberias did.”

Mishnah: “What the people of Tiberias did,” etc. Originally they closed the conduit on Friday and they entered and bathed on the Sabbath. They were suspected of filling it with wood on Friday so it would burn continuously on the Sabbath; they forbade them bathing and permitted sweating. They were suspected of coming and bathing but saying “we were sweating.” They forbade bathing and sweating to them. If there were there two basins, one of sweet water and one of salt water. They were suspected of uncovering the planks and bathing in sweet water but saying, “we did bathe in salt water;” they forbade them everything. When they were fenced in they continuously permitted them more until they permitted them water in a cave and the hot springs of Tiberias, but they did not permit bringing towels. Who permitted the bringing of linen cloths? Rebbi Ḥanina ben Aqabia, as it was stated: Rebbi Ḥanina ben Aqabia permitted three things. He permitted seaweed, he permitted the balcony, and he permitted bringing linen cloths.

There, we have stated: “If somebody bathes in a cave or in the waters of Tiberias he may dry himself even with ten linen towels but may not bring them in his hand.” Samuel said, what should an opinionated person do who never studied and never served? This Mishnah was before they permitted to bring linen towels. Rebbi Jeremiah and Rebbi Zeˋira, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel: Rebbi permitted linen towels. It was stated: One takes a shower neither with hot water nor with cold water. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi said, this baraita was before the Sages permitted the hot springs of Tiberias, as it was stated: One who bathes in the hot springs of Tiberias may sprinkle on himself, but others may not sprinkle on him. Rebbi Simeon ben Menassia said, he may not even sprinkle on himself since he increases vapor and sweeps the floor.

MISHNAH: One may not put cold water into a hot water container which was removed in order to heat it but one may put into it or into a cup to make it lukewarm.

HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “One may not put cold water into a hot water container which was removed,” etc. Rebbi Abba the (son of the) son of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: they stated this only for a cup, therefore not into itself. Rebbi Mana said, I objected before Rebbi Abba [the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba]: Rebbi Joḥanan could not have stated this on the first part [of the Mishnah] nor on the second part! “In order to heat it”, therefore to make it lukewarm is permitted. There came Rebbi Abba bar Cahana, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of (Rebbi) [Rav]. If to heat it, it is forbidden, if to make it lukewarm it is permitted.

HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “One may not put cold water into a hot water container which was removed,” etc. Rebbi Abba the (son of the) son of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: they stated this only for a cup, therefore not into itself. Rebbi Mana said, I objected before Rebbi Abba [the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba]: Rebbi Joḥanan could not have stated this on the first part [of the Mishnah] nor on the second part! “In order to heat it”, therefore to make it lukewarm is permitted. There came Rebbi Abba bar Cahana, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of (Rebbi) [Rav]. If to heat it, it is forbidden, if to make it lukewarm it is permitted.

Everybody agrees that a secondary vessel is permitted. What is the difference between a primary and a secondary vessel? Rebbi Yose said, here the hand rules, there the hand does not rule. Rebbi Jonah said, in neither case does the hand rule. But they forced distance for a primary vessel; they did not force distance for a secondary vessel. (Mishnah: “Into a pan or a pot which was taken off the fire boiling,” etc.) Rebbi Mana said, a pot of rice supports my father, a pot of groats supports my father, for you move them from place to place and they still are boiling hot.

MISHNAH: Into a pan or a pot which was taken off the fire boiling one should not give spices but one may give them into the bowl or into the tray. Rebbi Jehudah says, one may put them in everything except what contains vinegar or fish sauce.

MISHNAH: One does not put a vessel under the light to catch the oil but when he put it there when it still was daylight it is permitted. One may not use it because it is not prepared.

MISHNAH: One moves a new light but not a used one; Rebbi Simeon says one may move any light except one which was burning on the Sabbath.

HALAKHAH: (Mishnah: “One moves a new light but not a used one;” etc.) Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada objected: Did we not state, “one turns a basket upside down in front of the chicks that they may climb up and down”? They said, this is the one of Rebbi Joḥanan.

A Mishnah disagrees with him who said, anything which is specifically for something prohibited is prohibited, as we have stated there: “Its undercarriage, if it can be separated it is not connected to it, will not be measured with it, does not protect in a tent with a corpse; one may not drag it on the Sabbath if it contains coins.” And it was stated for this, if there were coins on it but they fell off, it may be dragged. Rav Sheshet said, this is Rebbi Sineon’s since Rebbi Simeon said, “if it burned out it is permitted to move it.” They said, why do we not explain it according to everybody, if he forgot. You cannot do this, as we have stated there: “if it cannot be separated it is connected to it, will be measured with it, does protect in a tent with a corpse; one may drag it on the Sabbath even though it contains coins.” Can you say about this, it is according to everybody, if he forgot?

A Mishnah disagrees with him who said, anything which is specifically for something prohibited is prohibited, as we have stated: “If there is a stone on top of an amphora he tilts it on its side and it falls down.” Rebbi Abba in the name of (Rebbi) [Rav] Ḥiyya bar Ashi: Rav explained this about one who forgot. Also from the sequel, “if it was between amphoras he lifts it, tilts it on its side and it falls down.” This also Rav explained about one who forgot.

A Mishnah disagrees with him who said, anything which is specifically for something prohibited is prohibited, as we have stated: “one turns a basket upside down in front of the chicks that they may climb up and down.” And it was stated about this, when they climbed on it by themselves it is forbidden to move it. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said before Rebbi Zeˋira, explain it if it is disgusting. He told him, did not Rebbi Hoshaia state, even a seah, even a three-qab. Can you say that seah and three-qab are disgusting?

Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Meïr. Samuel said, practice follows Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, practice follows Rebbi Simeon. They asked before Rebbi Joḥanan, you, what are you saying? He told them, I only have the Mishnah: “One may move any light except one which was burning on the Sabbath.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish instructed in al-Tarabulus, it is permitted to move a small light. Rebbi Ḥelbo and Rebbi Abbahu. Before Rebbi Ḥelbo they did not take away, before Rebbi Abbahu they took away. Rebbi Yasa visited Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya. He wanted to remove it before him. He told him, before us? Rebbi Yose the Galilean came before Yose ben Ḥanina; he wanted to take it away, he told him, who permitted you? It is found Rav and Rebbi Joḥanan, who forbid, are one. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, who permit, are one. Rebbi Eleazar bar Ḥanina: It happened and they moved a metal lamp instead of a pottery light on the Sabbath. Where do we hold? If following Rebbi Meїr, even the metal lamp should be forbidden. If following Rebbi Simeon, even a pottery light should be permitted. But we are following Rebbi Jehudah since Rebbi Jehudah is the one who said, a pottery light is disgusting, a metal light is not disgusting.

Rebbi Abba bat Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, it is forbidden to move a tarkos. Rebbi Immi instructed: it is permitted. Rebbi Jeremiah saw them moving it at the great assembly and did not object to them. In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said, up to three it is a chair, more than this a ladder. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, he who permits follows Rebbi Simeon, as it was stated: “A person may not drag a bed, or a chair, or a footstool, or a fauteuil, because he makes a groove, but Rebbi Simeon permits.” Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥuna, Rebbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ila: The Sages admit to Rebbi Simeon that a chair whose legs are stuck in mud one is permitted to move on the Sabbath. Since you are saying, it is permitted to move it, similarly it is permitted to return it. Rebbi Yose said, we also have stated: “and they may be removed on the Sabbath.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, it is Rebbi Simeon’s. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, a Mishnah says so, “one may not drag any vessel except a carriage because it presses.”

MISHNAH: One may put a vessel under the light to catch the sparks but one may not put water in it since he would extinguish.

MISHNAH: In what does one store away and in what may one not store away? One does not store away in olive cake, nor in manure, nor in salt, nor in lime, nor in sand, whether moist or dry. Not in straw, nor in fibers, nor in grape pits, nor in grasses when they are moist but one may store away in them when dry. One may store away in garments, and produce, and pigeon wings, and flax residue, and in fine sawdust. Rebbi Jehudah forbids if it is fine and permits coarse.

MISHNAH: One may store away in raw hides, which one may move, and in wool flakes, which one may not move. What does one do? He shakes the cover and they fall off. Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah says, a box he tilts on its side and takes out, lest he take it out and be unable to return it. But the Sages say, he takes and returns.

MISHNAH: If he did not cover it when it still was daylight he may not cover it when it is dark. If he covered it and it became uncovered, he is permitted to cover it. One may fill a pitcher and put it under the pillow or under the quilt.

MISHNAH: With what may an animal go out and with what may it not go out? A camel may go out with a bridle, and a female camel with a nose ring, and a Lybian donkey with a bridle, and a horse with a chain, and all that have a chain may go out with the chain and may be drawn with the chain which may be sprinkled upon and immersed in place.

MISHNAH: A donkey may go out with its saddle cloth if it is tied to it. Rams may go out protected on their bellies; female sheep may go out with their tail bound high, or bound low, or wrapped, and goats tied. Rebbi Yose prohibits all these except wrapped female sheep. Rebbi Jehudah says goats may go out tied to dry but not for milk.

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.

MISHNAH: With what may [an animal] not go out? The camel may not go out with its pad, nor bound on one foot, nor bound on two feet, and so all other animals. One may not tie camels one to the other and draw, but he may take the ropes into his hand and draw on condition that he not wrap up.

HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “With what may [an animal] not go out? The camel may not go out with its pad.” Like the curved padding with which one equalizes a hump back. עָקוּד at one front leg. רָגוּל at both hind legs.

MISHNAH: A donkey may not go out with its saddle cloth if it is not bound to it, nor with a bell even if it is plugged, nor with a ladder on its neck, nor with a strip on its foot. Chicken may no go out with threads or strips on their feet. Rams may not go out with a carriage under their tails nor female sheep with yaḥnun, nor a calf with gimun, nor a cow with hedgehog hide, nor with a strip between her horns. Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah’s cow went out with a strip between her horns against the will of the Sages.

HALAKHAH: Mishnah: “A donkey may not go out with its saddle cloth,” etc. It was stated, “but it may walk around with it in the courtyard.” Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: The same applies to the saddle. It was stated: “a donkey may go out with its saddle to get warm but one may not tie the load belt and not lower the strap under its tail.” Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Zeˋira: From where these things? As we have stated: “The practices of Sabbath … are like mountains hanging on a hair,” and you are saying so? He could have objected, what is the difference between a ladder and a package of straw? A ladder is substantial, a package of straw is not substantial. Rebbi Ḥanina said, he could have objected, what is the difference between a package of straw and an expert amulet? As we have stated, “it is forbidden that an animal go out with an expert amulet.” Rebbi Eudaimon said, he could have objected, what is the difference between a package of straw and a wound dressing? There are Tannaim who state, they may not go out with a package of straw; there are Tannaim who state, they may go out. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, this is a tannaitic difference. For him who said, they may go out with a package of straw; they may go out with a wound dressing. But for him who said, they may not go out with a package of straw; they may not go out with a wound dressing.

