Shabbat 145aשבת קמ״ה א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Shabbat 145a"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
145aקמ״ה א

כביצה מכוונת טהור הא יותר מכביצה טמא ואי אמרת משקה הבא לאוכל אוכל הוא במאי איתכשר הוא מותיב לה והוא מפרק לה בסוחט לתוך הקערה

in the exact amount of an egg-bulk, the liquid is ritually pure. Even though the ritually impure individual touched the food, less than an egg-bulk of food cannot become ritually impure. Once the first drop of liquid is squeezed out, less than an egg-bulk of food remains, and it cannot render the liquid impure. By inference, if he squeezed more than an egg-bulk, the liquid is ritually impure. And if you say that liquid that comes into food is considered food, in what manner was this liquid rendered susceptible to ritual impurity? He raised the objection and he resolved it: It is referring to a case where one squeezes into an empty bowl, in which case the juice is considered a liquid.

אמר רבי ירמיה כתנאי המחליק בענבים לא הוכשר רבי יהודה אומר הוכשר מאי לאו בהא קמיפלגי מר סבר משקה הבא לאוכל אוכל הוא ומר סבר לאו אוכל הוא

Rabbi Yirmeya said: The question of whether liquid squeezed directly from one food into another is considered liquid or food is parallel to the following dispute between tanna’im. We learned in a mishna: In the case of one who smooths bread before baking it by squeezing grapes onto it, the bread was not rendered susceptible to ritual impurity. Rabbi Yehuda says: It was rendered susceptible to ritual impurity. What, do they not disagree about this? One Sage held that liquid that comes into food is food, and therefore it cannot render bread susceptible to ritual impurity, and one Sage held that it is not food but rather a liquid, and therefore it renders the bread susceptible to ritual impurity.

אמר רב פפא דכולי עלמא משקה הבא לאוכל לאו אוכל הוא והכא במשקה הבא לאיבוד קמיפלגי מר סבר משקה הוא ומר סבר לאו משקה הוא ובפלוגתא דהני תנאי דתניא המפצע בזיתים בידים מסואבות הוכשר לסופתן במלח לא הוכשר

Rav Pappa said that the disputes are not necessarily parallel; it can be explained that everyone agrees that liquid that comes into food is not food, and here they disagree with regard to liquid that goes to waste, as the liquid that dripped onto the bread eventually evaporates due to the heat of the oven. One Sage, Rabbi Yehuda, held that it is nonetheless a liquid and therefore can render the bread susceptible to ritual impurity, and one Sage held that it is not a liquid. And they disagree in the dispute between these tanna’im, as it was taught in a baraita: In the case of one who cuts olives with soiled, i.e., ritually impure, hands, the olives are rendered susceptible to ritual impurity through the liquid that comes from them, and his hands render the olives ritually impure. If he cut them in order to dip them in salt, the olives are not rendered susceptible to ritual impurity, because if that liquid emerged from the olives against the owner’s will, the liquid cannot render food susceptible to ritual impurity.

לידע אם הגיעו זיתיו למסוק אם לאו לא הוכשר רבי יהודה אומר הוכשר מאי לאו בהא קמיפלגי דמר סבר משקה העומד לאיבוד משקה הוא ומר סבר לאו משקה הוא

If he was cutting in order to ascertain whether his olives have reached the stage of ripeness at which they are fit to be harvested or not, they are not rendered susceptible to ritual impurity. Rabbi Yehuda said: They are rendered susceptible to ritual impurity. What, do they not disagree with regard to this? One Sage, Rabbi Yehuda, held that liquid that emerges when one tests the olives but which stands to go to waste, is liquid and renders food susceptible to ritual impurity; and one Sage held that it is not liquid and does not render food susceptible to ritual impurity.

אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע הני תנאי במשקה העומד לאיבוד פליגי והנך תנאי במשקה העומד לצחצחו קמיפלגי

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: The last two disputes are not necessarily parallel. These tanna’im, who disagreed with regard to olives, disagreed with regard to liquid that stands to go to waste, and those tanna’im, who disagreed with regard to the liquid on the bread, disagreed with regard to liquid that stands to be used to shine it.

