Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Shabbath

Folio 82a

seeing that you do not cleanse yourselves with a shard,¹  nor kill vermin on your garments, and you do not pull out and eat a vegetable from a bunch which the gardener has tied together'?²

R. Huna said to his son Rabbah, 'Why are you not to be found before R. Hisda, whose dicta are [so] keen?' 'What should I go to him for,' answered he, 'seeing that when I go to him he treats me to secular discourses!'³  [Thus] he tells me, when one enters a privy, he must not sit down abruptly, nor force himself overmuch, because the rectum rests on three teeth-like glands, [and] these teeth-like glands of the rectum, might become dislocated and he [his health] is endangered. 'He treats of health matters,'⁴  he exclaimed, 'and you call them secular discourses! All the more reason for going to him!'

If a pebble and a shard lie before one, — R. Huna said: He must cleanse himself with the pebble, but not with the shard;⁵  but R. Hisda ruled: He must cleanse himself with the shard, and not with the pebble.⁶  An objection is raised: If a pebble and a shard lie before one, he must cleanse himself with the shard, not with the pebble this refutes R. Huna? — Rafram b. Papa interpreted it before R. Hisda on R. Huna's view as referring to the rims of utensils.⁷

If a pebble and grass lie before one, — R. Hisda and R. Hamnuna [differ therein]: one maintains: He must cleanse himself with the pebble, but not with the grass;⁸  whilst the other ruled: He must cleanse himself with the grass, not with the pebble.⁹  An objection is raised: If one cleanses himself with inflammable material,¹⁰  his lower teeth¹¹  will be torn away? — There is no difficulty: the one refers to wet [grass];¹²  the other to dry [grass].

If one has a call of nature but does not obey it — R. Hisda and Rabina — one said: He has an attack of offensive odour;¹³  the other said: He is infected by an offensive smell.¹⁴  It was taught in accordance with the view that he is infected by an offensive smell. For it was taught: One who has a call of nature yet eats, is like an oven which is heated up on top of its ashes, and that is the beginning of perspiration odour.¹⁵

If one has a call of nature but cannot obey it, — R. Hisda said: He should repeatedly stand up and sit down; R. Hanan of Nehardea said: Let him move to [different] sides; R. Hamnuna said: Let him work about that place with a pebble; while the Rabbis advise: Let him not think: Said R. Aha son of Raba to R. Ashi: If he does not think [of it], he is all the more likely not to be moved? Let him not think of other things, replied he.¹⁶  R. Jeremiah of Difti observed: I myself saw a certain Arab repeatedly arise and sit down until he poured forth like a cruse.

Our Rabbis taught: If one enters [a house] to [partake of] a complete meal,¹⁷  he should [first] walk ten four-cubit lengths others say, four ten-cubit lengths — be moved, then enter and take his seat.

MISHNAH. [IF ONE CARRIES OUT] A SHARD, [THE STANDARD IS] AS MUCH AS IS NEEDED FOR PLACING BETWEEN ONE BOARD AND ANOTHER:¹⁸  THIS IS R. JUDAH'S VIEW. R. MEIR SAID: LARGE ENOUGH TO SCRAPE OUT THE FIRE THEREWITH; R. JOSE SAID: LARGE ENOUGH TO CONTAIN A REBI'ITH. R. MEIR OBSERVED: THOUGH THERE IS NO PROOF OF THE MATTER, YET THERE IS A HINT: SO THAT THERE SHALL NOT BE FOUND AMONG THE PIECES THEREOF A SHARD TO TAKE FIRE FROM THE HEARTH.¹⁹  SAID R. JOSE TO HIM, THENCE IS PROOF [OF MY VIEW, VIZ.]: OR TO TAKE WATER WITHAL OUT OF THE CISTERN.²⁰

GEMARA. (The Scholars asked: Is R. Meir's standard greater or R. Jose's standard greater?)²¹  Logically, R. Jose's standard is greater, whereas the verse [quoted indicates that] R. Meir's standard is greater, for should you think that R. Jose's standard is greater, does he [the prophet] [first] curse in respect to a small vessel, and then curse in respect to a large one!²²  — Said Abaye: Our Mishnah too [means] to scrape out a fire from a large hearth.²³

SAID R. JOSE TO HIM, THENCE IS PROOF. But R. Jose says well to R. Meir! — R. Meir maintains that he proceeds to a climax: Not only will nothing that is of value to people be found therein, but even that which is of no value to people shall not be found therein.

CHAPTER IX

MISHNAH. R. AKIBA SAID: WHENCE DO WE KNOW THAT AN IDOL DEFILES BY CARRIAGE LIKE A NIDDAH?²⁴  BECAUSE IT IS SAID, THOU SHALT CAST THEM [SC. THE IDOLS] AWAY AS A MENSTRUOUS THING; THOU SHALT SAY UNTO IT, GET THEE HENCE:²⁵  JUST AS A NIDDAH DEFILES BY CARRIAGE, SO DOES AN IDOL DEFILE BY CARRIAGE.²⁶

GEMARA. We learnt elsewhere:²⁷  If one's house adjoins an idol,²⁸  and it collapses, he must not rebuild it.²⁹  What shall he do? He must retreat four cubits within his own [ground] and rebuild.

