וְעָלוּ בְּיָדוֹ שְׁתַּיִם — חַיָּיב. וְהָתְנַן פָּטוּר! לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא דְּבָעֵי זַיּוֹנֵי, הָא דְּלָא בָּעֵי זַיּוֹנֵי. and managed to write two letters, he is liable. The Gemara asks: Didn’t we learn in the mishna that one is exempt in that case? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult: That case where we learned that he is exempt is referring to a case where the letters require crowns. This is referring to a case where they do not require crowns, and he is liable. If the letters already had their requisite ornamentation and an individual separated them, it is as if he wrote two letters.
כָּתַב אוֹת אַחַת נוֹטָרִיקוֹן, רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן בְּתִירָה מְחַיֵּיב וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן זִימְרָא: מִנַּיִן לִלְשׁוֹן נוֹטָרִיקוֹן מִן הַתּוֹרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי אַב הֲמוֹן גּוֹיִם נְתַתִּיךָ״ — אָב נְתַתִּיךָ לָאוּמּוֹת, בָּחוּר נְתַתִּיךָ בָּאוּמּוֹת, הֲמוֹן חָבִיב נְתַתִּיךָ בָּאוּמּוֹת, מֶלֶךְ נְתַתִּיךָ לָאוּמּוֹת, וָתִיק נְתַתִּיךָ בָּאוּמּוֹת, נֶאֱמָן נְתַתִּיךָ לָאוּמּוֹת. We learned in the mishna If one wrote one letter as an abbreviation [notarikon] representing an entire word, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Beteira deems him liable to bring a sin-offering, and the Rabbis deem him exempt. Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Yosei ben Zimra: From where is it derived that the language of abbreviation is employed in the Torah? As it is stated: “Neither shall your name any more be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for the father of a multitude of nations [av hamon goyim] have I made you” (Genesis 17:5). The verse itself contracts av hamon into Abraham [Avraham]. The words av hamon themselves are interpreted as an abbreviation: I have made you a father [av] for the nations, I have made you chosen [baḥur] among the nations, I have made you beloved [ḥaviv] among the nations, I have made you king [melekh] for the nations, I have made you distinguished [vatik] for the nations, I have made you trusted [ne’eman] for the nations.
רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן דִּידֵיהּ אָמַר: ״אָנֹכִי״, נוֹטָרִיקוֹן: אֲנָא נַפְשִׁי כְּתַבִית יְהַבִית. רַבָּנַן אָמְרִי: אֲמִירָה נְעִימָה כְּתִיבָה יְהִיבָה. אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי ״אָנֹכִי״ לְמַפְרֵעַ: יְהִיבָה כְּתִיבָה נֶאֱמָנִין אֲמָרֶיהָ. Rabbi Yoḥanan himself said that the word anokhi that begins the Ten Commandments is an abbreviation for: I myself wrote and gave [ana nafshi ketivat yehavit]. The Rabbis said it is an abbreviation for: A pleasant statement was written and given [amira ne’ima ketiva yehiva]. Some say the word anokhi can be interpreted backwards: It was written, it was given, its statements are faithful [yehiva ketiva ne’emanim amareha].