MISHNAH: With what may a woman go out and with what may she not go out? A woman may go out neither with woolen or linen threads nor with ribbons on her head and she may not immerse herself wearing them unless she relaxes them. To the public domain not with a frontlet nor with a head-dress hanging down the cheeks as long as they are not sewn, nor an under-cap. Also not with a city of gold, nor with a chain, nor with nose rings, nor with a ring without a seal, nor with a pin. If she went out she is not liable for a purification offering.

Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaul stated: It is forbidden to send jewelry. Rebbi Mana said, they said only to send, therefore to wear it is permitted. It was stated: One may move the shofar to let a child drink, the writing tablet, and the bell, and the mirror, to cover vessels. Rebbi Abun said, a Mishnah says that it is forbidden to wear it, as we have stated: “Anything which one may use on the holiday one may send.” If you say that it is permitted to wear it should be permitted to send. And what is that which was stated: One may move the shofar to let a child drink, [the writing tablet,] and the bell, and the mirror, to cover vessels? If they are called implements. So far gold jewelry. Also even silver jewelry? They said in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah forbidden, [and] they said in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah permitted. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, I know the beginning and the end. Small girls were growing up in Rebbi Jeremiah’s dwelling. He went and asked Rebbi Zeˋira, who told him: do not forbid and do not permit.

Rebbi Iniani bar Sosai said in the name of Rebbi Eliezer: Everywhere they said she may not go out and when she did go out she is obligated for a purification sacrifice she is prohibited to go out with it to the courtyard. Everywhere they said she may not go out and when she went out she is not obligated for a purification sacrifice she is permitted to go out with it to the courtyard. Rebbi Abba bar Cohen in the name of Rav Sheshet, a Mishnah said so: “with an under-cap and another’s braid into the courtyard.” Rebbi Lia in the name of Rebbi Simeon bar Ḥiyya: Even when they said she may not go out but if she went out she is not obligated for a purification sacrifice, she is prohibited to go out with it to the courtyard. Is a man permitted because he is not vain? Let us hear from the following: Rabban Gamliel ben Rebbi went walking in his courtyard on the Sabbath with a golden key in his hand. His colleagues scolded him because of jewelry. This implies that if something is made as jewelry it is forbidden. This implies also if it has a dual purpose. This implies both man and woman. This implies that even when they said she may not go out but if she went out she is not obligated for a purification sacrifice, she is prohibited to go out with it to the courtyard.

MISHNAH: A man may not go out with a nailed shoe, nor with a single one if he does not have a wound on his foot, nor with a phylactery nor with a amulet not written by an expert, nor with armor, nor with a helmet, nor with soldier’s boots. If he went out he is not liable for a purification offering.

It was stated: But he may walk on it until he reaches the entrance of his courtyard. Rebbi Aḥa and Rebbi Zeˋira were walking on the highway. The sandal of Rebbi Aḥa was torn. When they came to the city gate, Rebbi Zeˋira told him, that is the entrance of your courtyard. Rebbi Aḥa wound a fiber around. Rebbi Abbahu wound a bundle of Jew’s mallow. Rebbi Abbahu was of the opinion that a bundle of Jew’s mallow is ready to be used. Rebbi Jonah threw them away before the fried food [store]. That is little honor. The honor of Rebbi Eleazar obliged him to take it off. Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Zeˋira: May one switch? He said to him, it is permitted. Nevertheless, he told him: go and look for an Elder and rely on him. He went out and found Rebbi Abba bar Mamal, asked him, and he permitted. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah said that this is a kind of clothing: “Or with a left [foot sandal] on the right [foot], the ḥaliṣah is valid.” That means, in (length). But in (width) it must cover most of the foot.

MISHNAH: A woman may not go out with a needle that has an ear, nor with a signet ring, nor with a snail-shaped headdress, nor with a perfume bouquet, nor with a perfume flask; if she went out she is liable for a purification offering, the words of Rebbi Meїr. But the Sages declare her not liable for a perfume bouquet or a perfume flask.

MISHNAH: A man may go out neither with a sword, nor with a bow, nor with a shield, nor with a bludgeon, nor with a spear, and if he went out he is liable for a purification offering. Rebbi Eliezer says, these are adornments for him, but the Sages say, they only are shameful for him, as it is said, they will forge their swords into ploughs and their lances into vintner’s knives. A garter is pure and one may go out with in on the Sabbath. Ropes are impure and one may not go out with them on the Sabbath.

MISHNAH: A woman may go out with hair threads, whether her own or another woman’s or an animal’s, with a frontlet with a head-dress hanging down the cheeks if they are sewn; with an under-cap and another’s braid into the courtyard with cotton wool in her ear, or cotton wool in her shoes, or cotton wool which she prepared for her period. With pepper or a grain of salt or any other thing she may put into her mouth on condition that she not start on the Sabbath, and if it fell out she may not return it. A replacement tooth and a gilt tooth Rebbi permits but the Sages prohibit.

MISHNAH: One goes out with a tetradrachma on a arthritic foot. Girls go out with threads and even chips in their ears. Arab women go out veiled and Median women pinned, and also everybody, but the Sages spoke about what is.

But did we not state, “girls go out with threads”? Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah, even wound around her neck. Abba bar Abba commanded to his son Samuel, do not accept this Mishnah, but “not with chips in their ears.” So is the Mishnah: “Arab women go out veiled; Median women pinned.”

