שבת דף פב

דלא מקנח לכו בחספא, ולא קטיל לכו כינא אמנייכו, ולא שליף לכו ירקא ואכיל לכו מכישא דאסר גינאה.

as you do not clean yourselves with an earthenware shard, and you do not kill lice on your garments, and you do not pull out a vegetable and eat it before you untie the bundle that was tied by the gardener? This implies that all these actions carry with them the danger of witchcraft.

אמר ליה רב הונא לרבה בריה: מאי טעמא לא שכיחת קמיה דרב חסדא, דמחדדן שמעתתיה? אמר ליה: מאי איזיל לגביה?

Rav Huna said to his son Rabba: What is the reason that you are not to be found among those who study before Rav Ḥisda, whose halakhot are incisive? Rabba said to him: For what purpose should I go to him? When I go to him, he sits me down and occupies me in mundane matters not related to Torah. For example, he said to me: One who enters a bathroom should not sit down immediately and should not exert himself excessively because the rectum rests upon three teeth, the muscles that hold it in place, and there is concern lest the teeth of the rectum dislocate through exertion and he come to danger. Rav Huna said to his son Rabba: He is dealing with matters crucial to human life, and you say that he is dealing with mundane matters? Now that I know what you meant, all the more so go before him.

דכי אזילנא לגביה מותיב לי במילי דעלמא. אמר לי: מאן דעייל לבית הכסא לא ליתיב בהדיא, ולא ליטרח טפי — דהאי כרכשתא אתלת שיני יתיב,

דילמא משתמטי שיני דכרכשתא ואתי לידי סכנה. אמר ליה: הוא עסיק בחיי דברייתא ואת אמרת במילי דעלמא?! כל שכן זיל לגביה.

היו לפניו צרור וחרס, רב הונא אמר: מקנח בצרור ואין מקנח בחרס, ורב חסדא אמר: מקנח בחרס ואין מקנח בצרור. מיתיבי: היו לפניו צרור וחרס — מקנח בחרס

The Gemara continues to discuss these halakhot. Rav Huna said: One who relieves himself and needs to wipe and has before him a stone and an earthenware shard, wipes with the stone and does not wipe with the earthenware shard, since he might injure himself. And Rav Ḥisda said: He wipes with the earthenware shard and does not wipe with the stone, which is set-aside. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: If one had before him a stone and an earthenware shard, he wipes with the earthenware shard and does not wipe with the stone. That is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Huna. Rafram bar Pappa explained it before Rav Ḥisda in accordance with the opinion of Rav Huna: It is not referring to earthenware shards, but to the smooth rims of vessels, which pose no danger.

ואין מקנח בצרור, תיובתא דרב הונא! תרגמה רפרם בר פפא קמיה דרב חסדא אליבא דרב הונא: באוגני כלים.

היו לפניו צרור ועשבים, רב חסדא ורב המנונא, חד אמר: מקנח בצרור ואין מקנח בעשבים, וחד אמר: מקנח בעשבים ואין מקנח בצרור. מיתיבי:

There were before him a stone and grasses. With regard to the preferred method to wipe on Shabbat, what is the ruling? There is a dispute between Rav Ḥisda and Rav Hamnuna. One said: He wipes with the stone and does not wipe with the grasses; and one said: He wipes with the grasses and does not wipe with the stone. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: One who wipes with something flammable, his lower teeth, which hold the intestines in place, fall out. How then, may one clean himself with grasses? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult: This, where it is permitted, is referring to moist grass; that, where it is prohibited, is referring to dry grass.

המקנח בדבר שהאור שולטת בו שיניו התחתונות נושרות! לא קשיא: הא בלחין, הא ביבשין.

הנצרך לפנות ואינו נפנה, רב חסדא ורבינא, חד אמר: רוח רעה שולטת בו, וחד אמר: רוח זוהמא שולטת בו. תניא כמאן דאמר רוח זוהמא שולטת בו, דתניא:

The Gemara continues to discuss this topic. With regard to one who needs to defecate and does not do so, there is a dispute between Rav Ḥisda and Ravina. One said: An evil spirit dominates him; and one said: An odor of filth dominates him. It was taught in a baraita in accordance with the one who said that an odor of filth dominates him, as it was taught: One who needs to defecate and eats is comparable to an oven that was heated on top of its ashes; and that is the onset of an odor of filth.

הנצרך לנקביו ואוכל — דומה לתנור שהסיקוהו על גב אפרו, וזו היא תחלת רוח זוהמא.

