shabbat

But could he not deduce [the answer] from his own statement, for we have learned: A window-shutter: R. Eliezer says if it is fastened or hung [on the window-frame] one may shut a window with it [on Shabbat], but if not, one may not shut a window with it; but the Sages say: in either case one may shut the window with it?

The minimum size of an etrog: Rafram b. Papa said: As is the dispute here, so is the dispute with regard to rounded pebbles. For it has been taught, It is permitted on Shabbat to carry three rounded smooth pebbles into [a field] lavatory. And what must be their size? R. Meir ruled, The size of a nut, R. Judah ruled, That of an egg.

1) If the first day of the festival falls on Shabbat, all the people bring their lulavim to the synagogue [on Friday]. 2) The next day they arise early [and come to the synagogue] and each one recognizes his own [lulav] and takes it, since the sages said “one cannot fulfill his obligation on the first day of the festival with his friend’s lulav.” 3) But on the other days of the festival one may fulfill his obligation with the lulav of his fellow. 4) Rabbi Yose says: if the first day of the festival fell on Shabbat, and he forgot and carried out his lulav into the public domain, he is not liable, since he brought it out while under the influence [of a religious act].

1) If the first day of the festival falls on Shabbat, all the people bring their lulavim to the synagogue [on Friday]. 2) The next day they arise early [and come to the synagogue] and each one recognizes his own [lulav] and takes it, since the sages said “one cannot fulfill his obligation on the first day of the festival with his friend’s lulav.” 3) But on the other days of the festival one may fulfill his obligation with the lulav of his fellow. 4) Rabbi Yose says: if the first day of the festival fell on Shabbat, and he forgot and carried out his lulav into the public domain, he is not liable, since he brought it out while under the influence [of a religious act].

R. Yose says: If the first day of the festival [fell on Shabbat, and he forgot and carried out his lulav into the public domain, he is not liable, since he brought it out while under the influence of a religious act]. Abaye said:

They objected: R. Yose says: One who slaughters a daily offering which has not been properly examined on Shabbat, he is liable to bring a sin-offering and another daily offering must be offered.

1) A woman may receive [a lulav] from her son or from her husband and put it back in water on Shabbat. 2) Rabbi Judah says: on Shabbat they may be put it back [into the water in which they were previously kept], on a festival day [water] may be added, and on the intermediate days [of the festival the water] may also be changed.

1) A woman may receive [a lulav] from her son or from her husband and put it back in water on Shabbat. 2) Rabbi Judah says: on Shabbat they may be put it back [into the water in which they were previously kept], on a festival day [water] may be added, and on the intermediate days [of the festival the water] may also be changed.

5) “The lulav for seven.” How so? a) If the first day of the festival fell on Shabbat, the lulav [is taken for] seven days; on any other day, [it is taken] for six.

6) “The aravah—seven days.” How is this? a) If the seventh day of [the ritual of] the aravah fell on Shabbat, [it lasts] seven days; if it fell on any other day, [it lasts only] six.

7) The mitzvah of the lulav—how was it carried out? 8) If the first day of the festival fell on Shabbat, they brought their lulavim to the Temple Mount, and the attendants would receive them and arrange them on top of the portico, and the elders laid theirs in the chamber. And they would teach the people to say, “Whoever gets my lulav in his hand, let it be his as a gift.”

GEMARA. But why [should it be forbidden to take the lulav on Shabbat]? It involves only a mere movement, why then should it not override the Shabbat? Rabbah said: It is a restrictive decree, lest one take [the lulav] in his hand and go to an expert in order to learn [how to wave it]

GEMARA. But why [should it be forbidden to take the lulav on Shabbat]? It involves only a mere movement, why then should it not override the Shabbat? Rabbah said: It is a restrictive decree, lest one take [the lulav] in his hand and go to an expert in order to learn [how to wave it]

But if so, the same should be true of the first day? The first day! The Rabbis enacted that he should take it at home [on the first day that falls on Shabbat]. That is true after the enactment, but what can you say about before the enactment?

But if so, the same should be true now! We do not know how to fix the New Moon. But they, who know how to fix the New Moon, let it override [the Shabbat]?

This is indeed so; for in our Mishnah we have learned: If the first day of the festival, fell on Shabbat, all the people brought their lulavim to the Temple Mount, while in another Mishnah we have learned [that they brought them] to the Synagogue, consequently you may deduce from these that the former refers to the time when the Temple was in existence while the latter refers to the time when the Temple was no longer in existence. This is conclusive.