But did we not state, “girls go out with threads”? Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah, even wound around her neck. Abba bar Abba commanded to his son Samuel, do not accept this Mishnah, but “not with chips in their ears.” So is the Mishnah: “Arab women go out veiled; Median women pinned.”

MISHNAH: She ties down with a stone, or a walnut, or a coin on condition that she not start tying down on the Sabbath.

MISHNAH: The amputee goes out with his prosthesis, the words of Rebbi Yose, but Rebbi Meїr prohibits. If it has an extensive reception area it is impure. His stilts are impure by stepping on, one goes out with them on the Sabbath, and one may enter the Temple Court with them. A wheelchair and its supports are impure by stepping on, one may not go out with them on the Sabbath, and one may not enter the Temple Court with them. Donkey figures are pure but one may not go out with them.

HALAKHAH: Samuel said, one goes out with them because they are like a sandal, and one may enter the Temple Court with them. Rebbi Yannai asked, one goes out with them because they are like sandals, and one may enter the Temple Court with them, because they are not sandals? Rebbi (asked) [Mana] said, instead of asking about Samuel he should have asked about the Mishnah, “its supports are impure by stepping on, one may go out with them on the Sabbath, and one may not enter the Temple Court with them.” Rebbi Mana said, say does its last part not disagree with Samuel? “Its supports are impure by stepping on, one may not go out with them on the Sabbath, and one may not enter the Temple Court with them. Donkey figures are pure and one may go out with them.” What are pure donkey figures? Rebbi Abbahu said, ὄνος κατʹ ὦμον, arm’s donkey.

MISHNAH: Boys go out with knots and princes with bells, and so may everybody, but the Sages spoke about what is. One may go out with a locust’s egg and a fox’s tooth and a nail of a crucified person because of healing, the words of Rebbi Yose. But Rebbi Meїr forbids on weekdays because of ways of the Emorite.

There are Tannaim who switch. Rebbi Ḥananiah in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan as our Mishnah. Rebbi Samuel, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, anything which heals is not forbidden because of ways of the Emorite. “דרגי דרגיבת because of ways of the Emorite; Rebbi Jehudah says because of the idol Dagon, and Dagon’s head and his two hands. דונו דני because of ways of the Emorite; Rebbi Jehudah says because of the idol Dan, they say, by the life of your god Dan. No no, because of ways of the Emorite; Rebbi Jehudah says because idolatry, they say no God, turn away from us, we have no desire to know Your ways.”

MISHNAH: A comprehensive principle they said about the Sabbath. Anybody who is oblivious of the principle of the Sabbath and performed many works on many Sabbaths is obligated for one purification sacrifice only. But one who knows the principle of the Sabbath and performed many works on many Sabbaths is obligated for every single Sabbath; and one who knows that it is the Sabbath and performed many works on many Sabbaths is obligated for every single work. One who performs many works similar to one work is obligated only for one purification sacrifice.

We have stated: “Anybody who is oblivious of the principle of the Sabbath.” They stated in the House of Rebbi: Anybody ignorant of the principles of the Sabbath. Rebbi Eleazar follows our Mishnah. Rebbi Joḥanan follows what was stated in the House of Rebbi. But Rebbi Eliezer said, “anybody who is oblivious of the principle of the Sabbath.” Therefore if he does not know anything of the principles of the Sabbath is he not liable? Since Rav stated our Mishnah and explained it: who is the one who does not know anything of the principles of the Sabbath? A child who was taken prisoner among the Gentiles. This implies that both versions are the same. As Rebbi Joḥanan said, anybody ignorant of the principles of the Sabbath. Therefore (if he does not) [if he did] know and forgot he is liable. Since what Rebbi Samuel, Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: This entire Halakhah follows Rebbi Eliezer, but following the rabbis he is liable only once. This implies that both versions are the same. They asked before Rebbi Yasa’s son: What did you hear from your father about Rebbi Yose? He said, following Rebbi Joḥanan. Rebbi Ḥizqiah told them, he did not say so. But Rebbi Simon bar Zavda was simply with Rebbi Yose’s son and heard from him following Rebbi Eliezer.

We have stated: “Anybody who is oblivious of the principle of the Sabbath.” They stated in the House of Rebbi: Anybody ignorant of the principles of the Sabbath. Rebbi Eleazar follows our Mishnah. Rebbi Joḥanan follows what was stated in the House of Rebbi. But Rebbi Eliezer said, “anybody who is oblivious of the principle of the Sabbath.” Therefore if he does not know anything of the principles of the Sabbath is he not liable? Since Rav stated our Mishnah and explained it: who is the one who does not know anything of the principles of the Sabbath? A child who was taken prisoner among the Gentiles. This implies that both versions are the same. As Rebbi Joḥanan said, anybody ignorant of the principles of the Sabbath. Therefore (if he does not) [if he did] know and forgot he is liable. Since what Rebbi Samuel, Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: This entire Halakhah follows Rebbi Eliezer, but following the rabbis he is liable only once. This implies that both versions are the same. They asked before Rebbi Yasa’s son: What did you hear from your father about Rebbi Yose? He said, following Rebbi Joḥanan. Rebbi Ḥizqiah told them, he did not say so. But Rebbi Simon bar Zavda was simply with Rebbi Yose’s son and heard from him following Rebbi Eliezer.

