Eruvin 192

כרבי יוסי דאמר נשים סומכות רשות

as R'Jose who ruled: It is optional for women to lay their hands upon an offering?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Lev. 1, 4; though the commandment was given to men only (cf. ibid. 2) .');">¹</span> For were you not to say so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That women may perform. If they wish, the commandments that were addressed to the men.');">²</span> how is it that Jonah's wife attended the festival pilgrimage and the Sages did not prevent her, seeing that there is no one who contends that the observance of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'is there one who says (that) '.');">³</span>

דאי לא תימא הכי אשתו של יונה היתה עולה לרגל ולא מיחו בה מי איכא למ"ד רגל לאו מצות עשה שהזמן גרמא הוא אלא קסבר רשות הכא נמי רשות

a festival is not a positive precept the performance of which is limited to a particular time? You must consequently admit that he holds it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Festival pilgrimage.');">⁴</span> to be optional;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That women may perform. If they wish, the commandments that were addressed to the men.');">²</span>

אלא האי תנא היא דתניא המוצא תפילין מכניסן זוג זוג אחד האיש ואחד האשה אחד חדשות ואחד ישנות דברי ר"מ ר' יהודה אוסר בחדשות ומתיר בישנות

could it not then here also<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tefillin.');">⁵</span> be said to be optional?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And men too may wear them whenever they wish.');">⁶</span> - It<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first ruling in our MISHNAH:');">⁷</span>

ע"כ לא פליגי אלא בחדשות וישנות אבל באשה לא פליגי שמע מינה מצות עשה שלא הזמן גרמא הוא וכל מצות עשה שאין הזמן גרמא נשים חייבות

represents rather the view of the following Tanna. For it was taught: If tefillin are found<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the Sabbath.');">⁸</span> they are to be brought in, one pair at a time, irrespective of whether the person who brings them in is a man or a woman, and irrespective of whether the tefillin were new or old; so R'Meir.

ודילמא סבר לה כר' יוסי דאמר נשים סומכות רשות לא ס"ד דלא רבי מאיר סבר לה כרבי יוסי ולא רבי יהודה סבר לה כרבי יוסי

R'Judah forbids this in the case of new ones<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which might be mere amulets.');">⁹</span> but permits it in that of old ones. Now since their dispute is confined to the question of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'until here they only differ in'.');">¹⁰</span>

לא רבי מאיר סבר לה כרבי יוסי דתנן אין מעכבין את התינוקות מלתקוע הא נשים מעכבין וסתם מתני' רבי מאיר

new and old while<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'but'.');">¹¹</span> in respect of the woman there is no divergence of opinion<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both agreeing that she mad wear them on the Sabbath and so bring them in.');">¹²</span> it may be concluded that it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tefillin.');">⁵</span>

ולא ר' יהודה סבר לה כר' יוסי דתניא (ויקרא א, ב) דבר אל בני ישראל וסמך בני ישראל סומכין ואין בנות ישראל סומכות רבי יוסי ור"ש אומרים נשים סומכות רשות

is a positive precept the performance of which is not restricted to a particular time, women being subject to the obligations of such precepts. But is it not possible that he holds the same view as R'Jose who stated: It is optional for women to lay their hands upon an offering?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. n. 3. Being optional its performance does not involve a transgression against the prohibition of adding to the commandments, while the carrying of them on the Sabbath is permitted on the ground that they are ornaments.');">¹³</span> - This cannot be entertained at all, since neither R'Meir holds the same view as R'Jose nor does R'Judah hold the same view as R'Jose.'

וסתם סיפרא מני ר' יהודה

Neither R'Meir holds the same view as R'Jose', since we learned: 'Children<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though they are exempt from the obligation of the blowing of the shofar.');">¹⁴</span> are not to be prevented from blowing<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the New Year festival, as an exercise and training practice.');">¹⁵</span> the shofar';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R.H. 33a.');">¹⁶</span>

א"ר אלעזר המוצא תכלת בשוק לשונות פסולות חוטין כשרין

from which it follows that women are to be prevented;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In order that their act should not appear as an 'addition to the commandments'.');">¹⁷</span> and any anonymous Mishnah represents the view of R'Meir.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It must be obvious, therefore, that R. Meir disagrees with R. Jose.');">¹⁸</span> 'Nor does R'Judah hold the same view as R'Jose', since it was taught: Speak unto the children of Israel.

