Talmud for Shabbat 107:21
אמר אביי השתא דאמר שמואל טפח ותנא דבי שמואל טפחיים שמואל הלכה למעשה אתא לאשמעינן
together, like Isaac the son of Abraham; RAGUL means that the forefoot must not be bent back on to the shoulder and tied. An objection is raised: 'Akud refers to the two forefeet or the two hindfeet [tied together]; ragul means that the forefoot must not be bent back on to the shoulder and tied? — He interprets as the following Tanna. For it was taught: 'Akud means the tying together of the forefoot and the hindfoot, or of the two forefeet or the two hindfeet; ragul means that the forefoot must not be bent back on to the shoulder and tied. Yet it is still not the same: as for the first and the last clauses, it is well; but the middle one is difficult?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For this Tanna includes the tying together of the two forefeet or the two hindfeet in the term 'akud, whereas according to Rab Judah, who> gives the analogy of Isaac, only the tying of the forefoot to the hindfoot is thus designated. ');"><sup>18</sup></span> — Rather [he maintains] as the following Tanna. For it was taught: 'Akud means the tying of hand and foot, like Isaac the son of Abraham; ragul means that the forefoot must not be bent back on to the shoulder and tied. ONE MUST NOT TIE CAMELS TOGETHER. What is the reason? — Said R. Ashi: Because it looks as if he is going to the fair. BUT HE MAY TAKE [etc.]. R. Ashi said: This was taught only in respect to Kil'ayim.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. The prohibition of twining them together cannot refer to the Sabbath. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> Kil'ayim of what? Shall we say, kil'ayim of man?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he winds the cords round his hand, he may pull at something simultaneously with the camels; thus they act in unison, and this may be regarded as two different species working together, which is forbidden, v. Deut. XXII, 10. On this supposition the Mishnah must be translated: providing he does not wind them (round his hand). ');"><sup>20</sup></span> Surely we learnt: A man is permitted to plough and pull with all of them.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. various animals, and this does not constitute kil'ayim. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> But if it means kil'ayim of the cords,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In case some are of wool, while others are of flax; when twined together they become kil'ayim, and as he holds them, they warm his hands, which is the equivalent of 'wearing' (v. Deut. XII, 11). ');"><sup>22</sup></span> — surely we learnt: If one fastens [two pieces together] with one fastening,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if he joins two pieces of cloth, one of wool and the other of linen, with a single stitch or knot. ');"><sup>23</sup></span> it is not a connection?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence when he twines the cords together they are not kil'ayim. ');"><sup>24</sup></span> — After all, it means kil'ayim of the cords, but this is its teaching: providing that he does not twine and knot [them together].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is a double fastening, which renders the combination kil'ayim. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> Samuel said: Providing that a handbreadth of a cord does not hang out of his hand.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For then it looks like a separate cord which he is carrying. ');"><sup>26</sup></span> But the School of R. Ishmael taught, Two handbreadths? — Said Abaye, Now that Samuel said one handbreadth, while the School of R. Ishmael taught two handbreadths, Samuel comes to inform us the <i>halachah</i> in actual practice.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., to be on the safe side we rule one handbreadth, yet no prohibition is violated for less than two. ');"><sup>27</sup></span>