MISHNAH: There are 39 categories of work. He who ploughs, who sows, who harvests, who binds into sheaves, who threshes, and who winnows, who selects, who grinds, and who sifts, who makes dough, and who bakes. He who shears wool, who bleaches it, who cards it, who dyes it, who spins it, who prepares the loom, who ties two threads as warp, who weaves two rows, who hits two threads, who ties, and who unties. Also who sews two stitches, who tears in order to sew two stitches. He who catches a deer, who slaughters it, who skins it, who salts it, who rubs it clean, who tans it, who cuts it, who writes two letters, and who erases in order to write two letters. He who builds, and who tears down, who extinguishes fire, and who lights fire, and who hits with a hammer, and who transports from one domain to another; these are the 39 categories of work.

But Rebbi Ismael himself had a problem: from where does one prove it? Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: Two prohibitions and one extirpation, the prohibitions split the extirpation. What is the reason? It should not be used to be rubbed on anybody’s skin and in its proportions you shall not imitate it, and it is written, a person who would compound similarly, or who would put it on a stranger, will be extirpated from his people, that is two prohibitions and one extirpation. The prohibitions split the extirpation. How does Rebbi Joḥanan treat this? The verse speaks about males. His sister is mentioned to teach about all females. Does Rebbi Eleazar not accept this? He has it from do not come near, equally male or female. How does Rebbi Joḥanan treat this? He explains it but it is not clear, so also from the following: Samuel bar Abba asked before Rebbi Zeˋira, should not well-being sacrifices, being treated separately, split all sancta regarding impurity? He told him, it was necessary that they be treated separately, to eliminate sancta dedicated for the upkeep of the Temple regarding larceny, lest one be liable for them because of mushiness, leftovers, and impurity. But is that not a Mishnah? “All sancta destined for the altar combine with one another with respect to liability for mushiness, leftovers, and impurity,” in contrast to sancta destined for the upkeep of the Temple. Since they do not combine, they do split. Rebbi Ḥanina said, so it is. They split but do not combine.

MISHNAH: They said another principle. Anything which can be preserved and one preserves its kind if he took it out on the Sabbath he is obligated for a purification sacrifice because of it, but for anything which cannot be preserved and one does not preserve its kind, if he took it out on the Sabbath only the one who preserves is obligated.

MISHNAH: One who brings out straw filling the mouth of a cow, wood shavings filling the mouth of a camel, grain filling the mouth of a sheep, grasses filling the mouth of a goat. Moist garlic leaves and onion leaves the volume of a dried fig, if dry filling the mouth of a goat; they are not combined since their measures are not identical. One who brings out foodstuffs in the volume of a dried fig; they are combined since their measures are the same except for their shells, and their pits, and their stalks, and their grit, and their bran. Rebbi Jehudah says except for pods of lentils which are cooked with them.

MISHNAH: One who brings out wine to mix a cup, milk for a sip, honey to put on a sore spot, oil to anoint a small limb, water to mix eye salve, and all other fluids by a quartarius, and all waste water by a quartarius. Rebbi Simeon says, all are by a quartarius; these measures were said only for those who store them.

“And all other fluids by a quartarius, and all waste water by a quartarius.” Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Ḥisda: The Mishnah speaks of one who moves from house to house.

MISHNAH: One who brings out rope to make a handle for a box, bast to make a hanger of a small or large sieve, Rebbi Jehudah says to make from it an instrument to measure a shoe for a child. Paper to write on it a toll collector’s receipt; and anybody who carries out a toll collector’s receipt is liable. Erased paper to tie over the the opening of a small perfume flask.

MISHNAH: Leather to make an amulet, split leather to write a mezuzzah on, parchment to write on it the smallest paragraph of phylacteries, which is Shemaˋ Israel, ink sufficient to write two letters with, kohl to apply to one eye, asphalt and sulphur to fix a hole, wax to close a small hole.

MISHNAH: Glue to put on top of the snare, clay soil to make an opening for a goldsmith’s oven, Rebbi Jehudah says, to make a stand. Bran to put on the opening of a goldsmith’s oven. Lime to apply to a little girl, Rebbi Jehudah says, to treat a temple, Rebbi Nehemiah says, to prepare make-up.

MISHNAH: Earth for a seal of merchandise, the words of Rebbi Aqiba, but the Sages say, for seals of letters. Manure and sand to fertilize one cabbage stalk, the words of Rebbi Aqiba, but the Sages say, to fertilize a stalk of leek. Coarse sand to add to a handful of lime, reed to make writing pen. If it was wide or splintered, to cook a most easily cooked egg, scrambled in a pan.

MISHNAH: Bone to fill a spoon; Rebbi Jehudah says to make a tooth of a key. Glass to scrape the head of the weaver’s beam. A pebble to throw at a bird; Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says, to throw at an animal.

MISHNAH: A potsherd to put between one half-brick and another, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Meïr says, to carry fire with it. Rebbi Yose says, to fill it with a quartarius. Rebbi Meïr said, even though it is no proof, it is a hint: that in its splinters no shard be found to catch fire from the blaze. Rebbi Yose told him, from there is proof, to draw water from the pit.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Aqiba says, from where that idolatry makes impure by load like a menstruating woman? For it is said, you shall throw it away like feeling miserable; you will call it excrement. Since the menstruating makes impure by load, idolatry also makes impure by load.

