נזיר חופף ומפספס אבל לא סורק
A nazirite, for whom it is prohibited to cut his hair, may wash his hair with sand and natron and separate it with his fingers; however, he may not comb it, as combing will certainly cause hair to fall out. Apparently, Rabbi Shimon permits washing hair even in a case where it is prohibited to cause hair to fall out; in his opinion, the fact that washing one’s hair might inadvertently cause that to happen is not a source of concern.
אלא הא והא רבי יהודה היא ותרי תנאי אליבא דרבי יהודה האי תנא אליבא דרבי יהודה סבר גריר והאי תנא אליבא דרבי יהודה סבר לא גריר
Rather, both this baraita and that baraita, which disagree with regard to cleaning silver utensils with sand and natron, are in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who holds that an unintentional act is prohibited. And there are two tanna’im in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. They disagree with regard to Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion. This tanna, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, holds that sand and natron scrape and smooth the utensils. Therefore, their use on Shabbat is prohibited. And that tanna, also in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, holds that sand and natron do not scrape and smooth the utensils. Therefore, their use on Shabbat is permitted.
במאי אוקימתא כרבי יהודה אימא סיפא אבל פניו ידיו ורגליו מותר הא מעבר שיער
The Gemara raises an objection: How did you establish that baraita? It was in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. If so, say the latter clause of the baraita: But his face, his hands, and his feet, it is permitted to wash with sand and natron. Doesn’t he thereby cause hair to fall out? It should be prohibited according to Rabbi Yehuda.
איבעית אימא בקטן ואיבעית אימא באשה ואיבעית אימא בסריס
The Gemara answers: If you wish, say that the permission to wash one’s face with sand and natron refers to a child; and if you wish, say instead that it refers to a woman; and if you wish, say instead that it refers to a eunuch. All of them have no facial hair, and that is why there is no concern that use of sand and natron to clean their faces will cause hair to fall out.
אמר רב יהודה עפר לבינתא שרי אמר רב יוסף כוספא דיסמין שרי אמר רבא עפר פלפלי שרי אמר רב ששת ברדא שרי
The Gemara continues: Rav Yehuda said: Washing one’s face with powdered frankincense (Rav Hai Gaon) is permitted on Shabbat, even if he has a beard, as it does not cause hair to fall out. Rav Yosef said: Washing with the solid residue of jasmine from which its fragrant oil was squeezed is permitted. Rava said: Washing with ground pepper is permitted. Rav Sheshet said: Washing with berada is permitted on Shabbat.
מאי ברדא אמר רב יוסף תילתא אהלא ותילתא אסא ותילתא סיגלי אמר רב נחמיה בר יוסף כל היכא דליכא רובא אהלא שפיר דמי
The Gemara asks: What is berada? Rav Yosef said: It is a mixture of one-third aloe, one-third myrtle, and one-third violets. Rav Neḥemya bar Yosef said: Everywhere that there is a mixture with no majority of aloe, it may well be used. Even if the mixture contains more than a third aloe, as long as it constitutes less than a majority, it does not cause hair to fall out.
בעו מיניה מרב ששת מהו לפצוע זיתים בשבת אמר להו וכי בחול מי התירו קסבר משום הפסד אוכלין
The Sages raised a dilemma before Rav Sheshet: What is the halakha with regard to splitting olives on a rock on Shabbat in order to wash with the oil that oozes from them (ge’onim)? He said to them: And did they permit doing so on a weekday? Rav Sheshet holds that crushing olives in that manner is prohibited even during the week because it involves ruining food. After the olives are split in that manner, they are no longer fit for consumption.
לימא פליגא דשמואל דאמר שמואל עושה אדם כל צורכו בפת אמרי פת לא מאיסא הני מאיסי
The Gemara comments: Let us say that Rav Sheshet disagrees with the opinion of Shmuel. As Shmuel said: A person may perform all his needs with bread, and he need not be concerned that it might be ruined. The Sages said in response: Rav Sheshet does not necessarily disagree with Shmuel. Using bread does not render it disgusting and inedible; splitting these olives renders them disgusting and inedible.
אמימר ומר זוטרא ורב אשי הוו יתבי אייתו לקמייהו ברדא אמימר ורב אשי משו מר זוטרא לא משא אמרו ליה לא סבר לה מר להא דאמר רב ששת ברדא שרי אמר להו רב מרדכי בר מיניה דמר דאפילו בחול נמי לא סבירא ליה
The Gemara relates that Ameimar, Mar Zutra, and Rav Ashi were sitting on Shabbat, and they brought berada before them for washing. Ameimar and Rav Ashi washed with it; Mar Zutra did not wash. They said to him: Doesn’t the Master hold in accordance with that which Rav Sheshet said: Washing with berada is permitted on Shabbat? Rav Mordekhai, who was also there, said to them: Except for him, the Master; i.e., do not draw conclusions from Mar Zutra, as he does not hold that one is permitted to use berada, even on a weekday.
סבר לה כי הא דתניא מגרר אדם גלדי צואה וגלדי מכה שעל בשרו בשביל צערו אם בשביל ליפות אסור
Mar Zutra holds in accordance with that which was taught in a baraita: A person may scrape off dried excrement crusts and scabs of a wound that are on his flesh because of the pain that they are causing him. However, if he does so in order to clean and beautify himself, it is prohibited. According to the tanna of this baraita, it is prohibited to adorn or beautify oneself, as the verse: “Neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment” (Deuteronomy 22:5) prohibits dressing or conducting oneself in the manner of women.
ואינהו כמאן סברוה כי הא דתניא רוחץ אדם פניו ידיו ורגליו בכל יום בשביל קונו משום שנאמר כל פעל ה׳ למענהו:
The Gemara asks: And Ameimar and Rav Ashi, who permit use of berada, in accordance with whose opinion do they hold? They hold in accordance with that which was taught in a baraita: A person must wash his face, his hands, and his feet every day for the sake of his Maker, as it is stated: “The Lord has made everything for His own purpose” (Proverbs 16:4). Every beautiful thing that exists in the world sings the praise of God Who created beautiful things. Therefore, it is appropriate for one to beautify himself in praise of God.
רבי אלעזר בן עזריה אומר קופה מטה על צדה ונוטל שמא יטול וכו׳: אמר רבי אבא אמר רבי חייא בר אשי (אמר רב) הכל מודים שאם נתקלקלה הגומא שאסור להחזיר
We learned in the mishna: 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 of the pot, and takes the pot. Otherwise, there is room for concern lest the wool collapse when he lifts the pot from the basket. Then he will be unable to replace the pot. It is prohibited to move the fleece to make room for the pot, since the fleece is set-aside. However, the Rabbis disagree and say: He may lift the pot and afterward replace it. Rabbi Abba said that Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi said that Rav said: Everyone agrees, even the Rabbis, that if the cavity in which the pot had been placed was destroyed, its walls having collapsed inward, it is prohibited to return the pot to the basket.
תנן וחכמים אומרים נוטל ומחזיר היכי דמי אי דלא נתקלקלה הגומא שפיר קא אמרי רבנן אלא לאו אף על פי דנתקלקלה הגומא
The Gemara asks, based on what we learned in the mishna. And the Rabbis say: He may lift the pot and afterward replace it. The Gemara elaborates: What are the circumstances? If the cavity in which the pot had been placed was not destroyed, the Rabbis say fittingly that it is permitted to replace the pot; why would Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya prohibit the practice? Rather, is it not that the Rabbis permit returning the pot even though the cavity was destroyed? Apparently, that is the subject of the dispute in the mishna.
לא לעולם דלא נתקלקלה והכא בחוששין קמיפלגי מר סבר חוששין שמא נתקלקלה הגומא ומר סבר אין חוששין
The Gemara rejects this: No, actually, everyone agrees that if the cavity was destroyed, it is prohibited to return the pot to the basket. The mishna is dealing with a case where the cavity was not destroyed, and here the tanna’im disagree with regard to whether or not one need be concerned lest, if one is allowed to remove the pot from the basket without tilting it to the side, the cavity be destroyed and he will come to return the pot to the basket anyway. One Sage, Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, holds that one need be concerned lest the cavity be destroyed and he return the pot anyway; and the other Sage, a reference to the Rabbis, holds that one need not be concerned about that.
אמר רב הונא האי סליקוסתא דצה שלפה והדר דצה שריא ואי לאו אסיר
The Gemara records several rulings with regard to placing an object into another object that is set-aside. Rav Huna said: With regard to this fragrant daffodil branch that was kept in a pot of moist earth in the house; if on Shabbat eve one inserted it into the earth, then pulled it out,and then inserted it again into the earth, it is permitted to pull it out again on Shabbat.By inserting it and then pulling it out, he has already widened the cavity in which the branch was placed. There is no room for concern that when he pulls it out again on Shabbat he will cause earth to shift from its place. And if he did not do so on Shabbat eve, it is prohibited to pull it out on Shabbat.
אמר שמואל האי סכינא דביני אורבי דצה שלפה והדר דצה שרי ואי לאו אסיר
Shmuel said: This knife that is stored between bricks; if one stuck it between the bricks on Shabbat eve, pulled it out, and then stuck it between the bricks, it is permitted to pull it out on Shabbat. And if he did not do so on Shabbat eve, it is prohibited to pull it out on Shabbat.
מר זוטרא ואיתימא רב אשי אמר בגורדיתא דקני שפיר דמי
Mar Zutra, and some say Rav Ashi, said: Placing a knife between the branches of a hedge of reeds (ge’onim) may well be done and there is no concern lest one come to cut the reeds when he removes it.
אמר ליה רב מרדכי לרבא מתיב רב קטינא תיובתא הטומן לפת וצנונות תחת הגפן אם היה מקצת עליו מגולים אינו חושש
Rav Mordekhai said to Rava: Rav Ketina raised a conclusive refutation of the opinions of Rav Huna and Shmuel from that which we learned in a mishna: With regard to one who conceals a turnip or radish in the ground beneath a vine for safekeeping, if some of its leaves were showing, allowing access to pull the turnip or the radish from the ground, he need neither be concerned;