Shabbat 135

אב מלאכה ומלאכה העושה מלאכות הרבה מעין מלאכה אחת אינו חייב אלא חטאת אחת:

PRIMARY LABOUR.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The general principle is this: a sin-offering in connection with the Sabbath is incurred for every unwitting transgression. The number of transgressions is determined by the number of unknown facts. Thus, when one is ignorant of the Sabbath law altogether, he is unaware of a single fact, and incurs one sin-offering only. If he forgets a number of Sabbaths, each is a separate fact; hence he is liable for each. If he knows that it is the Sabbath but forgets that certain labours are forbidden, each labour is a separate fact, and he is liable for each separately. — For primary (Heb. ab, lit., 'father') labours v. p. 3, n. 2. ');">¹</span> HE WHO PERFORMS MANY LABOURS BELONGING TO THE SAME CATEGORY OF WORK<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., all derivatives (toledoth) of the same primary labour (ab). ');">²</span> IS LIABLE TO ONE SIN-OFFERING ONLY.

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מ"ט תנא כלל גדול אילימא משום דקבעי למיתני עוד כלל אחר תנא כלל גדול וגבי שביעית נמי משום דקבעי למיתני עוד כלל אחר תנא כלל גדול והא גבי מעשר דקתני כלל אחר ולא תני כלל גדול

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Why does he [the Tanna] state, A GREAT PRINCIPLE? Shall we say that because he wishes to teach 'another principle',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Infra 75b. ');">³</span> he [therefore] states here, A GREAT PRINCIPLE?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By contrast, this being wider in scope. ');">⁴</span> And in respect to shebi'ith<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. It is also the name of a Tractate dealing with the laws thereof. ');">⁵</span>

א"ר יוסי בר אבין שבת ושביעית דאית בהו אבות ותולדות תנא גדול מעשר דלית בה אבות ותולדות לא תנא כלל גדול ולבר קפרא דתני כלל גדול במעשר מאי אבות ומאי תולדות איכא

too, because he wishes to teach another principle, he states, This is a great principle?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Sheb. v, 5 and VII, 1. ');">⁶</span> But what of tithes, though 'another principle' is taught, he nevertheless does not teach [elsewhere] 'a great principle'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Ma'as. I, 1, and II, 7. ');">⁷</span> — Said R. Jose b. Abin: As for the Sabbath and shebi'ith, since they possess both primaries and derivatives,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. infra 73a seq. Agricultural labour forbidden during the seventh year is likewise divided into primaries and derivatives: sowing, harvesting, reaping and fruit gathering, are primaries, other forms of labour in a field or vineyard are derivatives; v. M.K. 3a. ');">⁸</span>

אלא לאו היינו טעמא גדול עונשו של שבת יותר משל שביעית דאילו שבת איתא בין בתלוש בין במחובר ואילו שביעית בתלוש ליתא במחובר איתא וגדול עונשה של שביעית יותר מן המעשר דאילו שביעית איתא בין במאכל אדם בין במאכל בהמה ואילו מעשר במאכל אדם איתא במאכל בהמה ליתא

he teaches GREAT; but in respect to tithes, since there are no primaries and derivatives, he does not teach great'. Then according to Bar Kappara, who did learn 'A great principle' in respect to tithes,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In his collection of Baraithas. These are collections of Tannaitic teachings not incorporated by R. Judah ha-Nasi in the Mishnah; there were several such collections, the most authoritative being those of R. Hiyya and R. Oshaia. ');">⁹</span> what primaries and what derivatives are there? But surely this must be the reason:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why GREAT is stated in connection with Sabbath. ');">¹⁰</span> The penal scope of the Sabbath is 'greater' than that of shebi'ith, for whereas [the restriction of] the Sabbath is found in respect of both detached and growing [produce], [the prohibitions of] shebi'ith do not operate in respect of detached, but only in respect of growing [produce].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus: one must do no work on growing (lit., attached') produce on the Sabbath, e.g., sow, reap, etc., nor on detached produce, e.g., grind corn. But only the former is forbidden in the seventh year, not the latter. ');">¹¹</span>

ולבר קפרא דתני כלל גדול במעשר גדול עונשו של מעשר יותר משל פיאה דאילו מעשר איתא בתאנה וירק ואילו פיאה ליתא בתאנה וירק דתנן כלל אמרו בפיאה כל שהוא אוכל ונשמר וגידולו מן הארץ ולקיטתו כאחת ומכניסו לקיום חייב בפיאה

