Shabbat 80aשבת פ׳ א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Shabbat 80a"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
80aפ׳ א

תנא שתי אותיות בדיו (ושתי) אותיות בקולמוס שתי אותיות בקלמרין בעי רבא אות אחת בדיו אות אחת בקולמוס אות אחת בקלמרין מהו תיקו

A tanna taught in a Tosefta: The measure that determines liability for carrying out ink is equivalent to that which is used to write two letters when he carries out dried ink, and two letters when the ink is in the quill, and two letters in the inkwell [kalmarin]. Rava raised a dilemma: What is the halakha if one carried out sufficient ink to write one letter in the form of dried ink, and sufficient ink to write one letter in the quill, and sufficient ink to write one letter in the inkwell? Do they join together to constitute the measure for liability, or is each considered separately? No resolution was found for this dilemma. Therefore, let it stand unresolved.

אמר רבא הוציא שתי אותיות וכתבן כשהוא מהלך חייב כתיבתן זו היא הנחתן ואמר רבא הוציא אות אחת וכתבה וחזר והוציא אות אחת וכתבה פטור מאי טעמא בעידנא דאפקא לבתרייתא חסר ליה לשיעורא דקמייתא

Rava said: One who carried out a measure of ink equivalent to that which is used to write two letters on Shabbat, and he wrote two letters as he walked, even though he did not place the written material in the public domain, he is liable for carrying out the ink. Their writing is their placement. He is liable even without placing the ink on the ground. And Rava said: One who carried out sufficient ink to write one letter and he wrote it, and then proceeded to carry out sufficient ink to write one more letter and he wrote it, is exempt. What is the reason that he is exempt? At the time that he carried out the last drop of ink, he was lacking the first measure of ink. The ink that he carried out first dried slightly in the interim and not enough remained to write one letter.

ואמר רבא הוציא חצי גרוגרת אחת והניחה וחזר והוציא חצי גרוגרת אחת והניחה ראשונה נעשה כמי שקלטה [כלב] או שנשרפה ופטור ואמאי הא מנחה הכי קאמר ואם קדם והגביה ראשונה קודם הנחת שנייה נעשית ראשונה כמי שנקלטה או שנשרפה ופטור ואמר רבא הוציא חצי גרוגרת והניחה וחזר והוציא חצי גרוגרת והעבירה דרך עליה חייב ואמאי הא לא נח כגון שהעבירה תוך שלשה

And Rava said with regard to a similar issue: One who carried out half of a dried fig on Shabbat and placed it in a different domain, and proceeded to carry out another half of a dried fig and placed it, the first becomes as one that was snatched by a dog or burned and he is exempt, as he did not carry out the measure of a dried fig for which he would be liable. The Gemara wonders: And why is he exempt; isn’t an entire dried fig placed together? Why isn’t he liable for carrying it out? The Gemara explains: This is what Rava is saying: And if he lifted the first half-fig first before placement of the second, i.e., the two half-figs were never placed together, the first becomes as one that was snatched by a dog or burned and he is exempt. And Rava said: One who carried out half of a dried fig on Shabbat and placed it in a different domain, and proceeded to carry out another half of a dried fig and passed the second half-fig over the already placed first half-fig, is liable even though they were never placed together. The Gemara asks: And why is he liable? The second half-fig did not come to rest. The Gemara answers: It is referring to a case where he passed the second half-fig within three handbreadths of the first half-fig. The halakha is that objects less than three handbreadths apart are considered attached.

והאמר רבא תוך שלשה לרבנן צריך הנחה על גבי משהו לא קשיא כאן בזורק כאן במעביר

The Gemara asks: And didn’t Rava himself say: An object that passes within three handbreadths of the ground, according to the opinion of the Rabbis, must come to rest atop some defined place and if it does not it is not considered placed? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where Rava said that it must actually come to rest, it is referring to one who throws the object; here, where proximity alone is sufficient to render him liable, it is referring to one who passes an object in his hand, since he can place the object down at any point.

תנו רבנן הוציא חצי גרוגרת וחזר והוציא חצי גרוגרת בהעלם אחד חייב בשתי העלמות פטור רבי יוסי אומר בהעלם אחד לרשות אחד חייב לשתי רשויות פטור אמר רבה והוא שיש חיוב חטאת ביניהם אבל כרמלית לא

The Sages taught: One who carried out half of a dried fig into the public domain on Shabbat and proceeded to carry out another half of a dried fig, within one lapse of awareness, is liable; within two lapses of awareness, he is exempt because in neither lapse did he carry out a measure that would render him liable. Rabbi Yosei says: If he carried out the half-figs within one lapse of awareness to one domain he is liable; to two domains he is exempt. If he carried the two half-figs to two separate sections of the public domain, he is exempt because there is no permitted manner to unite the two halves. Rabba said with regard to Rabbi Yosei’s statement: That is only in a case where there is an area in which there is liability to bring a sin-offering between them. It only applies in a case where there is a private domain between the two sections of the public domain and carrying between them is prohibited by Torah law. However, if the two sections of the public domain were separated by a karmelit, no, he would not be exempt. In that case, there is no Torah prohibition against carrying between the two sections of the public domain through the karmelit, and by Torah law they are not considered separate.

