Shabbat 49aשבת מ״ט א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save 'Shabbat 49a'
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
49aמ״ט א

וגזרו רבנן על טומאה שלא בשעת מלאכה משום טומאה שבשעת מלאכה ועל הזאה שבשעת מלאכה משום הזאה שלא בשעת מלאכה:

And the Sages issued a decree that it should be considered a connection with regard to ritual impurity even when not in use, due to ritual impurity when in use. If one component becomes ritually impure, the other component becomes ritually impure as well. And, as a further stringency, they issued a decree that it is not considered a connection with regard to sprinkling even when in use, due to sprinkling when not in use. The water of purification must be sprinkled on each part individually.

בזמן שהן לחין: איבעיא להו לחין מחמת עצמן או דילמא לחין מחמת דבר אחר

The mishna listed several materials in which food may not be insulated on Shabbat eve when those materials are moist. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Is the mishna referring specifically to materials that are moist due to their own natural state, or is it referring perhaps even to materials that are now moist due to something else, e.g., because they were soaked by liquid?

תא שמע לא בתבן ולא בזגים ולא במוכין ולא בעשבים בזמן שהן לחין אי אמרת בשלמא לחין מחמת דבר אחר שפיר אלא אי אמרת לחין מחמת עצמן מוכין לחין מחמת עצמן היכי משכחת לה ממרטא דביני אטמי

Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from the materials listed in the mishna: And one may neither insulate a pot in straw, nor in the residue of grapes that have been pressed for their juice, nor in soft materials, nor in grass, when these materials are moist. Granted, if you say that the mishna is referring to materials that are moist due to something else, this can be well understood, as all of these materials can get wet. However, if you say that it is referring to materials that are moist due to their own natural state, where do you find soft materials that are moist due to their own natural state? Wool is dry in its natural state. The Gemara rejects this argument: The mishna is referring to a case where the material is made from wool plucked from between the thighs of the animal, as that wool is usually damp from sweat.

והא דתני רבי אושעיא טומנין בכסות יבשה ובפירות יבשין אבל לא בכסות לחה ולא בפירות לחין כסות לחה מחמת עצמה היכי משכחת לה ממרטא דביני אטמי:

The Gemara continues with a similar question: And that which Rabbi Oshaya taught in a baraita: One may insulate a pot of hot food on Shabbat eve in a dry garment and in dry produce, but not in a moist garment or in moist produce. Where do you find a ruling pertaining to a cloth that is moist due to its own natural state? The Gemara answers: Here too, the baraita is referring to a case where the cloth was made from wool plucked from between the thighs of the animal. The wool was spun and the cloth was woven while the wool was still moist. Consequently, there is no conclusive proof whether the materials listed in the mishna are prohibited only when naturally moist or even if they are moist due to another source.

מתני׳ טומנין בכסות ובפירות בכנפי יונה ובנסורת של חרשים ובנעורת של פשתן דקה רבי יהודה אוסר בדקה ומתיר בגסה:

MISHNA: One may insulate a pot of hot food on Shabbat eve in clothing, in produce, in doves’ wings, in a carpenter’s wood-shavings, and in the chaff of fine flax. Rabbi Yehuda prohibits doing so when it is fine, and permits doing so when it is coarse.

גמ׳ אמר רבי ינאי תפילין צריכין גוף נקי כאלישע בעל כנפים מאי היא אביי אמר שלא יפיח בהן רבא אמר שלא יישן בהן

GEMARA: Since doves’ wings were mentioned in the mishna, the Gemara cites a related story: Rabbi Yannai said: Donning phylacteries requires a clean body, like that of Elisha, Man of Wings. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the statement that donning phylacteries requires a clean body? Abaye said: It means that one may not break wind while donning them. Rava said: It means that one may not sleep in them.

ואמאי קרי ליה בעל כנפים שפעם אחת גזרה מלכות רומי הרשעה גזירה על ישראל שכל המניח תפילין ינקרו את מוחו והיה אלישע מניחם ויוצא לשוק ראהו קסדור אחד רץ מפניו ורץ אחריו וכיון שהגיע אצלו נטלן מראשו ואחזן בידו אמר לו מה זה בידך אמר לו כנפי יונה פשט את ידו ונמצאו כנפי יונה לפיכך קורין אותו אלישע בעל כנפים

The Gemara asks: And why did they call Elisha Man of Wings? Because on one occasion the evil kingdom of Rome issued a decree against Israel that, as punishment, they would pierce the brain of anyone who dons phylacteries. Nevertheless, Elisha would don them and defiantly go out to the marketplace. One day, an official [kasdor] who was appointed to enforce the decree saw him; Elisha ran away from him, and the official ran after him. When the official reached him, Elisha removed the phylacteries from his head and held them in his hand. The officer asked him: What is that in your hand? Elisha said to him: It is merely a dove’s wings. A miracle was performed: He opened his hand, and, indeed, it was found to be a dove’s wings. Therefore, in commemoration of this miracle, they would call him Elisha, Man of Wings.