דְּבֵי רַבִּי נָתָן אָמְרִי: ״כִּי יָרַט הַדֶּרֶךְ לְנֶגְדִּי״ — יָרְאָה, רָאֲתָה, נָטְתָה. דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל תָּנָא: ״כַּרְמֶל״ — כַּר מָלֵא. רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב אָמַר: ״וְהוּא קִלְלַנִי קְלָלָה נִמְרֶצֶת״, נוֹטָרִיקוֹן: נוֹאֵף הוּא, מוֹאָבִי הוּא, רוֹצֵחַ הוּא, צוֹרֵר הוּא, תּוֹעֵבָה הוּא. The school of Rabbi Natan said that there is another abbreviation in the Torah. In the verse: “And the angel of the Lord said to him: Why did you hit your donkey these three times? Behold I have come out as an adversary because your way is contrary [yarat] against me” (Numbers 22:32). Yarat is an abbreviation for: The donkey feared [yare’a], it saw [ra’ata], and it turned aside [nateta]. The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: The word karmel in the verse: “And bread, and toasted grain flour, and toasted grain [karmel]” (Leviticus 23:14) means: A full kernel [kar maleh], i.e., the seed fills the stalk. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said in King David’s words: “And behold, with you is Shimi ben Gera from Benjamin, of Bahurim, who cursed me with a grievous [nimretzet] curse on the day that I went to Mahanaim” (I Kings 2:8). The word nimretzet is an abbreviation for: He is an adulterer [noef], he is a Moabite [Moavi], he is a murderer [rotze’aḥ], he is an oppressor [tzorer], he is an abomination [to’eva].
רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר: ״מַה נְּדַבֵּר וּמַה נִּצְטַדָּק״ — נְכוֹנִים אֲנַחְנוּ, צַדִּיקִים אֲנַחְנוּ, טְהוֹרִים אֲנַחְנוּ, דַּכִּים אֲנַחְנוּ, קְדוֹשִׁים אֲנַחְנוּ. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that there is another abbreviation in the Bible: “And Judah said: What can we say to my master, what can we speak, and how can we justify [nitztadak]” (Genesis 44:16), which stands for: We are honest [nekhonim], we are righteous [tzaddikim], we are pure [tehorim], we are innocent [dakkim], we are holy [kedoshim].
מַתְנִי׳ הַכּוֹתֵב שְׁתֵּי אוֹתִיּוֹת בִּשְׁתֵּי הֶעְלֵמוֹת, אַחַת שַׁחֲרִית וְאַחַת בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם, רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל מְחַיֵּיב וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין. MISHNA: With regard to one who writes two letters on Shabbat in two separate lapses of awareness separated by a period of awareness that the day was Shabbat, writing one letter in the morning and one letter in the afternoon, Rabban Gamliel deems him liable to bring a sin-offering like someone who has unintentionally performed a full-fledged prohibited labor, and the Rabbis deem him exempt.
גְּמָ׳ בְּמַאי קָמִיפַּלְגִי? רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל סָבַר אֵין יְדִיעָה לַחֲצִי שִׁיעוּר, וְרַבָּנַן סָבְרִי יֵשׁ יְדִיעָה לַחֲצִי שִׁיעוּר. GEMARA: The Gemara asks: With regard to what do they disagree? Rabban Gamliel holds: There is no awareness for half a measure. One is not liable to bring a sacrifice for half a measure; therefore, the fact that he became aware between performance of the two halves of the prohibited labor is of no significance. His awareness does not demarcate between one act of writing a letter and the second act of writing a letter with regard to liability to bring a sin-offering. And the Rabbis hold: There is awareness for half a measure. If an individual became aware of his transgression between the two parts of the prohibited labor, each individual part is independent of the other, and the two halves of the prohibited labor do not join together to create liability.
הדרן עלך הבונה
מַתְנִי׳ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: הָאוֹרֵג שְׁלֹשָׁה חוּטִין בַּתְּחִילָּה וְאַחַת עַל הָאָרִיג — חַיָּיב. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: בֵּין בַּתְּחִילָּה בֵּין בַּסּוֹף — שִׁיעוּרוֹ שְׁנֵי חוּטִין. הָעוֹשֶׂה שְׁתֵּי בָתֵּי נִירִין בַּנִּירַיִם, בַּקֵּירוֹס, בַּנָּפָה, בַּכְּבָרָה וּבַסַּל — חַיָּיב. וְהַתּוֹפֵר שְׁתֵּי תְפִירוֹת, וְהַקּוֹרֵעַ עַל מְנָת לִתְפּוֹר שְׁתֵּי תְפִירוֹת. MISHNA: Rabbi Eliezer says: One who weaves on Shabbat is liable to bring a sin-offering if he wove three threads at the beginning of something new, or if he adds one thread to a preexisting woven fabric. And the Rabbis say: Both at the beginning and at the end, its measure for liability is two threads. One who makes two meshes, i.e., ties the threads of the warp, attaching them to either the nirin or the keiros, which will be explained in the Gemara, in a winnow, sieve, or basket, is liable for making meshes. And one who sews is liable if he sews two stitches. And one who tears is liable if he tears enough fabric in order to sew two stitches to repair it.
