[ג] הבהמה והכלים כרגלי הבעלים. המוסר בהמתו לבנו או לרועה הרי אלו כרגלי הבעלים. כלים המיוחדין לאחד מן האחין שבבית, הרי אלו כרגליו, ושאין מיוחדין הרי אלו כמקום שהולכין.
[ד] השואל כלי מחבירו מערב יום טוב, כרגלי השואל. ביום טוב, כרגלי המשאיל. האשה ששאלה מחברתה תבלין ומים ומלח לעיסתה, הרי אלו כרגלי שתיהן. רבי יהודה פוטר במים, מפני שאין בהן ממש.
[3] Livestock and utensils are [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the[ir] owners. [If] one entrusts his animal to his son or to a shepherd [on a festival day] these [animals] are [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the[ir] owners. Utensils designated for one of two brothers of a house, these are [accorded a tehum] like [that of] his feet, but [those] that are not designated for any one [brother], these are [restricted to] the place where they [all] may go.
[4] When one borrows a utensil from his friend, [if s/he borrowed it] before the festival [it is accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the borrower. [However, if s/he borrowed it] on the festival day it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the lender. And so [too], a woman who borrowed from her female friend [on a festival day] spice, and water and salt for her dough, these are [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of both of them. Rabbi Yehudah exempts water [from this rule] because it has no [noticeable] existence.
חמור, כרגלי חמר. פרה, כרגלי איכר. בהמה, כרגלי הרועה. ר' דוסה אומר: הלוקח בהמה, כרועה. פ"אע שלא הודיע עליה לרועה, הרי היא כרגלי הרועה. הלוקח בהמה מחבירו מערב יום טוב, כרגלי הלוקח. ביום טוב, כרגלי המוכר. הלוקח בשר מבית טבח מערב יום טוב, כרגלי הלוקח. ביום טוב, כרגלי המוכר. השואל חלוק מחבירו, מערב יום טוב, כרגלי השואל. ביום טוב, כרגלי המשאיל. שנים ששאלו חלוק אחד, אחד לילך בו שחרית לבית המדרש, ואחד לילך בו בסעודה, מערב יום טוב כרגלי השואל. ביום טוב, כרגלי המשאיל. האשה ששאלה מחברתה תבלין, מים ומלח מערב יום טוב, כרגלי השואל. ביום טוב, כרגלי המשאלת. נתנתן לעיסתה, הרי היא כרגלי שתיהן. ר' יהודה פוטר במים מפני שנבלעין בעיסה.
An ass is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of an ass-driver. The cow is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of a farmer. A domestic beast is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the shepherd. Rabbi Dosa says: S/he who purchases a beast, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] [the feet of] the shepherd, even if s/he did not inform the shepherd. S/he who purchases a beast from his/her fellow on the eve of a festival, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the purchaser. [If s/he purchased it] on a festival day, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the seller. S/he who purchases meat from the butcher on the eve of the festival, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the purchaser. [If s/he bought it] on the festival day, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the seller. S/he who borrows a cloak from his/her fellow on the eve of a festival, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the borrower. [S/he who borrows a cloak from his/her fellow] on the festival day, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the lender. Two who borrowed a single cloak, one to go in it in the morning to the study house and one to go in it to a meal, [if they did so] on the eve of a festival, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the one who borrows it. [If they did so] on the festival day, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the one who lends it. A woman who borrowed from her female friend spice, water, and salt [for her dough], [if she did so] on the eve of the festival, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the borrower. [If she did so] on the festival day itself, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of the lender. If she puts them into her dough, it is [accorded a tehum] like [that of] the feet of both of them. Rabbi Yehudah exempts water [from this rule] because it is absorbed by the dough.
@General observations
The rabbis limited the distance a person may walk on Shabbat and on festival days. This restriction is known as the tehum (תחום ,lit. boundary). According to this law a person is allowed to walk 2000 cubits (אמות/אמה – amot) beyond the place where s/he established her/his residence for Shabbat or the festival. If a person began the day in a city, the 2000 cubit limit is measured from the city’s border. If one began the day in an enclosure, the limit is measured from the outer walls of the structure, and if one began the day in the open, the limit is measured from beyond the distance of 2000 cubits where the person stood at the beginning of Shabbat or the festival.[1] The laws of tehumim are taught in Tractate Eruvin (mEruv 3-5). Massekhet Betsah adds another aspect of the tehum-laws and extends the movement-restrictions to a person’s property as well. Since carrying utensils outside of a building is in general prohibited on the Shabbat, the laws concerning the carrying of a person’s property are outlined in Tractate Betsah.
