Shabbat 101aשבת ק״א א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Shabbat 101a"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
101aק״א א

רבי יהודה אומר עמוקה עשרה ואין גבוהה עשרה מטלטלין מתוכה לים אבל לא מן הים לתוכה מאי שנא מן הים לתוכה דלא דקא מטלטלין מכרמלית לרשות היחיד מתוכה לים נמי קמטלטל מרשות היחיד לכרמלית אלא לאו אחודה ושמע מינה כחו בכרמלית לא גזרו שמע מינה

Rabbi Yehuda says: If the interior of the boat is ten handbreadths deep and it is not ten handbreadths above the surface of the water, one may carry from it into the sea, but not from the sea into it. The Gemara asks: What is different about carrying from the sea into the ship that one may not do so? Is it because in doing so one is carrying from a karmelit into the private domain? In carrying from the ship into the sea, one is also carrying from the private domain into a karmelit. Rather, is it not that from the ship to the sea is permitted because one throws the object onto the edge of the boat and it falls into the sea on its own, and learn from it that the Sages did not issue a decree prohibiting an action caused indirectly by one’s power in a karmelit? The Gemara summarizes: Indeed, learn from it that this is so.

אמר רב הונא הני ביצאתא דמישן אין מטלטלין בהן אלא בארבעה ולא אמרן אלא שאין בפחות משלשה ארבעה אבל יש בפחות משלשה ארבעה לית לן בה ואי מלינהו קני ואורבני לית לן בה

Rav Huna said: With regard to those small boats of Meishan, which are wide on top and narrow at the bottom, one may carry in them only within four cubits. Because they are less than four handbreadths wide at the bottom, they are not a private domain. And we only said this halakha in a case where the width of the boat does not reach four handbreadths less than three handbreadths from the bottom of the boat. However, if the width of the boat reaches four handbreadths less than three handbreadths from the bottom, we do not have this halakha, as those are considered full-fledged partitions which create a private domain. And, similarly, if one fills the bottom of the boat with reeds and thin willow branches up to the point where the boat reaches four handbreadths, we do not have this halakha. If there are ten handbreadths above the point where the boat reaches four handbreadths, it is a private domain.

מתקיף לה רב נחמן ולימא גוד אחית מחיצתא מי לא תניא רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה אומר נעץ קנה ברשות הרבים ובראשו טרסקל וזרק ונח על גביו חייב אלמא אמרינן גוד אחית מחיצתא הכא נמי נימא גוד אחית מחיצתא

Rav Naḥman strongly objects to this: And let us say: Lower the partition. The upper part of the raft is sufficiently wide and its partitions are sufficiently high; why not consider it as if the partitions of the boat descend from the top of the raft in a straight line to the bottom? Was it not taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: One who stuck a stick into the ground in the public domain, and hung a basket atop it that is four by four handbreadths wide, and threw an object from the public domain and it landed upon it, he is liable, like one who carried an object into a private domain? Apparently, we say: Lower the partition of the basket and treat it as if it reaches the ground, creating a column that is considered a private domain. Here, too, let us say: Lower the partition.

מתקיף לה רב יוסף ולא שמיעא להו להא דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב ומטו בה משום רבי חייא ותני עלה וחכמים פוטרין אמר ליה אביי ואת לא תסברא והתניא עמוד ברשות הרבים גבוה עשרה ורחב ארבעה ואין בעיקרו ארבעה ויש בקצר שלו שלשה וזרק ונח על גביו חייב אלמא אמרינן גוד אחית מחיצתא הכא נמי גוד אחית מחיצתא

Rav Yosef strongly objects to this statement of Rav Naḥman: And did they not hear that which Rav Yehuda said that Rav said, and there are those who determined that this halakha was stated in the name of Rabbi Ḥiyya: And it was taught in a baraita: And the Rabbis deem one exempt in the case of a reed stuck in the ground of a public domain? Apparently, the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, is an individual opinion and was not accepted as halakha. Abaye said to him: And do you not hold the principle of extending partitions? Was it not taught in a baraita: With regard to a column in the public domain that is ten handbreadths high and four handbreadths wide, and its base is not four handbreadths wide, and its narrowest point is more than three handbreadths high; and if one threw an object from the public domain and it came to rest atop the column, he is liable? Apparently, we say: Lower the partition. Since the column’s uppermost section is sufficiently wide, its partitions are considered as if they extend to the ground. Here, too, say: Lower the partition.

מידי איריא התם הויא ליה מחיצה שהגדיים בוקעין בה הכא הויא לה מחיצה שאין הגדיים בוקעין בה אמר ליה רב אחא בריה דרב אחא לרב אשי גבי ספינה נמי הא איכא בקיעת דגים אמר ליה בקיעת דגים לא שמיה בקיעה ומנא תימרא דבעא מיניה רבי טבלא מרבין מחיצה תלויה מהו שתתיר בחורבה ואמר ליה אין מחיצה תלויה מתרת

The Gemara asks: Are the case of the basket and the case of the boat comparable? There, in the case of the basket, it is a partition that goats pass through. A partition that does not serve as a barrier is not considered a partition. Here, it is a partition that goats do not pass through. It is considered a partition. Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Aḥa, said to Rav Ashi: In the case of a boat, too, there is the passage of fish, as they can swim through the lowered partitions of the boat. He said to him: Passage of fish is not considered passage because it is not visible. And from where do you say that this is so? As Rabbi Tavla raised a dilemma before Ravin: With regard to a hanging partition, what is the ruling in terms of it permitting one to carry in a ruin when part of the building’s walls are still intact, and they are still considered partitions? Ravin said to him: A hanging partition only permits one to carry