Again, the penal scope of the seventh year is 'greater' than that of tithes: for whereas [the law of] shebi'ith applies to both human food and animal fodder, [the law of] tithes operates in the case of human food, but not of animal fodder.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus the scope of both the Sabbath and shebi'ith is greater than that of tithes, and for that reason 'great' is employed in connection with the first two. ');">¹²</span> And according to Bar Kappara who learned 'a great principle' in connection with tithes, — the penal scope of tithes is greater than that of <i>pe'ah</i>:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">¹³</span> for whereas [the law of] tithes operates in figs and vegetables [too], <i>pe'ah</i> does not operate in figs and vegetables.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Penal scope', Heb. 'onesh, is employed here in the sense that the violation of these laws is punishable. ');">¹⁴</span>

אוכל למעוטי ספיחי סטיס וקוצה ונשמר למעוטי הפקר וגידולו מן הארץ למעוטי כמיהין ופטריות ולקיטתו כאחת למעוטי תאנה ומכניסו לקיום למעוטי ירק

For we learnt: A general principle was stated in respect to <i>pe'ah</i>: whatever is a foodstuff, is guarded, grows from the earth, is [all] gathered simultaneously,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the whole of the crop ripens about the same time. ');">¹⁵</span> and is collected for storage,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'is brought in to be kept'. This applies to cereals in general, which are stored in granaries over long periods. ');">¹⁶</span> is liable to <i>pe'ah</i>. 'Foodstuff' excludes the aftergrowth of woad<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [G], isatis tinctoria, a plant producing a deep blue dye. ');">¹⁷</span>

ואילו גבי מעשר תנן כלל אמרו במעשר כל שהוא אוכל ונשמר וגידולו מן הארץ חייב במעשר ואילו לקיטתו כאחת ומכניסו לקיום לא תנן:

and madder;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both being used as dyes. ');">¹⁸</span> 'is guarded' excludes hefker;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">¹⁹</span> 'grows from the earth' excludes mushrooms and truffles;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though these grow in the earth, they were held to draw their sustenance mainly from the air. ');">²⁰</span>

רב ושמואל דאמרי תרוייהו מתניתין בתינוק שנשבה לבין הנכרים וגר שנתגייר לבין הנכרים אבל הכיר ולבסוף שכח חייב על כל שבת ושבת תנן השוכח עיקר שבת לאו מכלל דהויא ליה ידיעה מעיקרא לא מאי כל השוכח עיקר שבת דהיתה שכוח ממנו עיקרה של שבת

'is [all] gathered simultaneously' excludes the fig-tree;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whose fruits do not all ripen at the same time. The same holds good of many other trees, which are likewise excluded. ');">²¹</span> 'and is taken in to be stored' excludes vegetables.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which must be consumed whilst fresh. ');">²²</span> Whereas in respect to tithes we learnt: A general principle was stated in respect to tithes: Whatever is a foodstuff, is guarded, and grows from the earth is subject to tithes; but we did not learn, 'is gathered simultaneously and is collected for storage.

אבל הכיר ולבסוף שכח מאי חייב על כל שבת ושבת אדתני היודע עיקר שבת ועשה מלאכות הרבה בשבתות הרבה חייב על כל שבת ושבת ליתני הכיר ולבסוף שכח וכ"ש הא מאי היודע עיקר שבת מי שהיה יודע עיקרה של שבת ושכחה

Rab and Samuel both maintain: Our Mishnah treats of a child who was taken captive among Gentiles, or a proselyte who became converted in the midst of Gentiles.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that they never knew the laws of the Sabbath. ');">²³</span> But if one knew and subsequently forgot, he is liable [to a sin-offering] for every Sabbath.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He is regarded as knowing the sanctity of the Sabbath but forgetting on each occasion that it is the Sabbath. ');">²⁴</span> We learnt: HE WHO FORGETS THE ESSENTIAL LAW OF THE SABBATH: surely that implies that he knew [it] originally? — No: what is meant by HE WHO FORGETS THE ESSENTIAL LAW OF THE SABBATH? That the very existence of the Sabbath was unknown<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'forgotten'. ');">²⁵</span> to him. But what if he knew and subsequently forgot; he is liable for every Sabbath? Then instead of teaching, HE WHO KNOWS THE ESSENTIAL LAW OF THE SABBATH AND PERFORMS MANY LABOURS ON MANY SABBATHS, INCURS A SIN-OFFERING ON ACCOUNT OF EACH SABBATH: let him teach, He who knew and subsequently forgot, and how much more so this one? — What is meant by, HE WHO KNOWS THE ESSENTIAL LAW OF THE SABBATH? That he who knew the essential law of the Sabbath and forgot it.