Beitzah 31b:2ביצה ל״א ב:ב
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Beitzah 31b:2"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
31bל״א ב

והאמרת רישא אין מבקעין כלל אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל חסורי מחסרא והכי קתני אין מבקעין מן הסואר של קורות ולא מן הקורה שנשברה ביו"ט אבל מבקעין מן הקורה שנשברה מערב יו"ט

GEMARA: The Gemara wonders at the wording of the mishna: But didn’t you say in the first clause of the mishna that one may not chop beams at all on a Festival, ostensibly due to the extra effort involved? Why, then, does the mishna later define how one may chop, and even permit the use of a cleaver? Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The mishna is incomplete and is teaching the following: One may not chop wood from the pile of beams intended for construction, nor from a beam that broke on the Festival itself, as it is considered muktze. However, one may chop wood from a beam that broke on the eve of the Festival, since it has presumably been designated as firewood.

וכשהן מבקעין אין מבקעין לא בקרדום ולא במגל ולא במגרה אלא בקופיץ תניא נמי הכי אין מבקעין עצים לא מן הסואר של קורות ולא מן הקורה שנשברה ביו"ט לפי שאינו מן המוכן:

Yet even when one chops such a beam, it must not be done in the weekday manner; an adjustment must be made. Therefore, one may not chop it neither with an ax, nor with a saw, nor with a sickle, but with a cleaver. The Gemara comments: This opinion, which is in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel, is also taught in a baraita: One may not chop wood, neither from the pile of beams nor from the beam that broke on the Festival itself, as it is not considered prepared.

ולא בקרדום: אמר רב חיננא בר שלמיא משמיה דרב לא שנו אלא בנקבות שלו אבל בזכרות שלו מותר

It is taught in the mishna that even when it is permitted to chop wood on a Festival, one may not do so with an ax. Rav Ḥinnana bar Shelemya said in the name of Rav: They taught this prohibition only with regard to a case where one chops with its female side, i.e., the broad side of the ax, as was normally done. But if one chops with its male side, i.e., the narrow side, this is permitted because it is an unusual manner of chopping.

פשיטא בקופיץ תנן מהו דתימא ה"מ קופיץ לחודיה אבל קרדום וקופיץ אימא מגו דהאי גיסא אסור האי גיסא נמי אסור קמ"ל

The Gemara challenges: It is obvious that one may do so in this unusual fashion, as we learned in the mishna that it is permitted to chop with a cleaver, and chopping with the narrow side of an ax is similar to chopping with a cleaver. The Gemara explains: It was necessary to teach this halakha lest you say: This applies only to a cleaver, as it is narrow on both sides, but with regard to a tool that is an ax on one side and like a cleaver on the other, one might say: Since this side, that which is like an ax, is prohibited, the other, side, which is like a cleaver, should also be prohibited. Rav therefore teaches us that the cleaver side is in fact permitted.

[ואיכא דמתני לה אסיפא אלא בקופיץ אמר רב חיננא בר שלמיא משמיה דרב לא שנו אלא בזכרות שלו אבל בנקבות שלו אסור פשיטא ולא בקרדום תנן מהו דתימא ה"מ קרדום אבל קופיץ וקרדום אימא מגו דהאי גיסא שרי האי גיסא נמי שרי קמ"ל:]

And some teach this halakha in relation to the latter clause of the mishna: Rather, with a cleaver. Rav Ḥinnana bar Shelemya said in the name of Rav: They taught that it is permitted to chop wood on a Festival from a beam that was broken the day before, as stated previously, when one does so only with its male side; but if he chops with its female side, it is prohibited. The Gemara challenges: This is obvious. Didn’t we learn in the mishna that one may not use an ax? The Gemara answers: It was necessary to teach this halakha lest you say: This prohibition applies only to an ax, but with regard to a utensil that is both an ax and a cleaver, i.e., that is broad on one side and narrow on the other, one might say: Since this side, the narrower one, is permitted, the other, broader side should also be permitted. Rav therefore teaches us that they did not permit one side due to the other.