There exists a baraita which says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like a menstruating woman. Also there exists a baraita which says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like crawling animals. The one who says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like a menstruating woman, is understandable. But concerning the one who says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like crawling animals, is it not called “unwell” only for its appurtenances? You will defile the coating of your silver gods and the clothing of your molten gold. Explain it if they were engraved on its body. Rebbi Jacob of Kefar Ḥanan said, explain it if one worships the ephod itself, similar to what is written, Gideon turned it into an ephod. Our Mishnah follows him who said, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like a menstruating woman. But did we not state: “its stones, its wood, and its dust make impure like a crawling animal”? Explain it if he worshipped the house itself and then built it up. But did we not state “there are three houses”? Explain it if he worshipped the house itself and then renovated it, as Rebbi Abba, Rab Huna said in the name of Rav: One who worships a house makes it forbidden. Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If somebody dedicates a house one does commit larceny with it. Rebbi Zeˋira said, about this the rabbis disagree. For him who says that he forbade it one may commit larceny with it, but for him who says that he does not forbid it, one does not commit larceny with it? Rebbi Ḥaggai objected before Rebbi Yose, does not a Mishnah disagree with Rav? “A trough in a rock: one does not fill from it.” Because he excavated it and after that combined it. Then not if he fixed it and after that excavated it. Is this house not as if he excavated it and after that combined it? What does Rav do with it? He explains that the hewing of stones is the completion of work on them. Does this not disagree with Rebbi Joḥanan, since Rebbi Joḥanan said, an idol which was broken is forbidden. And so we are thinking to say if in the future he cannot restore it in its entirety it is permitted according to everybody. But did we not state, “there are three kinds of stones”? Explain it that he worshipped every single stone and then builds with them. Even with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish this does not disagree, as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, an idol which was broken is permitted. And so we are thinking to say if in the future he can restore it in its entirety it is forbidden according to everybody, and Rebbi Yudan, the father of Rebbi Mattaniah, said, if they remain in their place is this not as if in the future he can restore it in its entirety? And these remain at their place. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav, one who worships a house makes it forbidden, a tree he does not make forbidden. But did we not state, “there are three kinds of Ashera”? Explain it that he worshipped a vine and then planted it.

There exists a baraita which says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like a menstruating woman. Also there exists a baraita which says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like crawling animals. The one who says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like a menstruating woman, is understandable. But concerning the one who says, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like crawling animals, is it not called “unwell” only for its appurtenances? You will defile the coating of your silver gods and the clothing of your molten gold. Explain it if they were engraved on its body. Rebbi Jacob of Kefar Ḥanan said, explain it if one worships the ephod itself, similar to what is written, Gideon turned it into an ephod. Our Mishnah follows him who said, idols are like a menstruating woman and its appurtenances are like a menstruating woman. But did we not state: “its stones, its wood, and its dust make impure like a crawling animal”? Explain it if he worshipped the house itself and then built it up. But did we not state “there are three houses”? Explain it if he worshipped the house itself and then renovated it, as Rebbi Abba, Rab Huna said in the name of Rav: One who worships a house makes it forbidden. Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If somebody dedicates a house one does commit larceny with it. Rebbi Zeˋira said, about this the rabbis disagree. For him who says that he forbade it one may commit larceny with it, but for him who says that he does not forbid it, one does not commit larceny with it? Rebbi Ḥaggai objected before Rebbi Yose, does not a Mishnah disagree with Rav? “A trough in a rock: one does not fill from it.” Because he excavated it and after that combined it. Then not if he fixed it and after that excavated it. Is this house not as if he excavated it and after that combined it? What does Rav do with it? He explains that the hewing of stones is the completion of work on them. Does this not disagree with Rebbi Joḥanan, since Rebbi Joḥanan said, an idol which was broken is forbidden. And so we are thinking to say if in the future he cannot restore it in its entirety it is permitted according to everybody. But did we not state, “there are three kinds of stones”? Explain it that he worshipped every single stone and then builds with them. Even with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish this does not disagree, as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, an idol which was broken is permitted. And so we are thinking to say if in the future he can restore it in its entirety it is forbidden according to everybody, and Rebbi Yudan, the father of Rebbi Mattaniah, said, if they remain in their place is this not as if in the future he can restore it in its entirety? And these remain at their place. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav, one who worships a house makes it forbidden, a tree he does not make forbidden. But did we not state, “there are three kinds of Ashera”? Explain it that he worshipped a vine and then planted it.

MISHNAH: From where that a ship is pure? For it is said, the way of a ship in the heart of the Sea. From where that a garden bed that is six by six hand-breadths one may sow with five kinds of seeds, four at its four sides and one in the middle? For it is said, for like the earth it will bring out its plants and like a garden it will cause it to grow its sown seeds.

Its sown seeds: the minimum of seeds are two. Rebbi Samuel bar Sisarta said, from two you infer four. Just as for two you start at the beginning of six and reduce continuously, so for four you start at the beginning of six and reduce continuously. It is impossible that there should not be a free space to plant in the middle. Rebbi Jonah said, working space joins working space but a kind does not meet another kind to jail it. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Its seed, its seeds, its sown seeds. That follows Rebbi Jehudah, since Rebbi Jehudah said six, seed, its seed, its seeds, its sown seeds. Rebbi Ḥaggai said, זרעיה has five letters; everywhere I find ו I delete it. This was asked of Rebbi Ḥuna, the scribe of the assembly, and he said, זירועיה is written plene. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: [All inside of six. Cahana in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish:] All at the outside of six. Then we should state “nine!” Rebbi Tanḥum from Bostra said, that is true. But our Mishnah speaks of a garden bed in the middle of garden beds.

MISHNAH: From where that one who loses semen on the third day is impure? For it is said, be prepared for three days, do not touch a woman. From where that one washes a baby on the third day if it falls on a Sabbath? For it is said, it was on the third day when they hurt. From where that one ties a crimson band to the head of the scapegoat? For it is said, if your sins were like scarlet they will be snow white, etc.

We have stated: “One washes the baby.” It was stated in the House of (Rav) [Rebbi]: “One washes the circumcision.” Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Practice follows him who says, “one washes the baby”. Rebbi Yose said, you are forced to say, one washes the baby. Samuel stated, one never witholds either oil or warm water from a wound on the Sabbath. Rebbi Yose said, my teacher Rebbi Zeˋira always was saying to me, state in your Mishnah, not only this but one sprinkles warm water on a wound on the Sabbath. If you are saying, “one washes the circumcision”, what is the difference between an adult and a baby?

MISHNAH: From where that anointing is like drinking on the Day of Atonement? Even though it is no proof, there is a hint, as it is said, it came like water into him and like oil in his bones.

MISHNAH: One who brings out wood to cook an easily cooked egg, spices to spice an easily cooked egg, and these combine one with the other. Shells of walnuts, skins of pomegranates, isatis, and madder to dye a small tissue like a hair net. Soda, and soap, Cimolian earth, and potash, to wash a small tissue like a hair net; Rebbi Jehudah says, to use on a stain.

MISHNAH: Pepper in any amount, ˋiṭran in any amount, spices and metals in any amount. Of the altar’s dust, of the altar’s stones, of rot of scrolls, of rot of their bindings the most minute amount since one collects them to hide them away. Rebbi Jehudah says, also one who takes out the most minute amount of appurtenances of idol worship, as it is said, nothing of the ban shall cling to your hand.

MISHNAH: One who takes out a peddler’s bag, even though it contains many kinds, is liable only for one purification sacrifice. Garden seeds less than the volume of a dried fig; Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra said, five. Green melon seeds two, squash seeds two, Egyptian bean seeds two. A live locust in any amount, dead in the volume of a dried fig. A vineyard bird either live or dead in any amount since one keeps it as medicine. Rebbi Jehudah says, also one who brings out a dead locust in the most minute amount since one keeps it as a toy for children.

MISHNAH: One who stores as seeds, as sample, or as medicine, if he takes out on the Sabbath he is liable for it in the most minute amount; but every other person is liable only for its quantity. If he brought it back he is liable only for its quantity.

HALAKHAH: “One who stores as seeds,” etc. Rebbi Jeremiah said, Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina asked, is the Mishnah Rebbi Jehudah’s? For Rebbi Jehudah said, a craftsman in the ways of his craft is liable. Rebbi Judah bar Pazi came in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina: It is Rebbi Jehudah’s. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina said, this comes only for the sample, because the buyer already was satisfied. But as to seeds and medicines even for the most minute amount he is liable. If one stored it and another took it out, he is not liable; Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar declares him liable. Where do we hold? If he took it out on the second’s initiative, everybody agrees that he is not liable; if he took it out on the first’s initiative, everybody agrees that he is liable. But we must hold when it was not explained. The rabbis say, it is a common presumption that he took it out on the second’s initiative; Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says that it is a common presumption that he took it out on the first’s initiative.

MISHNAH: He who takes out foodstuffs and puts them on the threshold, whether afterwards either he or another person took it out, is not liable since he did not complete his action in one piece. If a basket full of produce was put on the outer threshold, even if most of the produce is outside one is not liable until one take out the entire basket.

HALAKHAH: 2. Ḥizqiah said, the Mishnah is about a basket full of green melon and squash, where part of the food is inside and part outside. But a basket full of grain, when he took out in the volume of a dried fig he is liable. They said, Rebbi Joḥanan’s statement disagrees, as Rebbi Ḥiyya said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A crocheted cloth part of which was inside and part outside, if he took from one side and put it down on the other he is not liable. If he lifted it, only if he lifted it entirely at the same time.

MISHNAH: One who takes out either with his right hand, or with his left hand, or in his bosom, or on his shoulder, is liable since this was the carrying of the Kehatites. On the back of his hand, on his foot, in his mouth, on his elbow, in his ear, or in his hair, or in his money belt whose opening is downward, between his belt and his garment, or in the seam of his garment, in his shoe, or in his sandal, he is not liable since he did not take out in the way of takers-out.

MISHNAH: One who intends to carry on his front but it turns out that he carried on his back is not liable. On his back and he carried on his front he is liable. In truth a woman who ties to her sinar whether in front or back is liable since it is apt to move. Rebbi Jehudah says, the same holds for messengers.

MISHNAH: He who takes out foodstuffs less than a measure in a vessel is not liable even for the vessel since the vessel is an accessory to it, for a living person on a bier he is not liable even for the bier since the vessel is an accessory to him. For a dead person on a bier he is liable, and so for the volume of an olive from a dead person, or the volume of an olive from a carcass, or of a lentil from a crawling animal one is liable, but Rebbi Simeon declares not liable. He who takes out a loaf into the public domain is liable. If two together took it out they are not liable. If one alone is unable to take it out and two took it out they are liable, but Rebbi Simeon declares them not liable.

MISHNAH: He who takes off his fingernails one with the other or with his teeth, and similarly his hair, or his mustache, or his beard, and similarly the woman who braids, or who puts on kohl, or puts on make-up, Rebbi Eliezer declares liable for a purification sacrifice but the Sages say because of Sabbath rest. One who plucks from a flower pot with a hole is liable, with no hole is not liable, but Rebbi Simeon declares not liable in either case.

