Some Rabbinic Conceptions of Shabbat

They [the Sages] stated a major rule with respect to Shabbat: [If] one [entirely] forgot the principle of Shabbat, and performed many Melakhot [constructive activities forbidden on Shabbat and festivals] on many Shabbatot, he is only liable for one hattat [an offering brought to expiate sin]. [If] one was aware of the principle of Shabbat, but performed many Melakhot on many Shabbatot he is liable for [one hattat] for every Shabbat. [If] one knew it was Shabbat and performed many forbidden on many Shabbatot, he is liable a separate offering for every principal labor. [If] one performed many principle labors all of which stem from the same principal labor, he is liable to bring only one offering.

(2) The [number of] principal labors is forty minus one: Sowing, plowing, reaping, binding sheaves, threshing, winnowing, sorting, grinding, sifting, kneading, baking;Shearing wool, whitening it, combing it, dyeing it, spinning, weaving, making two loops, weaving two threads, separating two threads, tying [a knot], untying [a knot], sewing two stitches, tearing for the purpose of sewing two stitches;Hunting a deer, slaughtering it, skinning it, salting it, curing its hide, scraping it, cutting it, writing two letters, erasing for the purpose of writing two letters, Building, demolishing, extinguishing a flame, lighting a flame, striking with a hammer;Carrying from one domain to another. These are the principal labors - [they number] forty minus one.

(5) [If] one extinguishes the lamp because he is afraid of non-Jews, of bandits, of an evil spirit, or that the sick may sleep, he is exempt; But [if his intention is] to preserve the lamp, to preserve the oil, or to preserve the wick, he is liable. Rabbi Yose exempts in all [these cases] except the [act preserving the wick], because he thereby creates a coal.

In order to spare the lamp:. The Gemara asks with regard to Rabbi Yosei: In accordance with whose opinion does he hold? If he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who holds that one is liable for a prohibited labor performed on Shabbat not for its own sake, then even in all those cases he should also deem him liable. And if he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who holds that one is exempt for a prohibited labor performed on Shabbat not for its own sake, then even in the case of a wick he should also deem him exempt. Ulla said: Actually, Rabbi Yosei holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. However, Rabbi Yosei holds that with regard to every destructive action, if he dismantles in order to rebuild in the same place, then it is considered to be dismantling. But one who demolishes in order to build elsewhere it is not considered performance of the prohibited labor of dismantling. When one extinguishes the flame to spare the lamp or the oil, he does not do so in order to relight them. When he does so to spare the wick, he indicates that he intends to relight the wick. Rabba said to him: But all labors prohibited on Shabbat, we derive them from the labors performed in the Tabernacle, and there it was a case of dismantling in order to build elsewhere.

Ulla said to Rabba: That is not a proof, as there, in the case of the Tabernacle, it is different. Since it is written: “At the commandment of the Lord they encamped” (Numbers 9:23). Consequently, when they took down the Tabernacle it was tantamount to demolishing in order to build in the same place. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Actually, Rabbi Yosei holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. And as far as the question, what is different about a wick, that can be answered as Rav Hamnuna said, and some say, Rav Adda bar Ahava said: Here, we are dealing with a wick that one must singe before lighting it in order to facilitate its burning, as, in that case, even Rabbi Shimon agrees that extinguishing the flame is prohibited, as, by doing so, he prepares a vessel for use.