מאי שנא לשונות דאמר אדעתא דגלימא צבעינהו חוטין נמי נימא אדעתא דגלימא טוינהי בשזורים

.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. 1, 2.');">¹⁹</span> and he shall lay,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 4.');">²⁰</span> only the sons of Israel 'shall lay' but not the daughters of Israel.

שזורים נמי נימא אדעתא דשיפתא דגלימא עייפינהו במופסקין דכולי האי ודאי לא טרחי אינשי

R'Jose and R'Simeon ruled: It is optional for women to lay. Now who is the author of all anonymous statement in the Sifra?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The source of the teaching first cited.');">²¹</span> R'Judah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He too is thus in disagreement with R. Jose.');">²²</span>

אמר רבא וכי אדם טורח לעשות קמיע כמין תפילין דתנן במה דברים אמורים בישנות אבל בחדשות פטור

R'Eleazar said: If a man found blue wool in the street, and it was in the shape of straps.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Combed and dyed; since it is possible that the dyeing was not done with the intention, and for the purpose of using the wool for zizith (v. Glos.) . The threads for the zizith must be spun and dyed for the purpose of using them in the fulfilment of the commandment.');">²³</span> it is unfit<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For zizith.');">²⁴</span> but if it was in the shape of threads it is fit.

א"ר זירא לאהבה בריה פוק תני להו המוצא תכלת בשוק לשונות פסולין חוטין מופסקין כשירין לפי שאין אדם טורח

Wherein, however, do straps differ?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From threads.');">²⁵</span> In that it may be assumed that they were dyed for the purpose of being used for the manufacture of a cloak? But then, might it not be assumed in the case of threads also that they were spun for the purpose of [weaving] a cloak [with them]? - This is a case where they were twisted.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such threads are not used in the weaving of a cloak.');">²⁶</span>

אמר רבא ומשום דתני לה אהבה בריה דרבי זירא כיפי תלא לה והתנן במה דברים אמורים בישנות אבל בחדשות פטור

But even where they were twisted might it not be assumed that they were doubled for the purpose of being inserted in the border of a cloak? - This is a case where they were cut,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Into short lengths, which make them suitable for zizith but quite unit for use in the border of a cloak.');">²⁷</span> since people would not take so much trouble<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To tie them together and then to use them for a border instead of one long thread.');">²⁸</span> with them.

אלא אמר רבא טרח ולא טרח תנאי היא

Raba observed:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An objection against the ruling under discussion.');">²⁹</span> Does anyone go to the trouble of making all amulet in the shape of tefillin? Yet<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that'.');">³⁰</span>

דתניא המוצא תפילין מכניסן זוג זוג אחד האיש ואחד האשה

we have leant: THIS APPLIES TO OLD ONES BUT IN THE CASE OF NEW ONES<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since they may be presumed to be mere amulets.');">³¹</span> HE IS EXEMPT!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. he must not carry them on the Sabbath; Which shows that, where the infringement of a law is to be provided against, even a possibility that involves extra trouble is taken into consideration. Why then is the possibility of tying the threads together ruled out in the case of zizith?');">³²</span> R'ZERA said to his son Ahabah, go out and teach them:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Rabbis who objected to R. Eleazar's ruling. What follows is a Baraitha which is (a) more authoritative and (b) contains both the ruling and its reason.');">³³</span> If a man found blue wool in the street, it is unfit<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For zizith.');">³⁴</span> if it was in the shape of straps,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 667, n. 10.');">³⁵</span> but if it was in the shape of cut threads it is fit<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For zizith.');">³⁴</span> because no one would take unnecessary trouble.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To tie them together and then to use them instead of one long thread.');">³⁶</span> 'And', retorted Raba, 'because Ahabah the son of R'Zera taught it has he, forsooth, hung jewels<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., ('precious) stones'.');">³⁷</span> upon it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. his citation is open to the same objection as the ruling of R. Eleazar.');">³⁸</span> Have we not in fact learnt: THIS APPLIES TO OLD ONES BUT IN THE CASE OF NEW ONES<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since they may be presumed to be mere amulets.');">³⁹</span> HE IS EXEMPT? '<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra n. 2.');">⁴⁰</span> The fact, however, is, explained Raba, that the question whether one does, or does not take unnecessary trouble is a point at issue between Tannas. For it was taught: If tefillin are found<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the Sabbath.');">⁴¹</span> they are to be brought in, one pair at a time, irrespective of whether the person who brings them is a man or a woman