On the day" even on Shabbat; "First" even in the Provinces; "The first" this teaches that it overrides only the first day of the Festival.

The Master said, "On the day" even if it is Shabbat. But since [the taking of the lulav] is just ordinary carrying, do we need a verse to permit ordinary carrying? Rava said: It was necessary only with regard to those things that enable the lulav, and this is in accordance with a ruling of that Tanna of whom it has been taught, The lulav and all the things that enable it override the Shabbat, the words of R. Eliezer. What is the reason of R. Eliezer?

The Master said, "On the day" even if it is Shabbat. But since [the taking of the lulav] is just ordinary carrying, do we need a verse to permit ordinary carrying? Rava said: It was necessary only with regard to those things that enable the lulav, and this is in accordance with a ruling of that Tanna of whom it has been taught, The lulav and all the things that enable it override the Shabbat, the words of R. Eliezer. What is the reason of R. Eliezer?

Scripture says: "On the day," implying, even on Shabbat. But what do the rabbis do with the words "on the day"? They need it to infer from it that on the day, [the lulav is taken] but not at night. And R. Eliezer, from where does he deduce that [the lulav is to be taken] by day, and not at night? He deduces it from the conclusion of the verse, "And you shall rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days" "days" but not nights. And the Rabbis? If I learned it from that verse, I might have said that we ought to compare ‘days’ [mentioned here] with ‘days’ mentioned with regard to the Sukkah so that just as there [the expression of] ‘days’ includes nights, so here also [the expression of] ‘days’ includes nights.

The aravah for seven days. How so? Why does the [ritual of the] aravah on the seventh day override Shabbat? R. Yohanan said: In order to publicize the fact that it is a [commandment] of the Torah. But if so, let the lulav also override Shabbat in order to publicize the fact that it is a from the Torah?

The aravah for seven days. How so? Why does the [ritual of the] aravah on the seventh day override Shabbat? R. Yohanan said: In order to publicize the fact that it is a [commandment] of the Torah. But if so, let the lulav also override Shabbat in order to publicize the fact that it is a from the Torah?

But if so, ought it not override [the Shabbat] on any day? [If that were done] people would come to hold the lulav in light esteem. Let it [the aravah] override [Shabbat] on the first day of the Festival? It will not be clear [that it is the aravah that overrides Shabbat, for] people might say that it is the lulav which overrides it.

But if so, ought it not override [the Shabbat] on any day? [If that were done] people would come to hold the lulav in light esteem. Let it [the aravah] override [Shabbat] on the first day of the Festival? It will not be clear [that it is the aravah that overrides Shabbat, for] people might say that it is the lulav which overrides it.

But if so, ought it not override [the Shabbat] on any day? [If that were done] people would come to hold the lulav in light esteem. Let it [the aravah] override [Shabbat] on the first day of the Festival? It will not be clear [that it is the aravah that overrides Shabbat, for] people might say that it is the lulav which overrides it.

Let it override one of the other days? Since [the permission to override Shabbat] was removed from the first day, it was transferred to the seventh.

But if so, let it override Shabbat at the present time also? We do not know when New Moon was set.

But in their case since they know when the New Moon was fixed, why should it not override [Shabbat]? When Bar Hadya came, he explained that this never happened. When, however, Ravin came and all the company that used to go down [from Palestine to Babylon] they stated that it did happen, and that it did not override [the Sabbath].

He raised an objection against him: The lulav overrides Shabbat on the first day, and the aravah on the last day. On time the seventh day of the [ritual of the] aravah fell on Shabbat, and they brought saplings of aravot on the eve of Shabbat and placed them in the courtyard of the Temple. The Boethusians discovered them and took them and hid them under some stones.

He raised an objection against him: The lulav overrides Shabbat on the first day, and the aravah on the last day. On time the seventh day of the [ritual of the] aravah fell on Shabbat, and they brought saplings of aravot on the eve of Shabbat and placed them in the courtyard of the Temple. The Boethusians discovered them and took them and hid them under some stones.

He raised an objection against him: The lulav overrides Shabbat on the first day, and the aravah on the last day. On time the seventh day of the [ritual of the] aravah fell on Shabbat, and they brought saplings of aravot on the eve of Shabbat and placed them in the courtyard of the Temple. The Boethusians discovered them and took them and hid them under some stones.