אביי אמר אפילו כרמלית אבל פיסלא לא ורבא אמר אפילו פיסלא ואזדא רבא לטעמיה דאמר רבא רשות שבת כרשות גיטין דמיא:

Abaye said: Even if they were separated by a karmelit it is not considered one domain, and he is exempt. However, if the two sections were separated by a large beam, no, they are not considered separate. And Rava said: Even if the two sections were separated by a large beam, according to Rabbi Yosei, they are considered separate and he is exempt. The Gemara comments: And Rava follows his line of reasoning stated elsewhere as Rava said: The definition of domain for Shabbat is like the definition of domain for bills of divorce. Just as with regard to bills of divorce, two areas separated by a beam are not considered one domain, so too, with regard to the halakhot of Shabbat, they are not considered one domain.

כחול כדי לכחול עין אחת עין אחת: הא לא כחלי אמר רב הונא שכן צנועות כוחלות עין אחת מיתיבי רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר כחול אם לרפואה כדי לכחול עין אחת אם לקשט בשתי עינים תרגמא הילל בריה דרבי שמואל בר נחמני כי תניא ההוא בעירניות:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out blue eye shadow is equivalent to that which is used to paint one eye blue. The Gemara asks: How could the mishna say one eye? Women do not paint only one eye blue. Rav Huna said: Because modest women, who cover their faces with a veil, paint only the one eye that shows blue. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: For carrying out blue eye shadow, if it is used for healing, the measure for liability is equivalent to that which is used to paint one eye blue; if it is used to adorn the eye, the measure that determines liability for carrying out is equivalent to that which is used for two eyes. Hillel, son of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani, explained it: When this baraita was taught it was in reference to village women. Because immodest behavior is less common there, women do not customarily cover their faces.

(שעוה כדי ליתן על פי נקב קטן: תנא כדי ליתן על פי נקב קטן של יין):

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out wax is equivalent to that which is used to place on the opening of a small hole to seal it. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: Enough to place on the opening of a small hole in a receptacle holding wine. The size of a hole that enables pouring wine is smaller than the size of the hole required when pouring more viscous liquids.

דבק כדי ליתן בראש השפשף: תנא כדי ליתן בראש שפשף שבראש קנה של ציידין:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out glue is equivalent to that which is used to place on the top of a board [shafshaf ]. The Sages taught: This means an amount equivalent to that which is used to place on the top of a board that is attached to the top of a hunter’s rod. Hunters would spread glue to trap the birds that land on the board.

זפת וגפרית כדי לעשות כו׳: תנא כדי לעשות נקב קטן:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out tar and sulfur is equivalent to that which is used to seal a hole in a vessel and to make a small hole in that seal. Tar and sulfur were used to seal large cavities in jars. Holes were sometimes made in those seals. A tanna taught in a Tosefta: One is liable for carrying out a measure equivalent to that which can be used to make a large hole into a small hole.

חרסית כדי לעשות פי כור כו׳: למימרא דשיעורא דרבי יהודה נפיש הא קיימא לן דשיעורא דרבנן נפיש דתנן רבי יהודה אומר כדי ליטול הימנו מדת מנעל לקטן אימא כדי לסוד פיטפוט כירה קטנה:

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out crushed earthenware is equivalent to that which is used to knead and make an opening for the bellows to be placed in a gold refiners’ crucible. Rabbi Yehuda says: An amount equivalent to that which is used to make a small tripod for the crucible. The Gemara wonders: Is that to say that the measure of Rabbi Yehuda is greater? Don’t we maintain that the measure of the Rabbis is greater, as we learned in a mishna that Rabbi Yehuda says with regard to reeds: The measure for liability is equivalent to that which is used to take the measure of a shoe for a child? That is smaller than the measure determined by the Rabbis. The Gemara answers: Here too, say it does not mean sufficient material to make the entire tripod, but to plaster the cracks in the small tripod of a small stove, which requires a minimal amount of plaster.

(סובין כדי ליתן על פי כור של צורפי זהב):

We learned in the mishna: The measure that determines liability for carrying out bran is equivalent to that which is used to place on the opening of a gold refiners’ crucible.