גְּמָ׳ כִּי אֲתָא רַבִּי יִצְחָק תָּנֵי: ״שְׁתַּיִם״. וְהָאֲנַן תְּנַן: ״שָׁלֹשׁ״! לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא בְּאַלִּימֵי, הָא בְּקַטִּינֵי. אָמְרִי לַהּ לְהַאי גִּיסָא, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ לְהַאי גִּיסָא. אָמְרִי לַהּ לְהַאי גִּיסָא: אַלִּימֵי — תְּלָתָא לָא סָתְרִי, תְּרֵי סָתְרִי. קַטִּינֵי — תְּרֵי נָמֵי לָא סָתְרִי. וְאָמְרִי לַהּ לְהַאי גִּיסָא: קַטִּינֵי — תְּלָתָא יְדִיעִי, תְּרֵי לָא יְדִיעִי. אַלִּימֵי — תְּרֵי נָמֵי יְדִיעִי. GEMARA: When Rabbi Yitzḥak came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he taught that Rabbi Eliezer said: Two threads is the measure that determines liability for beginning a weave. The Gemara asks: Didn’t we learn three in the mishna? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, because this source is referring to thick threads and that source is referring to thin threads. Some say it this way, that one is liable when weaving two thick threads, and some say it that way, that one is liable when weaving two thin threads. The Gemara elaborates: Some say it this way: One who weaves thick threads, three threads will not unravel, but two will unravel. With regard to thin threads, two will also not unravel. And some say it this way: One who weaves thin threads, three threads are conspicuous, two are not conspicuous. With regard to thick threads, two are also conspicuous.
תַּנְיָא: הָאוֹרֵג שְׁלֹשָׁה חוּטִין בַּתְּחִילָּה וְאֶחָד עַל הָאָרִיג — חַיָּיב. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: בֵּין בַּתְּחִילָּה בֵּין בַּסּוֹף — שִׁיעוּרָן שְׁנֵי חוּטִין. וּבַשָּׂפָה — שְׁנֵי חוּטִין בְּרוֹחַב שְׁלֹשָׁה בָּתֵּי נִירִין. הָא לְמָה זֶה דּוֹמֶה? לְאוֹרֵג צִלְצוֹל קָטָן, שְׁנֵי חוּטִין בְּרוֹחַב שְׁלֹשָׁה בָּתֵּי נִירִין. וְהָאוֹרֵג שְׁלֹשָׁה חוּטִין בַּתְּחִילָּה וְאֶחָד עַל הָאָרִיג חַיָּיב, סְתָמָא כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. It was taught in a baraita: One who weaves three threads at the beginning or one thread onto a preexisting woven fabric is liable. And the Rabbis say: Both at the beginning and at the end, its measure for liability is two threads. And if one weaves a hem with a thread or color different from the original garment, he is liable for weaving two threads across a width of three meshes, i.e., three threads of the warp. Why is one liable in that case? To what is this similar? It is similar to weaving a small belt in which one weaves two threads across a width of three meshes, the width of the belt. And when it is taught in the baraita: One who weaves three threads at the beginning or one thread onto a preexisting woven fabric is liable, that unattributed baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer.