הוצרך ליפנות ואינו יכול ליפנות, אמר רב חסדא: יעמוד וישב, יעמוד וישב. רב חנן מנהרדעא אמר: יסתלק לצדדין. רב המנונא אמר:

The Gemara continues to discuss the issue: One who needed to defecate and is unable to do so, Rav Ḥisda said: He should stand and sit, stand and sit. Rav Ḥanan from Neharde’a said: He should move to the sides and attempt to relieve himself in a different spot. Rav Hamnuna said: He should manipulate with a stone in that place. And the Rabbis said: He should divert his thoughts to other matters. Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: All the more so that when he diverts his thoughts he will not be able to defecate. Rav Ashi said to him: He should divert his thoughts from other matters, and focus exclusively on his effort to relieve himself. Rav Yirmeya from Difti said: I saw a certain Arab who stood and sat, stood and sat, until it poured out of him like a pot. Apparently, that advice is effective.

ימשמש בצרור באותו מקום. ורבנן אמרי: יסיח דעתו. אמר ליה רב אחא בריה דרבא לרב אשי: כל שכן דכי מסח דעתיה לא מפני! אמר ליה:

יסיח דעתו מדברים אחרים. אמר רב ירמיה מדיפתי: לדידי חזי לי ההוא טייעא דקם ויתיב וקם ויתיב עד דשפך כקדרה.

תנו רבנן: הנכנס לסעודת קבע, יהלך עשר פעמים של ארבע [ארבע] אמות, ואמרי לה: ארבע פעמים של עשר עשר אמות, ונפנה, ונכנס וישב במקומו.

The Sages taught in a baraita: One who wishes to enter and partake of a regular meal that will last for some time, should pace a distance of four cubits ten times, and some say, ten cubits four times, in order to expedite the movement of the bowels, and defecate, and enter, and sit in his place.

מתני׳ חרס — כדי ליתן בין פצים לחברו, דברי רבי יהודה. רבי מאיר אומר: כדי לחתות בו את האור. רבי יוסי אומר: כדי לקבל בו רביעית.

MISHNA: One who carries out a shard of earthenware on Shabbat is liable if it is in a measure equivalent to that which is used to place between one pillar and another when piled on the ground to separate them; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: In a measure equivalent to that which is used to stoke a fire with it. Rabbi Yosei says: In a measure equivalent to that which is used to hold a quarter of a log in it. Rabbi Meir said: Although there is no proof for the matter, there is a biblical allusion to my opinion, as it is stated: “And He shall break it as a potter’s vessel is broken, smashing it without sparing; and there shall not be found among its pieces a shard to rake fire on the hearth” (Isaiah 30:14). Rabbi Yosei said to him: Is there proof from there? The verse concludes: “And to extract water from the cistern,” indicating that earthenware is significant if it is large enough to hold water.

אמר רבי מאיר: אף על פי שאין ראיה לדבר, זכר לדבר: ״לא ימצא במכתתו חרש לחתות אש מיקוד״. אמר לו רבי יוסי: משם ראיה? ״ולחשוף מים מגבא״.

גמ׳ איבעיא להו: שיעורא דרבי מאיר נפיש, או שיעורא דרבי יוסי נפיש? מסברא — שיעורא דרבי יוסי נפיש, ומקרא — שיעורא דרבי מאיר נפיש.

GEMARA: A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Is the measure stated by Rabbi Meir greater, or is the measure stated by Rabbi Yosei greater? The Gemara responds: It is reasonable to say that the measure of Rabbi Yosei is greater; however, based on the verse it appears that the measure of Rabbi Meir is greater. As, if it enters your mind to say that the measure of Rabbi Yosei with regard to the shard of earthenware is greater, would the prophet first curse him by saying that a small vessel will not be found, and then curse him by saying that a larger vessel will not be found? Abaye said: The mishna is also referring to a large shard of earthenware required to stoke the fire of a large conflagration. Even in the mishna, Rabbi Meir’s measure is larger.

דאי סלקא דעתך שיעורא דרבי יוסי נפיש, לייט לה במנא זוטרא, והדר לייט לה במנא רבה?! אמר אביי: [מתניתין נמי] לחתות אש מיקידה גדולה.