The next day the ammei ha’aretz discovered them and removed them from under the stones, and the priests brought them in and stood them up on the sides of the altar. For the Boethusians do not admit that the beating of the aravah overrides Shabbat.

Then why should it not override [Shabbat]? Since for us it does not override [Shabbat] it does not override it for them either. But is there not the first day of the Festival which for us does not override [Shabbat], but it does for them?

Then why should it not override [Shabbat]? Since for us it does not override [Shabbat] it does not override it for them either. But is there not the first day of the Festival which for us does not override [Shabbat], but it does for them?

Then why should it not override [Shabbat]? Since for us it does not override [Shabbat] it does not override it for them either. But is there not the first day of the Festival which for us does not override [Shabbat], but it does for them?

I can answer: For them also it does not override [Shabbat]. Does not then a contradiction arise between those two mishnayot, since one teaches “all the people brought their lulavim to the Temple Mount,” and the other mishnah teaches... that they brought them] to the synagogue, and we answered, that the one referred to Temple times and the other to the time after the destruction of the Temple? No; both refer to Temple times, but there is nevertheless no contradiction

Aibu said in the name of R. Elazar b. Zadok: One should not walk more than three parasangs on erev Shabbat. R. Kahana said: They made this statement only [in reference to a man who was going to] his home, but if he was going to his inn he relies upon [the food] which he has with him.

1) As was its performance on a weekday, so was its performance on Shabbat, except that they would gather them on the eve of Shabbat and place them in golden basins so that they would not become wilted. 2) Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka says: they used to bring palm branches and they would beat them on the ground at the sides of the altar, and that day was called “[the day of] the beating of the palm branches.” 3) Immediately after beating the willows (or palm branches) the children undo their lulavs and eat their etrogim.

1) As was its performance on a weekday, so was its performance on Shabbat, except that they would gather them on the eve of Shabbat and place them in golden basins so that they would not become wilted. 2) Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka says: they used to bring palm branches and they would beat them on the ground at the sides of the altar, and that day was called “[the day of] the beating of the palm branches.” 3) Immediately after beating the willows (or palm branches) the children undo their lulavs and eat their etrogim.

As it was performed on weekdays, so was it was performed on Shabbat, save that on the eve of Shabbat he would fill a non-sanctified golden barrel from the Shiloah, and place it in the chamber. If it was poured away or uncovered, he would refill it from the laver, f... or wine or water which has become uncovered is invalid for the altar.

As it was performed on weekdays, so was it was performed on Shabbat, save that on the eve of Shabbat he would fill a non-sanctified golden barrel from the Shiloah, and place it in the chamber. If it was poured away or uncovered, he would refill it from the laver, f... or wine or water which has become uncovered is invalid for the altar.

As it was performed on weekdays, so was it was performed on Shabbat, [save that on the eve of Shabbat he would fill a non-sanctified golden barrel from the Shiloah, and place it in the chamber.] But why [bring the water in a non-sanctified vessel]? Let him bring it in a sanctified one? Zeiri said: [The author of our Mishnah] is of the opinion that no fixed amount has been prescribed for the water [of libation] and that the ministering vessels sanctify their contents even if there was no intention

As it was performed on weekdays, so was it was performed on Shabbat, [save that on the eve of Shabbat he would fill a non-sanctified golden barrel from the Shiloah, and place it in the chamber.] But why [bring the water in a non-sanctified vessel]? Let him bring it in a sanctified one? Zeiri said: [The author of our Mishnah] is of the opinion that no fixed amount has been prescribed for the water [of libation] and that the ministering vessels sanctify their contents even if there was no intention

Mishnah: The flute was for five or six days. This refers to the flute at the Bet Hashoevah [the place of the water-drawing] which does not override Shabbat or the festival day.

Our Rabbis taught: The [playing of the] flute overrides the Shabbat, the words of R. Yose bar Judah. But the Sages say: It does not override even the Festival. R. Yoseph said: The dispute concerns only the song that accompanied the sacrifices, since R. Yose holds that the essential feature of the [Temple] music is with an instrument, so it is considered Temple service and it overrides the Shabbat, whereas the Rabbis hold that the essential feature of the [Temple] music is the singing by voice, so the [playing of the instruments] is not considered Temple service and does not, therefore, override Shabbat But with regard to the singing at the Festival of Water-Drawing, all agree that it is a just an expression of rejoicing and does not, therefore, override the Sabbath.