אמר רבי זירא אמר רב חייא בר אשי אמר רב סוחט אדם אשכול של ענבים לתוך הקדרה אבל לא לתוך הקערה ודג לצירו אפילו לתוך הקערה

Rabbi Zeira said that Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said that Rav said: A person may squeeze a cluster of grapes into a pot with food in it on Shabbat, because liquid that is squeezed directly into food is considered food rather than liquid; however, one may not do so into a bowl that is empty or that contains liquid. And squeezing a fish for its brine is permitted even into a bowl.

יתיב רב דימי וקאמר לה להא שמעתא אמר ליה אביי לרב דימי אתון משמיה דרב מתניתון ולא קשיא לכו אנן משמיה דשמואל מתנינן לה וקשיא לן מי אמר שמואל דג לצירו אפילו לתוך הקערה והאיתמר כבשים שסחטן אמר רב לגופן מותר למימיהן פטור אבל אסור

Rav Dimi sat and stated this halakha. Abaye said to Rav Dimi: You teach this halakha in the name of Rav and it is not difficult for you; we teach it in the name of Shmuel and it is difficult for us for the following reason: Did Shmuel say that it is permitted to squeeze a fish for its brine even into a bowl? Wasn’t it stated that there was a dispute with regard to pickled vegetables that one squeezed? Rav said: If he wants to squeeze them because he needs the vegetables themselves without the liquid, it is permitted to do so even ab initio on Shabbat. And if he squeezes them because he needs their liquid, he is exempt from bringing a sin-offering, but it is prohibited to do so ab initio.

ושלקות בין לגופן בין למימיהן מותר ושמואל אמר אחד כבשים ואחד שלקות לגופן מותר למימיהן פטור אבל אסור

And with regard to boiled vegetables, whether he needs the vegetables themselves without their liquid or whether he wants to squeeze the vegetables for their liquids, it is permitted to squeeze them on Shabbat. And Shmuel said: With regard to both pickled vegetables and boiled vegetables, if he squeezes them for the vegetables themselves, it is permitted, and if he squeezes them for their liquids, he is exempt from bringing a sin-offering, but it is prohibited to do so ab initio. Apparently, squeezing fish for its brine falls into the category of squeezing boiled items for their liquid, which according to Shmuel is prohibited. As such, Shmuel’s two statements appear contradictory.

אמר ליה האלהים עיני ראו ולא זר (כלו כליותי בחקי וגו׳) מפומיה דרבי ירמיה שמיע לי ורבי ירמיה מרבי זירא ורבי זירא מרב חייא בר אשי ורב חייא בר אשי מרב:

He said to him: You can certainly rely on my version of this statement. To underscore his point, he uttered the oath-like expression: By God! and applied the verse: “Whom I shall see for myself; my eyes have seen it, and not another’s” (Job 19:27). I heard this tradition from the mouth of Rabbi Yirmeya, and Rabbi Yirmeya heard it from Rabbi Zeira, and Rabbi Zeira heard it from Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi, and Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi heard it from Rav, and each transmitter of this tradition is a reliable source.

גופא כבשים שסחטן אמר רב לגופן מותר למימיהן פטור אבל אסור ושלקות בין לגופן בין למימיהן מותר ושמואל אמר אחד זה ואחד זה לגופן מותר למימיהן פטור אבל אסור רבי יוחנן אמר אחד כבשים ואחד שלקות לגופן מותר למימיהן חייב חטאת

Apropos the topic of squeezing pickled vegetables, the Gemara addresses the matter itself. We learned that with regard to pickled vegetables that one squeezed, Rav said that if he squeezes them for themselves, it is permitted, and if he squeezes them for their liquids he is exempt from bringing a sin-offering, but it is prohibited to do so ab initio; and with regard to boiled vegetables, if he squeezes them both for themselves and for their liquids it is permitted. And Shmuel said: With regard to both this, pickled vegetables, and that, boiled vegetables, squeezing for the vegetables themselves without liquid is permitted; squeezing them for their liquids, one is exempt, but it is prohibited to do so ab initio. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: With regard to both pickled vegetables and boiled vegetables, if one squeezes them for the vegetables themselves it is permitted; if one squeezes them for their liquids, he is liable to bring a sin-offering for having performed a labor prohibited by Torah law.