רבי יוסי אומר: משם ראיה. שפיר קאמר ליה רבי יוסי לרבי מאיר! ורבי מאיר ״לא מיבעיא״ קאמר: לא מיבעיא מידי דחשיב לאינשי דלא לישתכח ליה,

We learned in the mishna that Rabbi Yosei said to him: Is there proof from there? He cites proof for his opinion from the conclusion of that same verse. The Gemara comments: Rabbi Yosei spoke well to Rabbi Meir. And how does Rabbi Meir address that proof? He explains that the verse is stated employing the style of: There is no need. It should be understood as follows: There is no need to say that an item that is significant to people, e.g., a large shard of earthenware to stoke a fire, shall not be found, but even an item that is insignificant to people, i.e., a shard to extract water, shall not be found. Therefore, the conclusion of the verse does not contradict Rabbi Meir’s opinion.

אלא אפילו מידי דלא חשיב לאינשי לא לישתכח ליה.

הדרן עלך המוציא יין

מתני׳ אמר רבי עקיבא: מניין לעבודה זרה שמטמאה במשא כנדה, שנאמר: ״תזרם כמו דוה צא תאמר לו״ — מה נדה מטמאה במשא, אף עבודה זרה מטמאה במשא.

MISHNA: Rabbi Akiva said: From where is it derived that idolatry, e.g., a statue of a deity, transmits impurity imparted by carrying even when the person who carries it does not come into contact with it, just as a menstruating woman does? As it is stated: “And you will defile the silver overlays of your statues, and the golden plating of your idols, you will cast them away as you would a menstruating woman [dava], you will tell it, get out” (Isaiah 30:22). Just as a menstruating woman transmits impurity imparted by carrying, so too, idolatry transmits impurity imparted by carrying.

גמ׳ תנן התם: מי שהיה ביתו סמוך לעבודה זרה ונפל, אסור לבנותו. כיצד יעשה? כונס לתוך שלו ארבע אמות ובונה.

GEMARA: Since the halakhot of idolatry and the impurity it causes are beyond the scope of tractate Shabbat, the fundamentals of this halakha are cited from tractate Avoda Zara. We learned in a mishna there: One whose house was adjacent to a house of idolatry, sharing a common wall, and the dividing wall fell, it is prohibited to rebuild it as he would thereby have built a wall for idol worship. What should one do? He moves four cubits into his own land and builds the wall there.

היה שלו ושל עבודה זרה, נידון מחצה על מחצה. אבניו ועציו ועפריו מטמאים כשרץ, שנאמר: ״שקץ תשקצנו וגו׳״. רבי עקיבא אומר כנדה, שנאמר:

If the wall stood upon ground that belonged to him and to the house of idolatry, the area is calculated as half and half as far as moving into his property before rebuilding the wall, and one may build the wall four cubits from the middle of the wall. Its stones and its wood and its dust from the house of idolatry transmit impurity like creeping animals, and by rabbinic decree, one who touches them becomes impure like one who touches a creeping animal, as it is stated: “And you shall not bring an abomination into your house and become banned like it, you shall utterly detest it [shaketz teshaketzenu] and you shall utterly abhor it, for it is a banned object” (Deuteronomy 7:26). Shaketz is a term used with regard to creeping animals. Rabbi Akiva says: Idolatry transmits impurity like a menstruating woman, as it is stated: “You will cast them away as you would a menstruating woman [dava]” (Isaiah 30:22). Just as a menstruating woman transmits impurity imparted by carrying, as one who moves a menstruating woman without touching her becomes impure, so too, idolatry transmits impurity imparted by carrying. Rabba said in explanation of that which the verse said: “You will cast them away”: Make them foreign to you like a stranger. The end of the same verse: “You will tell it, get out” means that under no circumstances can you say to it, come in.

״תזרם כמו דוה״ — מה נדה מטמאה במשא, אף עבודה זרה מטמאה במשא. אמר רבה: ״תזרם״ דאמר קרא, נכרינהו מינך כזר.

״צא תאמר לו״ — הכנס אל תאמר לו.

ואמר רבה: במשא דכולי עלמא לא פליגי דמטמאה, דהא אתקש לנדה. כי פליגי באבן מסמא. רבי עקיבא סבר כנדה: מה נדה מטמאה באבן מסמא — אף

And to the essence of the dispute, Rabba said: With regard to impurity imparted by carrying, everyone agrees that idol worship transmits impurity, as it is juxtaposed to a menstruating woman in the verse. Where they argue, it is with regard to the halakha of a very heavy stone. There is a special law with regard to the ritual impurity of a zav and a menstruating woman. If they sit on an object, even if it is an object that cannot become ritually impure, and beneath that object is a vessel, even though the weight of the zav and the menstruating woman has no effect on the vessel, it becomes ritually impure. Rabbi Akiva holds that the impurity of idolatry is like the impurity of a menstruating woman in all respects; just as a menstruating woman transmits impurity via a very heavy stone, so too, idolatry transmits impurity via a very heavy stone. And the Rabbis hold that in this regard, the impurity of idolatry is like the impurity of a creeping animal; just as a creeping animal does not transmit impurity via a very heavy stone, so too, idolatry does not transmit impurity via a very heavy stone.