Our Rabbis taught: The [playing of the] flute overrides the Shabbat, the words of R. Yose bar Judah. But the Sages say: It does not override even the Festival. R. Yoseph said: The dispute concerns only the song that accompanied the sacrifices, since R. Yose holds that the essential feature of the [Temple] music is with an instrument, so it is considered Temple service and it overrides the Shabbat, whereas the Rabbis hold that the essential feature of the [Temple] music is the singing by voice, so the [playing of the instruments] is not considered Temple service and does not, therefore, override Shabbat But with regard to the singing at the Festival of Water-Drawing, all agree that it is a just an expression of rejoicing and does not, therefore, override the Sabbath.

Our Rabbis taught: The [playing of the] flute overrides the Shabbat, the words of R. Yose bar Judah. But the Sages say: It does not override even the Festival. R. Yoseph said: The dispute concerns only the song that accompanied the sacrifices, since R. Yose holds that the essential feature of the [Temple] music is with an instrument, so it is considered Temple service and it overrides the Shabbat, whereas the Rabbis hold that the essential feature of the [Temple] music is the singing by voice, so the [playing of the instruments] is not considered Temple service and does not, therefore, override Shabbat But with regard to the singing at the Festival of Water-Drawing, all agree that it is a just an expression of rejoicing and does not, therefore, override the Sabbath.

R. Yirmiyah b. Abba said that the dispute concerns only the music at the Simchat Bet Hashoevah, since R. Yose b. Judah holds that even an added expression of rejoicing overrides the Shabbat, while the Rabbis hold that an added expression of rejoicing does not override [either] the Shabbat [or the Festival], but as regards the music which accompanied the sacrifices, all agree that it is [an integral part of] the worship and it overrides the Shabbat.

R. Yirmiyah b. Abba said that the dispute concerns only the music at the Simchat Bet Hashoevah, since R. Yose b. Judah holds that even an added expression of rejoicing overrides the Shabbat, while the Rabbis hold that an added expression of rejoicing does not override [either] the Shabbat [or the Festival], but as regards the music which accompanied the sacrifices, all agree that it is [an integral part of] the worship and it overrides the Shabbat.

R. Yirmiyah b. Abba said that the dispute concerns only the music at the Simchat Bet Hashoevah, since R. Yose b. Judah holds that even an added expression of rejoicing overrides the Shabbat, while the Rabbis hold that an added expression of rejoicing does not override [either] the Shabbat [or the Festival], but as regards the music which accompanied the sacrifices, all agree that it is [an integral part of] the worship and it overrides the Shabbat.

They raised an objection: [It was taught:] The music which accompanied the Simchat Bet Hashoevah overrides Shabbat, the words of R. Yose b. Judah. The sages, however, rule that it does not override even the Festival. Is not this a refutation of R. Joseph? It is indeed a refutation.

Can we also say that they dispute only concerning the music which accompanied the Simchat Bet Hashoevah, but that with regard to the music that accompanied the sacrifices all agree that it overrides Shabbat, and this would, therefore, constitute a double refutation of R. Joseph?

R. Joseph could answer you: They dispute concerning the music that accompanied the Simchat Bet Hashoevah and the same applies also to [that which accompanied] the sacrifices, and the reason that they disagree with regard to the Simchat Bet Hashoevah was in order to inform you of the extent of the view of R. Yose b. Judah, that even the music of the Simchat Bet Hashoevah overrides [the Shabbat].

But didn’t we teach: This refers to the flute at the Bet Hashoevah, which overrides neither Shabbat nor the festival day. This [playing] does not override the Shabbat, but the playing which accompanied the sacrifices does override [the Shabbat]? Now whose view is it? If you were to say that it is that of R. Yose b. Judah, did he not state that the playing which accompanies the Simchat Bet Hashoevah also overrides Shabbat? Consequently it must be, the view of the Rabbis, and thus there is a double refutation of R. Joseph? It is indeed a refutation.

But didn’t we teach: This refers to the flute at the Bet Hashoevah, which overrides neither Shabbat nor the festival day. This [playing] does not override the Shabbat, but the playing which accompanied the sacrifices does override [the Shabbat]? Now whose view is it? If you were to say that it is that of R. Yose b. Judah, did he not state that the playing which accompanies the Simchat Bet Hashoevah also overrides Shabbat? Consequently it must be, the view of the Rabbis, and thus there is a double refutation of R. Joseph? It is indeed a refutation.