1. And are thus not exposed to witchcraft — this remark gives the point of the story.
2. But you first untie the bunch.
3. I.e., not on Torah.
4. Lit., 'the life (health) of the creatures.
5. Though the first is not a utensil (v. p. 389. n. 1), because the latter is dangerous.
6. Because the former is technically a utensil.
7. Which are rounded and smooth; hence they are not dangerous.
8. Because it injures the flesh (Rashi). Or the reference is to attached (growing) grass, and one must not make use on the Sabbath of that which is attached to the soil.
9. He ignores the prohibition mentioned in the last note, and holds grass to be preferable, because a pebble is not a utensil and may normally not be handled on the Sabbath.
10. Lit., 'over which the fire rules'.
11. I.e., the teeth-like glands supporting the rectum.
12. This is permissible.
13. From his mouth.
14. From the whole body.
15. Which affects the whole body.
16. But concentrate on this.
17. Lit., 'a fixed meal' as opposed to a mere snack, so that he will have to sit some time there.
18. When they are piled up. Rashi: the boards are not allowed to touch, but are separated by shards to prevent them from warping. 'Aruk: to enable the air to enter and dry them.
19. Isa. XXX. 14.
20. Ibid. The least quantity of water to be counted is a rebi'ith; v. first Mishnah of this chapter.
21. Rashal and BaH delete this bracketed passage.
22. This is raised as a difficulty. Generally speaking, only a very small shard is required for scraping out a fire from a stove, certainly not one large enough to contain a rebi'ith. On the other hand, the prophet would not curse by first observing that not even a small shard will remain, and then add that a large shard will not remain either.
23. Which requires a larger shard.
24. If one carries a niddah (q.v. Glos.), even without actually touching her, he becomes unclean, and R. Akiba teaches that the same applies to an idol.
25. Isa. XXX, 22.
26. Rashi: This Mishnah is quoted here because of its similarity in style to a later Mishnah concerning circumcision on the Sabbath (infra 86a). R. Han. and Tosaf.: Since the last Mishnah of the preceding chapter quotes a law which is supported by, though not actually deduced from, a Biblical verse, this chapter commences similarly. Both verses quoted are from Isa. XXX.
27. V. A.Z. 47b.
28. So that its wall is also the wall of the heathen temple, though actually it belongs entirely to him.
29. Since he thereby builds a wall for the temple too.

If it belongs to him and to the idol, it is judged as half and half.¹  The stones, timber and earth thereof defile like a [dead] creeping thing [sherez], for it is said, Thou shalt treat a creeping thing.²  R. Akiba said: [They defile] like a niddah, because it is said, 'Thou shalt cast them away [tizrem] as a menstruous thing': just as a niddah defiles by carriage, so does an idol defile by carriage. Rabbah observed, Tizrem, mentioned in the verse, means 'thou shalt alienate them from thee as a zar [stranger].' 'Thou shalt say unto it, Get thee hence', but thou shalt not say unto it, Enter hither.³

Rabbah also observed: As for carriage, all agree that it defiles thereby, since it is assimilated to niddah. They differ in respect to a stone that closes a cavity:⁴  R. Akiba holds, It is like a niddah: just as a niddah defiles through a cavity-closing stone, so does an idol defile through a cavity-closing stone; while the Rabbis maintain, It is like a creeping thing [sherez]: just as a sherez does not defile through a cavity-closing stone, so does an idol not defile through a cavity-closing stone.

Now, according to R. Akiba, in respect of which law is it likened to a sherez?⁵ — In respect of its service utensils.⁶  And according to the Rabbis, in respect of which law is it likened to niddah? — In respect of carriage. Then let it be likened to nebelah?⁷  That indeed is so, but [the analogy with niddah teaches:] just as a niddah is not [a source of contamination] through her [separate] limbs,⁸  So is an idol not [a source of contamination] through its limbs. Then when R. Hama b. Guria asked: 'Does the law of an idol operate in respect of its limbs or not?'-solve it for him from this that according to the Rabbis it does not operate in respect of its limbs? — R. Hama b. Guria asked it on R. Akiba's view.

But R. Eleazar maintained: In respect of a cavity-closing stone all agree that it does not defile thereby, since it is likened to a sherez,⁹  they differ only in respect of carriage. R. Akiba holds, It is like a niddah: just as a niddah defiles through carriage, so does an idol defile through carriage. While the Rabbis argue. It is like a sherez: just as a sherez does not defile through carriage, so does an idol not defile through carriage. Now, according to R. Akiba, in respect of what law is it likened to a sherez? — In respect of its service utensils. And according to the Rabbis', in respect of what law is it likened to a niddah? — Just as a niddah is not [a source of contamination] through her [separate] limbs, so is an idol not [a source of contamination] through its limbs.

1. E.g., if the wall is two cubits thick, one cubit only is accounted as his portion, and be must retreat another three cubits.
2. Deut. VIII, 26. Shakkez teshakkezenu fr. shekez, something loathsome, which is connected with sherez (E.V.: thou shalt utterly detest it). A sherez defiles by its touch, but not when it is merely carried; but v. discussion infra.
3. I.e., one must absolutely reject it (Tosaf. s.v.[H]).
4. Rashi: a stone resting upon laths, and under it lie utensils. Tosaf.: a stone so heavy that when a niddah sits upon it her additional weight makes no difference to the utensils upon which it rests. According to both definitions, the question is whether these utensils are defiled when an idol is placed upon the stone.
5. As it is in the verse, v.p. 393, n. 8.
6. The utensils used in an idol's service do not defile through carriage or through a cavity-closing stone.
7. V. Glos. This analogy would give the exact law, whereas the analogy with niddah has to be qualified by a further analogy with sherez.
8. If a limb e.g., an arm, is cut off from a niddah, it defiles as the severed limb of a living human being in general, but not as niddah. The practical difference is that it does not defile through a cavity-closing stone.
9. This is the text as emended by Rashal.