תַּנְיָא אִידַּךְ: הָאוֹרֵג שְׁנֵי חוּטִין עַל הַגַּס? וְעַל הָאִימְרָא — חַיָּיב. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ אֶחָד. וּבַשָּׂפָה, שְׁנֵי חוּטִין בְּרוֹחַב שְׁלֹשָׁה בָתֵּי נִירִין — חַיָּיב. הָא לְמָה זֶה דּוֹמֶה — לְאוֹרֵג צִלְצוֹל קָטָן שְׁנֵי חוּטִין עַל רוֹחַב שְׁלֹשָׁה בָּתֵּי נִירִין: וְהָאוֹרֵג שְׁנֵי חוּטִין עַל הַגַּס וְעַל הָאִימְרָא חַיָּיב — סְתָמָא כְּרַבָּנַן. It was taught in another baraita: One who weaves two threads onto a large fabric or onto the border of a fabric alongside the woof on Shabbat is liable. Rabbi Eliezer says: One is liable even if he weaves one thread. And along the edge of the warp, one who weaves two threads across a width of three meshes is liable. To what is this similar? It is similar to weaving a small belt in which one weaves two threads across a width of three meshes. The Gemara comments: When it was taught in the baraita: One who weaves two threads onto a large fabric or onto the border is liable, that unattributed baraita is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis.
הָעוֹשֶׂה שְׁנֵי בָתֵּי נִירִין כּוּ׳. מַאי בַּנִּירַיִם? אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: תַּרְתֵּי בְּבַת נִירָא וַחֲדָא בְּנִירָא. בְּקֵירוֹס. מַאי בְּקֵירוֹס? אָמַר רַב: מְצוֹבִיתָא. We learned in the mishna that one who makes two meshes, attaching them to either the nirin or the keiros, is liable. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of to the nirin? Abaye said: One ties two to the meshes, the thread of the warp, and ties one to the crosspiece, the thread that extends from the weaving rod. We learned in the mishna that one is liable for attaching the meshes to the keiros, and the Gemara asks: What is a keiros? Rav said: It refers to the slips, the parts that go up and down on a stationary loom and are parallel to the pole.
וְהַתּוֹפֵר שְׁתֵּי תְפִירוֹת. הָא תְּנֵינָא בַּאֲבוֹת מְלָאכוֹת: וְהַתּוֹפֵר שְׁתֵּי תְפִירוֹת! מִשּׁוּם דְּקָבָעֵי לְמִיתְנָא סֵיפָא: ״וְהַקּוֹרֵעַ עַל מְנָת לִתְפּוֹר שְׁתֵּי תְפִירוֹת״, קָתָנֵי נָמֵי הַתּוֹפֵר. וְהַקּוֹרֵעַ. הָא נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא בַּאֲבוֹת מְלָאכוֹת! אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם דְּקָבָעֵי לְמִיתְנֵי סֵיפָא, הַקּוֹרֵעַ בַּחֲמָתוֹ וְעַל מֵתוֹ, מִשּׁוּם הָכִי קָתָנֵי [הַתּוֹפֵר שְׁתֵּי תְפִירוֹת]. And we also learned in the mishna that one who sews on Shabbat is liable if he sews two stitches. The Gemara asks: We already learned that on the list of primary categories of prohibited labor: And one who sews two stitches is liable. The Gemara answers: Since the mishna wanted to teach in the latter clause: And one who tears in order to sew two stitches, it also taught the halakha of one who sews. And one who tears, did we not also learn this in the mishna enumerating the list of primary categories of prohibited labor? Since the mishna wanted to teach a new halakha in the latter clause, namely: One who tears in his anger or for his dead relative, therefore, it also taught the halakha of one who sews two stitches.
וְהַקּוֹרֵעַ עַל מְנָת לִתְפּוֹר שְׁתֵּי תְפִירוֹת. הֵיכִי מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ? With regard to what we learned in the mishna: And one who tears in order to sew two stitches, the Gemara asks: Where do you find that case where it is necessary to tear a garment in order to sew it?