ומאי שנא כנפי יונה משאר עופות משום דאמתיל כנסת ישראל ליונה שנאמר כנפי יונה נחפה בכסף וגו׳ מה יונה כנפיה מגינות עליה אף ישראל מצות מגינות עליהן:

The Gemara asks: And what is different about doves’ wings from those of other birds that led Elisha to say that he had doves’ wings in his hand? The Gemara answers: Because the congregation of Israel is likened to a dove, as it is stated: “You shall shine as the wings of a dove covered with silver and her pinions with yellow gold” (Psalms 68:14). Just as this dove, only its wings protect it and it has no other means of protection, so too the Jewish people, only mitzvot protect them.

בנסורת של חרשין כו׳: איבעיא להו רבי יהודה אנסורת של חרשין קאי או אנעורת של פשתן קאי

We learned in the mishna: One may insulate food on Shabbat eve in a carpenter’s wood-shavings, and in the chaff of fine flax. Rabbi Yehuda prohibits doing so when it is fine, and permits doing so when it is coarse. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda referring to the carpenter’s wood-shavings, or is it referring to the chaff of flax?

תא שמע דתניא רבי יהודה אומר נעורת של פשתן דקה הרי הוא כזבל שמע מינה אנעורת של פשתן קאי שמע מינה:

The Gemara answers: Come and hear proof as it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says: The legal status of the chaff of fine flax is like that of manure, i.e., it adds heat. The Gemara comments: Conclude from it that Rabbi Yehuda is referring to the chaff of flax. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, conclude from it.

מתני׳ טומנין בשלחין ומטלטלין אותן בגיזי צמר ואין מטלטלין אותן כיצד הוא עושה נוטל את הכסוי והן נופלות

MISHNA: One may insulate cooked food on Shabbat eve in animal hides and may move those hides on Shabbat. So too, one may insulate food in wool fleece and, in contrast to hides, one may not move the fleece.How, then, does one act if he insulated food in fleece, and now wishes to remove the pot? He lifts the cover, which he is permitted to move, and the fleece falls by itself. He need not even touch it.

רבי אלעזר בן עזריה אומר קופה מטה על צדה ונוטל שמא יטול ואינו יכול להחזיר וחכמים אומרים נוטל ומחזיר:

Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: If he placed the pot in a basket filled with fleece, he leans the basket on its side so that the fleece will fall to the side and takes the pot. Otherwise, there is concern lest the wool collapse when he lifts the pot from the basket. And then, he will be unable to replace the pot, as it is prohibited to move the wool to make room for the pot, since the wool is set-aside. And the Rabbis disagree and say: He may take the pot and afterward replace it.

גמ׳ יתיב רבי יונתן בן עכינאי ורבי יונתן בן אלעזר ויתיב רבי חנינא בר חמא גבייהו וקא מיבעיא להו שלחין של בעל הבית תנן אבל של אומן כיון דקפיד עלייהו לא מטלטלינן להו או דילמא של אומן תנן וכל שכן של בעל הבית

GEMARA: The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yonatan ben Akhinai and Rabbi Yonatan ben Elazar sat, and Rabbi Ḥanina bar Ḥama sat with them, and they raised the following dilemma: Did we learn the halakha in the mishna that only the hides of a common homeowner may be moved; however, the hides of a craftsman, whose profession is processing hides, since he is particular that they not be ruined because they are essential to his work, one may not move them on Shabbat? Or, perhaps, we learned the halakha in the mishna that even the hides of a craftsman may be moved, and all the more so that hides of a common homeowner may be moved.

אמר להו רבי יונתן בן אלעזר מסתברא של בעל הבית תנן אבל של אומן קפיד עלייהו אמר להו רבי חנינא בר חמא כך אמר רבי ישמעאל ברבי יוסי

Rabbi Yonatan ben Elazar said to them: It stands to reason that we learned the halakha in the mishna with regard to the hides of a common homeowner; however, hides of a craftsman may not be moved, since he is particular about them. Rabbi Ḥanina bar Ḥama said to them that Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said as follows: