Shabbat 77aשבת ע״ז א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Shabbat 77a"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
77aע״ז א

תנינא המוציא יין כדי מזיגת כוס ותני עלה כדי מזיגת כוס יפה וקתני סיפא ושאר כל המשקין ברביעית ורבא לטעמיה דאמר רבא כל חמרא דלא דרי על חד תלת מיא לאו חמרא הוא

learned that in the mishna: One who carries out undiluted wine is only liable if he carries out a measure equivalent to the wine typically diluted for a cup. And it was taught with regard to the mishna: A measure equivalent to the wine diluted for a significant cup of wine. And it was taught in the latter clause of the mishna: And the measure that determines liability for carrying out all other liquids is a quarter of a log. Since a quarter of a log is the significant measure for liquids, that is also the significant measure for diluted wine. And Rava is consistent with his line of reasoning, as Rava said: Any wine that does not hold one part wine diluted by three parts water is not wine. Wine must be sufficiently potent to be capable of being diluted with water three times its measure.

אמר אביי שתי תשובות בדבר חדא דתנן והמזוג שני חלקי מים ואחד יין מן היין השירוני ועוד מים בכד ומצטרפין

Abaye said: There are two possible responses with regard to this matter. One, as we learned in a mishna: Diluted wine, which is used to determine the exact color of red, is two parts water and one part wine from the wine of the Sharon. Apparently, wine constitutes one-third and not one-quarter of the diluted cup. And furthermore: Rava’s opinion is that the measure that determines liability for carrying out wine is a measure that, when diluted, would equal a quarter of a log, i.e., a quarter of a quarter of a log of undiluted wine. Is it possible that the water is in the jug and yet joins together with the wine? The wine that he is carrying out is less than the required measure and is not fit for drinking.

אמר ליה רבא הא דקאמרת שני חלקי מים ואחד יין מן היין השירוני יין השירוני לחוד דרפי אי נמי התם משום חזותא אבל לטעמא בעי טפי ודקאמרת מים מכד ומצטרפין לענין שבת מידי דחשיב בעינן והא נמי הא חשיב

Rava said to him: That which you said that the dilution ratio that determines the color red is two parts water and one part wine, from the wine of the Sharon, is no proof. Wine of the Sharon is unique in that it is weak, and therefore two parts of water are sufficient to dilute it. Alternatively, there the dilution ratio mentioned is for determining the appearance of the color red; however, for the purpose of taste, more water is necessary. And that which you said: Is it possible that the water is in the jug and yet joins together with the wine? With regard to the liability of carrying out on Shabbat, we require an object that is significant, and this quarter of a quarter of a log of wine is also significant.

תנא יבש בכזית דברי רבי נתן אמר רב יוסף רבי נתן ורבי יוסי ברבי יהודה אמרו דבר אחד רבי נתן הא דאמרן ורבי יוסי ברבי יהודה דתניא רבי יהודה אומר ששה דברים מקולי בית שמאי ומחומרי בית הלל דם נבלה בית שמאי מטהרין ובית הלל מטמאין אמר רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה אף כשטמאו בית הלל לא טמאו אלא בדם שיש בו רביעית הואיל ויכול לקרוש ולעמוד על כזית

A tanna taught in a Tosefta: The measure that determines liability for carrying out congealed wine on Shabbat is an olive-bulk; this is the statement of Rabbi Natan. Rav Yosef said: Rabbi Natan and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, said the same thing. Rabbi Natan’s statement is that which we just stated. And the statement of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, is as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda says: Six matters are among the leniencies of Beit Shammai and among the stringencies of Beit Hillel. They include the blood of a carcass. Beit Shammai deem it ritually pure, as, in their opinion, only the flesh of a carcass imparts impurity; and Beit Hillel deem it ritually impure. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, said: Even when Beit Hillel deemed it impure, they deemed impure only a measure of blood that contains a quarter of a log, since it can congeal and constitute an olive-bulk. Rav Yosef draws a parallel between the two opinions. Both tanna’im agree that a quarter of a log of liquid congeals to the size of an olive-bulk.

אמר אביי דילמא לא היא עד כאן לא קאמר רבי נתן הכא דבעי רביעית אלא ביין דקליש אבל בדם דסמיך כזית לא בעי רביעית אי נמי עד כאן לא קאמר רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה התם דכזית סגי ליה ברביעית אלא בדם דסמיך אבל יין דקליש כזית הוי יותר מרביעית וכי מפיק פחות מכזית ליחייב:

Abaye said: Perhaps that is not the case, as Rabbi Natan said that a quarter of a log is required only here, with regard to wine, which is liquid; however, with regard to blood, which is viscous, in order to produce an olive-bulk when congealed, a quarter of a log is not required. Less than a quarter of a log of blood congeals into an olive-bulk. Alternatively, Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, said that in order to create a congealed olive-bulk, a quarter of a log is sufficient only there, with regard to blood, which is viscous; however, wine, which is liquid, in order to create a congealed olive-bulk, more than a quarter of a log of wine is required. And, therefore, even when he carries out less than an olive-bulk on Shabbat, let him be liable. There is no proof that the two tannaitic opinions are parallel.

חלב כדי גמיעה: איבעיא להו כדי גמיאה או כדי גמיעה אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק הגמיאיני נא מעט מים מכדך

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out milk is equivalent to that which is swallowed [kedei gemia] in one gulp. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Is the correct version of the mishna: Kedei gemia with an alef or kedei gemia with an ayin? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It should be written with an alef as we find in the Torah: “And he said: Give me to swallow [hagmi’ini with an alef ] please, a little water from your jug” (Genesis 24:17).

איבעיא להו

A similar dilemma with regard to spelling was raised before the Sages.