But didn’t we teach: This refers to the flute at the Bet Hashoevah, which overrides neither Shabbat nor the festival day. This [playing] does not override the Shabbat, but the playing which accompanied the sacrifices does override [the Shabbat]? Now whose view is it? If you were to say that it is that of R. Yose b. Judah, did he not state that the playing which accompanies the Simchat Bet Hashoevah also overrides Shabbat? Consequently it must be, the view of the Rabbis, and thus there is a double refutation of R. Joseph? It is indeed a refutation.

But didn’t we teach: This refers to the flute at the Bet Hashoevah, which overrides neither Shabbat nor the festival day. This [playing] does not override the Shabbat, but the playing which accompanied the sacrifices does override [the Shabbat]? Now whose view is it? If you were to say that it is that of R. Yose b. Judah, did he not state that the playing which accompanies the Simchat Bet Hashoevah also overrides Shabbat? Consequently it must be, the view of the Rabbis, and thus there is a double refutation of R. Joseph? It is indeed a refutation.

4) And on the eve of Shabbat they would add another six, three as a sign to the people to stop working and three to mark a distinction between the holy and the profane.

5) On the eve of Shabbat in the intermediate days of the [Sukkoth] festival, there were [therefore] forty-eight blasts: three at the opening of the gates, three at the upper gate, three at the lower gate, three at the water-drawing, three at the altar, nine at the daily morning sacrifice, nine at the daily evening sacrifice, nine at the additional sacrifices, three as a sign to the people to cease from work, and three to mark a distinction between the holy and the profane.

On the eve of Shabbat during the intermediate days of the festival etc. But [the sounding of the shofar] on the tenth step is not mentioned. Who is in agreement with our Mishnah? It is in agreement with that of R. Eliezer b. Jacob, for it has been taught: Three blasts on the tenth step. R. Eliezer b. Jacob ruled, Three at the altar.

We have learned “On the eve of Shabbat during the intermediate days of the festival there were [therefore] forty-eight blasts.” Now if it were so, why was it not stated that on Shabbat during the festival it was possible to have fifty-one blasts? R. Zera answered, Because the trumpet was not sounded at the opening of the gates on the Shabbat.

We have learned “On the eve of Shabbat during the intermediate days of the festival there were [therefore] forty-eight blasts.” Now if it were so, why was it not stated that on Shabbat during the festival it was possible to have fifty-one blasts? R. Zera answered, Because the trumpet was not sounded at the opening of the gates on the Shabbat.

We have learned “On the eve of Shabbat during the intermediate days of the festival there were [therefore] forty-eight blasts.” Now if it were so, why was it not stated that on Shabbat during the festival it was possible to have fifty-one blasts? R. Zera answered, Because the trumpet was not sounded at the opening of the gates on the Shabbat.

Rava said: Who is not concerned about the flour [he grinds out]? First, because we have learned every day; And secondly, even if there were the same number, it should still have been stated “on the Shabbat of the Festival they blew forty-eight blasts” since from this statement you could make two deductions, that of R. Eliezer b. Jacob and that of R. Aha b. Hanina.

Rather Rava explained: Because the trumpet was not sounded for the Water-Drawing on the Sabbath, so that the number was far less. But let it also teach Rosh Hashanah that fell on Shabbat for on it there are three additional sacrifices: The additional offering of Rosh Hashanah, the additional offering of Rosh Hodesh, and the additional offering of Shabbat?

Rather Rava explained: Because the trumpet was not sounded for the Water-Drawing on the Sabbath, so that the number was far less. But let it also teach Rosh Hashanah that fell on Shabbat for on it there are three additional sacrifices: The additional offering of Rosh Hashanah, the additional offering of Rosh Hodesh, and the additional offering of Shabbat?

It was necessary to teach the instance of the eve Shabbat during Hol Hamoed in order to teach us that the law is in agreement with R. Eliezer b. Jacob. Did he say let it teach one case instead of the other? [The question in fact was] let this one and that one be taught? [The Tanna of our Mishnah] might mentioned some and omitted others. But what else did he omit to justify this omission also?

Rather, What else then was omitted that we might say that this also was similarly omitted? The other omission was the eve of Pesah which fell on the eve of Shabbat, when six blasts are to be subtracted and six are to be added.

