הרוצה שיתעשר יעסוק בבהמה דקה אמר רב חסדא מאי דכתיב (דברים ז, יג) ועשתרות צאנך שמעשרות את בעליהן
One who wishes to become wealthy should engage in raising small domesticated animals. Rav Ḥisda said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And the flocks [ve’ashterot] of your sheep” (Deuteronomy 7:13)? It means that sheep enrich [me’ashrot] their owners.
ואמר רבי יוחנן כסא דחרשין ולא כסא דפושרין והני מילי בכלי מתכות אבל בכלי חרש לית לן בה ובכלי מתכות נמי לא אמרן אלא דלא שדי בהו ציביא אבל שדי בהו ציביא לית לן בה וכי לא שדי בהו ציביא נמי לא אמרן אלא דלא ציץ אבל ציץ לית לן בה
The Gemara cites additional statements by Rabbi Yoḥanan providing practical advice. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: It is preferable to drink from a cup of witches and not to drink from a cup of lukewarm water, which is extremely unhealthy. Rabbi Yoḥanan qualifies his statement: We said this only with regard to lukewarm water in metal vessels, but in earthenware vessels we have no problem with it. And even in metal vessels, we said that lukewarm water is unhealthy only in a case where one did not cast flavorings into the water, but if he cast flavorings into the water we have no problem with it. And even if one cast flavorings into the water, we said this only in a case where the water had not been boiled [tzeyatz], but if the water had been boiled we have no problem with it.
ואמר ר' יוחנן מי שהניח לו אביו מעות ורוצה לאבדן ילבש כלי פשתן וישתמש בכלי זכוכית וישכור פועלים ואל ישב עמהן ילבוש כלי פשתן בכיתנא רומיתא וישתמש בכלי זכוכית בזוגיתא חיורתא וישכור פועלים ואל ישב עמהן בתורי דנפיש פסידייהו
And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: In the case of one whose father bequeathed him a great deal of money and he seeks to lose it, he should wear linen garments, and should use glass vessels, and should hire laborers and not sit with them to supervise. The Gemara elaborates: He should wear linen garments; this is stated with regard to Roman linen, which becomes tattered quickly. He should use glass vessels; this is stated with regard to expensive white glass. And he should hire laborers and not sit with them; this applies to laborers who work with oxen, whose potential for causing damage is great if they are not supervised, as they will trample the crops.
דרש רב עוירא זימנין אמר לה משמיה דרבי אמי וזימנין אמר לה משמיה דרבי אסי מאי דכתיב (תהלים קיב, ה) טוב איש חונן ומלוה יכלכל דבריו במשפט לעולם יאכל אדם וישתה פחות ממה שיש לו וילבש ויתכסה במה שיש לו ויכבד אשתו ובניו יותר ממה שיש לו שהן תלויין בו והוא תלוי במי שאמר והיה העולם
Rav Avira interpreted the following verse homiletically, but sometimes he said the interpretation in the name of Rabbi Ami and sometimes he said it in the name of Rabbi Asi: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Good is the man who is gracious and lends, who orders his affairs with justice” (Psalms 112:5)? It means to teach that a person should always eat and drink less than what is within his means, and he should dress and cover himself in accordance with his means, and he should honor his wife and children more than what is within his means; as they are dependent on him and he is dependent on the One Who spoke and the world was created.
דרש רב עינא אפתחא דבי ריש גלותא השוחט לחולה בשבת חייב לכסות אמר להו רבה אשתומא קאמר לישמטוה לאמוריה מיניה דתניא ר' יוסי אומר כוי אין שוחטין אותו ביו"ט ואם שחטו אין מכסין את דמו
§ The mishna teaches that one may not slaughter a koy on a Festival since he may not cover its blood, as it is unclear whether there is an obligation by Torah law to do so. But if one transgressed and slaughtered a koy, one does not cover its blood. With regard to this, Rav Eina taught at the entrance to the house of the Exilarch: One who slaughters an undomesticated animal or a bird for a critically ill person on Shabbat, for whom it is permitted to slaughter, is obligated to cover its blood. Rabba said to those present: Rav Eina is saying an astonishing statement; remove his interpreter from before him. As it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: One may not slaughter a koy on a Festival, but if he slaughtered it, one does not cover its blood until after the Festival.