MISHNAH: If one throws from a private domain to the public domain or from the public domain to a private domain, he is liable. From a private domain to another private domain when a public domain is between them, Rebbi Aqiba declares him liable but the Sages declare him not liable.

Is there no difference, whether according to his opinion or that of the rabbis, only if it came to rest from a public domain into a private domain? In Rebbi’s opinion, even if it did not come to rest; in the rabbis’ opinion, only if it came to rest. For Rebbi Abba bar Ḥuna said in the name of Rav: Rebbi declared liable only for a private domain which was roofed. The word of Rebbi Joḥanan implies, even if it was not roofed, for Rebbi Immi said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Only if it descended to within the partitions. Rebbi Immi asked before Rebbi Joḥanan: Does the Mishnah follow Rebbi, since Rebbi considers partitions as solidly filled up? He said to him, it is everybody’s opinion. Could one not object that Rebbi said, if it is roofed? And you say, it is not roofed? What is the difference between bills of divorce and the Sabbath? Rebbi Ila said, about the Sabbath it is written: You shall not do any work; it may make itself automatically. But here he shall deliver into her hand, into her domain.

MISHNAH: How is this? Two balconies one vis-a-vis the other in the public domain: one who hands over or throws from one to the other is not liable. If they both were on the same floor, the one who hands over is liable but the one who throws is not liable, for this was the service of the Levites. Two carts, one parallel to the other in the public domain: they used to hand over from one to the other but did not throw. The enclosure of a cistern or a rock high ten [hand-breadths] and wide four [hand-breadths]: one who takes from them or puts on them is liable, less than this he is not liable.

MISHNAH: One who throws four cubits to a wall higher than ten hand-breadths is like one who throws in the air, lower than ten hand-breadths is like one who throws on the ground and one who throws four cubits on the ground is liable. One who threw less than four cubits and it rolled further than four cubits is not liable; one who threw more than four cubits and it rolled back within four cubits is liable.

HALAKHAH: 3. Our Mishnah applies if there is no hole there, but if there is a hole, there is the disagreement between Rebbi Meïr and the rabbis. In the opinion of Rebbi Meïr, whether it is four by four or it is not four by four one considers the wall as carved out. In the rabbis’ opinion, if it is four by four one considers the wall as carved out, otherwise one does not consider the wall as carved out but as closed. Rav Ḥisda said, if it extends slanting. But will it not finally descend? Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, explain it that it was a soft fig cake and it stuck. Rebbi Ḥaggai asked before Rebbi Yose, does this not imply that the declivity of a terrace belongs to the level below? He said to him, there the vegetables profit from the terrace but here people rub it and it falls down. If it would say, if there is a hole [in the wall] and it profits from the hole just as vegetables profit from the terrace, you would be justified.

MISHNAH: One who throws four cubits in the ocean is not liable. If there was a shallow spot in the water and a public thoroughfare passed through it, one who throws four cubits into it is liable. What is a shallow spot in the water? Less than ten hand-breadths. Shallow water and a public thoroughfare passed through it: one who throws four cubits in it is liable.

MISHNAH: He who throws from the sea to dry land, or from dry land to the sea, of from the sea to a ship, or from a ship to the sea, or from one ship to another is not liable. If ships are tied to one another one carries from one to the other; if they are not tied to one another, even though they be surrounded, one does not carry from one to the other.

MISHNAH: One who throws and remembers before it leaves his hand, if another person caught it, or a dog caught it, or it was burned, he is not liable. If one threw with the intention of causing an injury whether on a human or an animal and he remembered before it caused an injury, he is not liable. This is the principle: All who are liable for a purification sacrifice are liable only if beginning and end were in error. If the beginning was unintentional but the end criminal or the beginning criminal and the end unintentional they are not liable unless beginning and end be unintentional.

HALAKHAH: 6 So is the Mishnah: “he acted intentionally.” This is difficult. If somebody shot an arrow intending to kill a person, he was warned, and changed his intention; is that anything? Finally you have to say that it was intentional.

MISHNAH: How much would a builder build to become liable? One who builds anything. One who chisels stone, and one who hits with a hammer or a hatchet, or who drills anything is liable. This is the principle: Anybody who performs work on the Sabbath and whose work has permanence is liable. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, also one who hits with the back of his hammer on the anvil during work is liable because he improves the work.

The Mishnah is Rebbi Simeon’s, as it was stated: “One who scratches, who drills, who chops anything is liable; Rebbi Simeon says, one who scratches only if he scratches completely, one who drills only if he drills completely, one who chops only if he chopped completely, one who tans hides only if he tanned completely.” And Rebbi Jacob bar Ada said, this only follows Rebbi Simeon since Rebbi Simeon did not treat partial work as whole work, but the rabbis do treat partial work as whole work.

MISHNAH: He who ploughs any amount, who weeds, who prunes, or who thins anything is liable. One who collects wood, if to improve in any amount, or if as firewood to cook an easily cooked egg. One who collects grasses, if to improve in any amount, if for animals to fill a kid goat’s mouth.

MISHNAH: One who writes two letters is liable, whether with his right hand, or with his left hand, whether of one denomination or of two denominations, whether two signs of any language. Rebbi Yose said, two letters create liability only as signs since they were making signs on the planks to know which belongs to which. Rebbi Jehudah said, we find a short name from a long name, Sem from Simeon, Noah fron Naḥor, Dan from Daniel, Gad from Gadiel.