מיתיבי סוחטין כבשים בשבת לצורך השבת אבל לא למוצאי שבת וזיתים וענבים לא יסחוט ואם סחט חייב חטאת קשיא לרב קשיא לשמואל קשיא לרבי יוחנן רב מתרץ לטעמיה שמואל מתרץ לטעמיה רבי יוחנן מתרץ לטעמיה

The Gemara raises an objection based on that which was taught in a baraita: One may squeeze pickled vegetables on Shabbat for the purpose of using them on Shabbat but not for the conclusion of Shabbat. And one may not squeeze olives and grapes at all on Shabbat, and if one squeezed them unwittingly, he is liable to bring a sin-offering. Apparently, it is permitted to squeeze pickled vegetables ab initio on Shabbat for any purpose, even for their juice, and if so, it is difficult according to the opinion of Rav, it is difficult according to the opinion of Shmuel, and it is difficult according to the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, which all assert that squeezing pickled vegetables for their juice is prohibited on some level. The Gemara responds that Rav interprets the baraita according to his line of reasoning, Shmuel interprets the baraita according to his line of reasoning, and Rabbi Yoḥanan interprets the baraita according to his line of reasoning. The Gemara proceeds to elucidate how the baraita is explained according to each opinion.

רב מתרץ לטעמיה סוחטין כבשים בשבת לצורך השבת אבל לא למוצאי שבת במה דברים אמורים לגופן אבל למימיהן פטור אבל אסור ושלקות בין לגופן בין למימיהן מותר וזיתים וענבים לא יסחוט ואם סחטן חייב חטאת

Rav interprets the baraita according to his line of reasoning by emending the baraita and adding to it: One may squeeze pickled vegetables on Shabbat for the purpose of Shabbat, but not for the conclusion of Shabbat. In what case is this statement said? When one squeezes the vegetables for themselves; however, if one squeezes them for their liquid, he is exempt from bringing a sin-offering, but it is prohibited to do so. And with regard to boiled vegetables, whether one squeezes them for themselves or whether he does so for their liquid, it is permitted. And with regard to olives and grapes, one may not squeeze them at all, and if one squeezed them unwittingly he is liable to bring a sin-offering.

שמואל מתרץ לטעמיה סוחטין כבשים בשבת לצורך השבת הוא הדין לשלקות במה דברים אמורים לגופן אבל למימיהן פטור אבל אסור וזיתים וענבים לא יסחוט ואם סחט חייב חטאת

Shmuel interprets the baraita according to his line of reasoning by emending the baraita and adding to it: One may squeeze pickled vegetables on Shabbat for the purpose of Shabbat, and the same is true for boiled vegetables. In what case is this statement said? When one squeezes them for themselves; however, if he squeezes them for their liquids, he is not liable to bring a sin-offering, but it is prohibited to do so. And with regard to olives and grapes, one may not squeeze them at all, and if one squeezed them unwittingly, he is liable to bring a sin-offering.

רבי יוחנן מתרץ לטעמיה סוחטין כבשים לצורך השבת אבל לא למוצאי שבת אחד כבשים ואחד שלקות במה דברים אמורים לגופן אבל למימיהן לא יסחוט ואם סחט נעשה כמי שסחט זיתים וענבים וחייב חטאת

And Rabbi Yoḥanan also interprets the baraita according to his line of reasoning by emending the baraita and adding to it: One may squeeze pickled vegetables for the purpose of Shabbat but not for the conclusion of Shabbat, and that ruling applies both to pickled vegetables and to boiled vegetables. In what case is this statement said? When one squeezes them for themselves, but if he does so for their liquids, one may not squeeze them, and if one squeezed them unwittingly, he becomes like one who squeezed olives or grapes, and he is liable to bring a sin-offering.

אמר רב חייא בר אשי אמר רב דבר תורה אינו חייב אלא על דריסת זיתים וענבים בלבד וכן תני דבי מנשה דבר תורה אינו חייב אלא על דריסת זיתים וענבים בלבד ואין עד מפי עד כשר

Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said that Rav said: By Torah law, one is only liable for stomping on olives and grapes, and all other prohibitions related to squeezing or juicing are rabbinic decrees and protective measures. And similarly, it was taught in the school of Menashe: By Torah law, one is only liable for stomping on olives and grapes. And it was taught in the school of Menashe: And testimony of one witness based solely on what he learned from the mouth of another witness, i.e., hearsay testimony, is valid