עבודה זרה מטמאה באבן מסמא. ורבנן סברי כשרץ: מה שרץ לא מטמא באבן מסמא — אף עבודה זרה לא מטמאה באבן מסמא.

ולרבי עקיבא, למאי הלכתא איתקש לשרץ? — למשמשיה. ולרבנן, למאי הלכתא איתקש לנדה? — למשא. ולקשיה רחמנא לנבלה! אין הכי נמי, אלא: מה נדה אינה לאברין,

The Gemara asks: And according to Rabbi Akiva, who holds that the impurity of idolatry is similar to that of a menstruating woman in all respects, for what halakha was it juxtaposed to a creeping animal? The Gemara explains: In his opinion, it was not stated in reference to idolatry itself, but rather to its accessories, objects used for the purposes of idolatry. The Gemara asks further: And according to the Rabbis, for what halakha was it juxtaposed to a menstruating woman? To teach that it transmits impurity through carrying. And instead of juxtaposing idolatry to both a menstruating woman and to creeping animals, let the Torah juxtapose it to an animal carcass, which transmits impurity through carrying and does not transmit impurity via a very heavy stone, since according to the Rabbis the law is the same for idolatry. The Gemara answers: Yes, it is indeed so. In that sense, juxtaposition to an animal carcass would suffice. However, the juxtaposition to a menstruating woman teaches: Just as a menstruating woman does not transmit impurity through limbs, as if the limb of a menstruating woman is supported by a vessel, the vessel does not become ritually impure (Ra’avad), so too, idolatry does not transmit impurity through limbs, as a severed part of an idol does not transmit impurity. The Gemara is puzzled by this: But that which Rav Ḥama bar Guria raised as a dilemma: Does idolatry have the capacity to transmit impurity through limbs or does it not have the capacity to transmit impurity through limbs? Resolve the dilemma from this, as according to the opinion of the Rabbis, it does not transmit impurity through limbs. And the Gemara replies: Although that is so, Rav Ḥama bar Guria raised the dilemma in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva and the dilemma is unresolved.

אף עבודה זרה אינה לאברין. ואלא הא דבעי רב חמא בר גוריא: עבודה זרה ישנה לאברין או אינה לאברין? תיפשוט ליה מהא, דלרבנן אינה לאברין!

רב חמא בר גוריא אליבא דרבי עקיבא בעי לה.

ורבי אלעזר אמר: באבן מסמא דכולי עלמא לא פליגי דלא מטמאה. כי פליגי במשא: רבי עקיבא סבר כנדה, מה נדה מטמאה במשא — אף עבודה זרה מטמאה במשא.

And in another approach to this dispute, Rabbi Elazar said: With regard to a very heavy stone, everyone agrees that idolatry does not transmit impurity in that manner. Where they disagree is with regard to impurity imparted by carrying. Rabbi Akiva holds that the legal status of idolatry is like that of a menstruating woman: Just as a menstruating woman transmits impurity through carrying, so too, idolatry transmits impurity through carrying. And the Rabbis hold that the legal status of idolatry is like that of a creeping animal: Just as a creeping animal does not transmit impurity through carrying, so too, idolatry does not transmit impurity through carrying. The Gemara asks: And according to Rabbi Akiva’s opinion, with regard to what halakha was idolatry juxtaposed to a creeping animal? The Gemara answers: With regard to the halakha that its accessories do not transmit impurity through carrying. The Gemara asks: And according to the Rabbis, with regard to what halakha was idolatry juxtaposed to a menstruating woman? The Gemara answers: Just as a menstruating woman does not transmit impurity through her limbs, so too, idolatry does not transmit impurity through its limbs.

ורבנן סברי כשרץ, מה שרץ לא מטמא במשא — אף עבודה זרה לא מטמאה במשא. ורבי עקיבא, למאי הלכתא איתקש לשרץ? למשמשיה. ורבנן למאי הלכתא איתקש לנדה?

מה נדה אינה לאברים, אף עבודה זרה אינה לאברים.