מקל וחומר ומה מילה שודאה דוחה שבת אין ספיקה דוחה יו"ט כסוי שאין ודאו דוחה שבת אין דין שאין ספקו דוחה יו"ט
Rabbi Yosei elaborates: This can be derived from an a fortiori inference: And if with regard to the mitzva of circumcision, concerning which a definite obligation overrides Shabbat, nevertheless its uncertain obligation does not override a Festival; then with regard to the mitzva of covering the blood, concerning which even a definite obligation does not override Shabbat, is it not logical that its uncertain obligation, e.g., covering the blood of a koy, would not override a Festival? Although circumcision involves an act of prohibited labor, one performs it on Shabbat for a male infant whose eighth day from birth occurs on Shabbat. But in a case where it is uncertain when the eighth day from birth occurs, it is forbidden to circumcise the child on a Festival. By contrast, covering the blood is never performed on Shabbat.
אמר לו תקיעת שופר בגבולים תוכיח שאין ודאה דוחה שבת וספיקה דוחה יו"ט
The Sages said to him in rebuttal: The sounding of the shofar in the provinces, i.e., outside the Temple, will prove that this a fortiori inference is incorrect. This is because its definite obligation does not override Shabbat and it is prohibited to sound the shofar on Rosh HaShana that falls on Shabbat; and yet its uncertain obligation overrides the Festival.
השיב רבי אלעזר הקפר בריבי תשובה מה למילה שכן אינה נוהגת בלילי ימים טובים תאמר בכסוי שנוהג בלילי ימים טובים
Rabbi Elazar HaKappar the Distinguished responded with another refutation of the a fortiori inference: It cannot be inferred from circumcision that an uncertain obligation of the mitzva of covering the blood does not override a Festival. What is notable about circumcision? It is notable in that it is not in effect on Festival nights, but is performed only during the daytime. Will you then say with regard to the mitzva of covering the blood, which is in effect on Festival nights, that it does not override a Festival? Perhaps, since the mitzva of covering the blood is in effect during both day and night, its uncertain obligation overrides a Festival as well.
אמר רבי אבא זה אחד מן הדברים שאמר רבי חייא אין לי עליהם תשובה והשיב רבי אלעזר הקפר בריבי תשובה
In reference to Rabbi Elazar HaKappar’s refutation, Rabbi Abba says: This a fortiori inference drawn by Rabbi Yosei is one of the matters with regard to which Rabbi Ḥiyya says: I do not have any refutation for them, and Rabbi Elazar HaKappar the Distinguished successfully responded with a refutation.
קתני מיהת כסוי שאין ודאו דוחה שבת מאי ודאו דכסוי דלא דחי שבת לאו השוחט לחולה בשבת
Rabba concludes his refutation of the statement of Rav Eina: In any event, the baraita teaches that definite obligations with regard to the mitzva of covering the blood do not override Shabbat. Now, what is a case of a definite obligation of covering the blood that does not override Shabbat? Is it not a case where one slaughters an undomesticated animal or a bird for a critically ill person on Shabbat? The baraita nevertheless teaches that one does not cover the blood, in contradiction to the ruling of Rav Eina.
ודלמא דעבר ושחט
The Gemara asks: But perhaps the baraita is referring to an instance where one transgressed Shabbat and slaughtered an animal for a healthy person. But in a case where one slaughtered an animal for an ill person, since it was permitted for him to slaughter the animal, perhaps he must cover the blood as well.
דומיא דמילה מה מילה ברשות אף כסוי נמי ברשות
The Gemara responds: The baraita cannot be referring to such a case, since Rabbi Yosei compares it with circumcision. Therefore, it must be similar to the case of circumcision, in that just as the circumcision was performed with permission, as it is a mitzva to perform circumcision even if the eighth day falls on Shabbat, so too, the covering of the blood must be referring to a case where the slaughter was done with permission, i.e., for an ill person. Accordingly, the baraita poses a difficulty to the statement of Rav Eina.
אמרו לו תקיעת שופר בגבולין תוכיח שאין ודאה דוחה שבת וספיקה דוחה יום טוב מאי ספיקה
§ The baraita states that the Sages said to Rabbi Yosei in refutation of his a fortiori inference: The sounding of the shofar in the provinces will prove that the inference is incorrect, since its definite obligation does not override Shabbat and its uncertain obligation overrides a Festival. The Gemara asks: What is its uncertain obligation that overrides a Festival?
אילימא ספק חול ספק יום טוב השתא ודאי יום טוב דחיא ספק יו"ט ספק חול מיבעיא
If we say that it is referring to uncertainty with regard to whether one of the two days of Rosh HaShana is a weekday or a Festival, this is unfeasible: Now that the sounding of the shofar overrides the definite Festival of Rosh HaShana, is it necessary to teach that it overrides a day with regard to which it is uncertain whether it is a Festival or a weekday? That is, if the uncertainty is with regard to the Festival itself, then this case should have no bearing on the halakha concerning the obligation to cover the blood of a koy on a Festival, since the latter occurs on a definite Festival.