And never more than forty-eight. No? But is there not the eve of Pesah which falls on Shabbat, on which according to R. Judah, there were fifty-one blasts, and according to the Rabbis there were fifty-seven?

[Our Mishnah] mentioned only those which recur every year, but the eve of the Pesah which falls on the Sabbath, since it does not occur every year, it did not teach. Does then erev Shabbat during the Festival of Sukkot occur every year? Sometimes it does not happen at all, and when is this so, for instance, the first day of the Festival coincides with the eve of Shabbat?

[Our Mishnah] mentioned only those which recur every year, but the eve of the Pesah which falls on the Sabbath, since it does not occur every year, it did not teach. Does then erev Shabbat during the Festival of Sukkot occur every year? Sometimes it does not happen at all, and when is this so, for instance, the first day of the Festival coincides with the eve of Shabbat?

When the first day of the Festival [of Sukkot] would coincide with the eve of Shabbat, they postpone it. What is the reason? Because if the first day of the Festival of Sukkot were to fall on the eve of Shabbat, when would Yom Kippur be? On the [previous] Sunday. Therefore it is postponed.

When the first day of the Festival [of Sukkot] would coincide with the eve of Shabbat, they postpone it. What is the reason? Because if the first day of the Festival of Sukkot were to fall on the eve of Shabbat, when would Yom Kippur be? On the [previous] Sunday. Therefore it is postponed.

But do we postpone it? Have we not in fact learned: The fats [of offerings performed on] Shabbat may be offered on Yom Kippur; And R. Zera stated:

When I was in the school of Rav in Babylon I used to say that which has been taught, "If Yom Kippur fell on the eve of Shabbat, they did not sound the trumpet, and if it fell at the conclusion of Shabbat they did not recite the Havdalah" is agreed to by all, but when I came up to Palestine I found R. Judah the son of R. Shimon b. Pazzi sitting and teaching that it was in agreement with R. Akiba only?

When I was in the school of Rav in Babylon I used to say that which has been taught, "If Yom Kippur fell on the eve of Shabbat, they did not sound the trumpet, and if it fell at the conclusion of Shabbat they did not recite the Havdalah" is agreed to by all, but when I came up to Palestine I found R. Judah the son of R. Shimon b. Pazzi sitting and teaching that it was in agreement with R. Akiba only?

An objection was raised: If Rosh Hodesh fell on Shabbat, the Psalm of Rosh Hodesh supersedes the Psalm of Shabbat. Now if the law were [as R. Aha stated], why should not one say both that of the Rosh Hodesh and that of Shabbat?

An objection was raised: If Rosh Hodesh fell on Shabbat, the Psalm of Rosh Hodesh supersedes the Psalm of Shabbat. Now if the law were [as R. Aha stated], why should not one say both that of the Rosh Hodesh and that of Shabbat?

An objection was raised: If Rosh Hodesh fell on Shabbat, the Psalm of Rosh Hodesh supersedes the Psalm of Shabbat. Now if the law were [as R. Aha stated], why should not one say both that of the Rosh Hodesh and that of Shabbat?

An objection was raised: Rava b. Samuel taught: It might have been that that just as they sound a blast for Shabbat on its own and for Rosh Hodesh on its own, so too they sound a blast for each additional offering (musaf) separately. scripture says, “And on your New Moons” (Numbers 10:10). This is a refutation of R. Aha. It is indeed a refutation.

And if Shabbat occurred on any of these days”are moved” is to be superseded.

Mishanh. 1) A festival which fell next to Shabbat, either before or after it, all the watches shared equally in the distribution of the showbread. 2) If one day intervened between them [Shabbat and Yom Tov], the watch whose time of service was fixed [for that week] took ten [of the] loaves, while they that were detained took two. 3) On all other days of the year the incoming watch took six loaves and the outgoing watch six. a) Rabbi Judah said, the incoming watch took seven and the outgoing five.

Mishanh. 1) A festival which fell next to Shabbat, either before or after it, all the watches shared equally in the distribution of the showbread. 2) If one day intervened between them [Shabbat and Yom Tov], the watch whose time of service was fixed [for that week] took ten [of the] loaves, while they that were detained took two. 3) On all other days of the year the incoming watch took six loaves and the outgoing watch six. a) Rabbi Judah said, the incoming watch took seven and the outgoing five.