מתני׳ בית שהוא מלא פירות ונפחת נוטל ממקום הפחת ר' מאיר אומר אף פוחת לכתחלה ונוטל:

MISHNA: If there is a house that is filled with produce and locked on all sides, and a hole formed in one of its walls or its roof, one may remove produce through the place of the hole. The produce is not considered muktze, even though one cannot reach it without the existence of the hole. Rabbi Meir says: One may even make a hole ab initio and take produce through that opening.

גמ׳ אמאי והא קא סתר אהלא אמר רב נחומי בר אדא אמר שמואל באוירא דליבני איני והאמר רב נחמן הני ליבני דאייתור מבנינא שרי לטלטולינהו בשבתא הואיל וחזי למזגא עלייהו שרגינהו ודאי אקצינהו

GEMARA: The Gemara wonders at Rabbi Meir’s statement: Why does he permit one to make a hole in order to remove the produce ab initio? Isn’t one who does so dismantling a tent, thereby performing a biblically prohibited labor? Rav Naḥumi bar Adda said that Shmuel said: Here, it is referring to bricks placed one on top of the other [aveira delivni] but not cemented together. This is not considered a building at all. The Gemara challenges: Is that so? But didn’t Rav Naḥman say: With regard to these bricks remaining from a building, it is permitted to handle them on Shabbat, since they are fit to sit on; however, if one arranged them in rows, one on top of the other, he has certainly set them aside from his intentions? This indicates that even bricks placed on top of one another without being cemented together are nonetheless considered muktze.

אמר רבי זירא ביו"ט אמרו אבל לא בשבת תניא נמי הכי רבי מאיר אומר אף פוחת לכתחלה ונוטל ביו"ט אמרו אבל לא בשבת

Rabbi Zeira said: Rabbi Meir was referring to a Festival. On a Festival they said that one may do so, but they did not allow it on Shabbat even in such a manner, and Rav Naḥman was speaking of Shabbat. This opinion was also taught explicitly in the following baraita: Rabbi Meir says: One may even make a hole on a Festival ab initio and remove the produce from inside; they said this with regard to a Festival, but not with regard to Shabbat.

אמר שמואל חותמות שבקרקע מתיר אבל לא מפקיע ולא חותך שבכלים מתיר ומפקיע וחותך אחד שבת ואחד יו"ט

Shmuel said: In the case of fastenings made of knotted ropes that are attached to the ground and that serve as closures for doors of cellars and caves, one may untie the knot, but one may not unravel the rope itself into its constituent fibers nor cut the rope. This constitutes the prohibited labor of dismantling the cellar or cave on Shabbat. With regard to fastenings that are on the doors of vessels, e.g., cupboards, it is permitted to untie, or unravel, or cut them if necessary, both on Shabbat and on a Festival, as the prohibition against dismantling does not apply to vessels.

מיתיבי חותמות שבקרקע בשבת מתיר אבל לא מפקיע ולא חותך ביום טוב מתיר ומפקיע וחותך

The Gemara raises an objection to this from the following baraita: In a case of fastenings that are attached to the ground, which are on doors, on Shabbat one may untie the rope but not unravel or cut it. Although it is permitted to do so by Torah law, the Sages prohibited it. However, on a Festival, one may untie or unravel or cut it, as this is not prohibited even by rabbinic law. This appears to contradict the opinion of Shmuel, who does not differentiate between Shabbat and Festivals.

הא מני ר' מאיר היא דאמר אף פוחת לכתחלה ונוטל ופליגי רבנן עליה ואנא דאמרי כרבנן ומי פליגי רבנן עליה בחותמות שבקרקע והתניא מודים חכמים לרבי מאיר בחותמות שבקרקע שבשבת מתיר אבל לא מפקיע ולא חותך ביום טוב מתיר ומפקיע וחותך

Shmuel could respond: In accordance with whose opinion is this baraita? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who said: One may even make a hole and remove produce ab initio, whereas the Rabbis disagree with him and prohibit it, and I spoke in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. The Gemara asks: And do the Rabbis disagree with him with regard to doors sealed to the ground? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: The Rabbis concede to Rabbi Meir with regard to doors sealed to the ground that one may untie them on Shabbat but not unravel or cut them, while on a Festival one may untie or unravel or cut them?