Therefore, mBets 5:3-5 discusses the question of how far objects may be transported on festival days. In general, the rabbis assert that a person’s property may be carried as far as the person himself/herself may walk. The above mishnah and the parallel Tosefta text deal with a problem that occurs when someone entrusts or lends a utensil to someone else. Both tannaitic sources discuss whether the owner’s tehum applies to the borrowed utensil or whether the purchaser’s tehum sets the limits for the carrying of the object. The rabbis determine that any object lent on the day before the festival day may be carried as far as the borrower may walk on the festival day, whereas any object lent on the festival day itself may be transported only as far as the owner is allowed to move. The rule applies as well when two tehumim overlap. This means that if two people live 3000 cubits away from each other, neither can reach the other’s home. Yet there is still an area of 1000 cubits where they may meet each other.[2] This mishnah teaches that an object may not be taken from one person to the common area and then be taken home by the second person. Although both, the lender and the borrower, walk within the tehum permitted to both of them, they may not carry the object out of the tehum permitted for the object itself.
A person’s tehum can be extended by setting the so-called eruvei tehumim or simply eruv.[3] An eruv is established by placing food 2000 cubits away from the person’s residence before the beginning of the Shabbat or festival day. The depot of the food is then considered the legal residence of this person and enables him/her thus to go 2000 cubits to her/his eruv and 2000 cubits from the eruv. Through this mechanism a person is able to walk up to 4000 cubits in one direction on the Shabbat or festival days. Yet what s/he gains in one direction, s/he loses in the other direction. This means that after establishing an eruv a person may walk up to 4000 cubits in one direction only.
[1] For the explanation of the tehum-laws see REISMAN and GOLDWURM, Tractate Betsah, bBets 37a.
[2] For this explanation see REISMAN and GOLDWURM, Tractate Betsah, bBets 37a.
[3] On the topic of the eruv see FONROBERT, “From Separatism to Urbanism,” 56; FONROBERT, “Gender Politics,” 57; LEHNARDT, Besa, 15.
@Feminist observations
The above-cited mishnah and Tosefta text both agree on these rules. Yet a difference can be noted between them concerning the ruling about objects carried by women on festival days. An eruv symbolically transforms a public domain into a large private one. This allows a person to carry outside the house items that it would normally be permissible to carry from place to place inside the house. In this mishnah, a large number of examples for this practice are given, but only one of them singles women out as the doer. Here again one observes that women are conceived as being responsible for the making of the dough and as working together with their neighbors and borrowing ingredients for their dough from each other. Yet even though this rule is found in both the Mishnah and the Tosefta, some significant differences between them emerge. We note that, according to the Tosefta, the same rules apply to both women and men. Therefore, in analogy to the various (male/genderless) examples presented earlier, when a woman borrows ingredients for her dough on the day before the festival, the ingredients are part of the borrower’s tehum, but if she had borrowed them on the festival day itself, the carrying of the ingredients is limited to the lender’s tehum. The Tosefta adds that dough may be carried only within the common tehum of both women. The reason for this is that the dough contains ingredients that are accorded the status of the borrower, or dough-maker, and others with the status of their lender-supplier, bound by her/his own tehum.
In contrast to the Tosefta, the Mishnah records only the last ruling about the dough. Consequently, according to the Mishnah, there are two possibilities for interpreting the carrying options for women on festival days: (i) The Mishnah fixes general rules about transporting items from one tehum to another. These restrictions − like other rules throughout the Tractate Betsah – albeit formulated in male language and for male subjects, include women; (ii) By stating that the dough may be carried only within the common tehum of both women,[1] the Mishnah rules that women are not included in the above-mentioned rulings and are limited in their mobility options.
When we look at mBetsah as a whole, and at our mishnah in particular, the first assumption is much more probable. The same rules applied here to women and men. The dough is presented not as part of a carrying rule specific to women, but as an example of an item containing ingredients from two different owners with two different tehumim. That the specification of a general rule is explained with an item (the dough) clearly associated with a female working domain again shows the central importance of women’s sphere of activity to the underlying principle of the whole tractate: “There is no difference between Shabbat and festivals except for the preparation of food.” Nevertheless, one observes again that the Mishnah records women only in a deviation from the norm. While the male verb-forms and the male subjects were recorded when fixing a rule, women were recorded when the Mishnah speaks about exemptions or specifications of rabbinic regulations.