Gemara. What is meant by before and what by after? If you say that before refers to the first day of the Festival and after to the last day of the festival, isn't this then the Shabbat of Hol Hamoed?

If it falls on Shabbat, the villages and large towns move the reading up to the day of gathering, and the walled places read on the next day. If it falls on Sunday, the villages move the reading up to the day of gathering, the large towns read on that day, and the walled cities on the day following.

Joshua b. Levi also said: Women are obligated to read the Megillah, since they were also part of the same miracle. Joshua b. Levi further said: If Purim falls on Shabbat, they ask questions and they offer derashot on the subject of the day.

But did Rabbi really hold that towns should not shift their time to the day of gathering? Has it not been taught: If it falls on Shabbat, villages push the reading forward to the day of gathering, and large towns read on Friday and walled cities on Sunday. Rabbi said: I say that, since the towns have to shift their time, they may as well shift it to the day of gathering?

How now! There, the proper time is Shabbat, and since they must shift they can shift [further]; but here the proper time is Friday.

Whose authority does R. Helbo in the name of R. Huna follow: If Purim falls on Shabbat, all shift their reading to the day of gathering? All shift their reading, do you really think? But aren’t there the walled cities which read on the Sunday? Rather [say]: All who shift [their readings] shifted to the day of gathering. According to whom? — According to Rabbi.

But at any rate all agree that the Megillah is not to be read on Shabbat. What is the reason? Rabbah said: All are obligated to read the Megillah, but not all are competent to read it, and there is therefore a decree [not to read on Shabbat] lest one take the scroll in his hand and go to an expert to learn and [in doing so] carry it four cubits in a public domain.

But at any rate all agree that the Megillah is not to be read on Shabbat. What is the reason? Rabbah said: All are obligated to read the Megillah, but not all are competent to read it, and there is therefore a decree [not to read on Shabbat] lest one take the scroll in his hand and go to an expert to learn and [in doing so] carry it four cubits in a public domain.

This is also the reason for [not blowing] the shofar on Shabbat and [for not carrying] the lulav.

But did Rav actually say this? Did not R. Judah the son of R. Shmuel b. Shilat say in the name of Rav: If Purim falls on Shabbat, Friday is the proper time? Friday is the proper time! Surely Shabbat is the proper time! What Rav must have meant is this: The alternative time is like the proper time. Just as at the proper time [the Megillah may be read] by an individual, so at the alternative time [it may be read] by an individual.

But did Rav actually say this? Did not R. Judah the son of R. Shmuel b. Shilat say in the name of Rav: If Purim falls on Shabbat, Friday is the proper time? Friday is the proper time! Surely Shabbat is the proper time! What Rav must have meant is this: The alternative time is like the proper time. Just as at the proper time [the Megillah may be read] by an individual, so at the alternative time [it may be read] by an individual.

In respect of these they said that they should be moved up but not postponed. But with regard to the bringing the wood for the priests, the [fast of] Tisha B’Av, the hagigah, and assembling the people they postpone [until after Shabbat] and they do not move them up.

But with regard to the bringing the wood for the priests, the [fast of] Tisha B’Av, the hagigah (the festival sacrifice), and assembling the people they postpone [until after Shabbat] and they do not move them up. [The reason for the Fast of] Tisha B’av is that we do not hasten the approach of punishment. [The reason for] the festival sacrifice and the assembling of the people is that the time for their obligation has not yet arrived.

A Tanna taught: The festival sacrifice and all the period of the festival sacrifice is postponed. We understand what is meant by the festival sacrifice, that if it falls on Shabbat we postpone it till after Shabbat. But what is meant by the “period of the festival sacrifice”?

A Tanna taught: The festival sacrifice and all the period of the festival sacrifice is postponed. We understand what is meant by the festival sacrifice, that if it falls on Shabbat we postpone it till after Shabbat. But what is meant by the “period of the festival sacrifice”?

R. Oshaya said: This is what he meant: The festival sacrifice [is postponed if its time] occurs on Shabbat, and the “burnt-offering of appearance” is postponed even until after the festival day which is the proper time for a festival sacrifice.

R. Ashi said: [It means that] the festival sacrifice may be postponed for the whole period of the festival sacrifice, and even on Shavuot which is only one day, it may be postponed [for seven days], as we have learned: [Beth Hillel] agree that if Shavuot falls on Shabbat, the day for killing [the sacrifice] is after Shabbat.