Shabbat 145

אלא לאו רישא בעכו"ם וסיפא בשאר מצות ושגג בלא מתכוין בשאר מצות ה"ד דסבור דשומן הוא ואכלו משא"כ בשבת דפטור דנתכוון לחתוך את התלוש וחתך את המחובר פטור ואביי שגג בלא מתכוין ה"ד דסבור רוק הוא ובלעו משא"כ בשבת דפטור דנתכוון להגביה את התלוש וחתך את המחובר פטור אבל נתכוון לחתוך את התלוש וחתך את המחובר חייב:

Surely then the first clause [dealing with the greater severity of the Sabbath] refers to idolatry, whilst the second treats of other precepts; and how is unwitting and unintentional transgression possible? When one thought that it [heleb] was permitted fat, and ate it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus it was unwitting, because he thought it permitted fat, and unintentional, since he had no intention of eating heleb. On the present hypothesis it is regarded as unwitting but intentional only when he knows that it is heleb and eats it as such, thinking, however, that heleb is permitted. ');">¹</span> [While] 'this is not so with respect to the Sabbath,' viz., that he is not culpable, for if [by analogy] one intended cutting something detached but cut something attached [instead], he is not culpable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus on this interpretation the Baraitha supports Raba. ');">²</span>

איתמר נתכוון לזרוק שתים וזרק ארבע רבא אמר פטור אביי אמר חייב רבא אמר פטור דלא קמיכוין לזריקה דארבע אביי אמר חייב דהא קמיכוין לזריקה בעלמא כסבור רשות היחיד ונמצאת רשות הרבים רבא אמר פטור ואביי אמר חייב רבא אמר פטור דהא לא מיכוין לזריקה דאיסורא ואביי אמר חייב דהא קא מיכוין לזריקה בעלמא

But Abaye [maintains:] how is an unwitting and unintentional offence meant? When one thinks that it [heleb] is spittle and swallows it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is unwitting, because he thinks it spittle, and unintentional, because he has no intention of eating at all, swallowing not being eating. But the case posited by Raba is not unintentional in Abaye's view, since he did intend to eat. ');">³</span> [While] 'which is not so in the case of the Sabbath,' where he is exempt, for if [by analogy] one intends lifting something detached but cuts something attached [to the soil], he is not culpable. But if he intends to cut something detached and cuts something attached, he is liable.

וצריכא דאי אשמעינן קמייתא בההוא קאמר רבא דהא לא קמיכוין לחתיכה דאיסורא אבל נתכוון לזרוק שתים וזרק ארבע דארבע בלא תרתי לא מיזרקא ליה אימא מודה ליה לאביי ואי אשמעינן בהא בהא קאמר רבא דהא לא קמיכוין לזריקה דארבע אבל כסבור רה"י ונמצא רה"ר דמכוין לזריקה דארבע אימא מודי ליה לאביי צריכא

It was stated: If one intends to throw [an object] two [cubits], but throws it four,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Four cubits in the street is the minimum distance for culpability. ');">⁴</span> Raba said: He is not culpable; Abaye ruled: He is culpable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On Raba and Abaye v. supra 72b, p. 345. n. 3. ');">⁵</span>

תנן אבות מלאכות ארבעים חסר אחת והוינן בה מנינא למה לי וא"ר יוחנן שאם עשאן כולם בהעלם אחד חייב על כל אחת ואחת בשלמא לאביי דאמר כי האי גוונא חייב משכחת לה דידע דאסורא שבת וידע לה איסור מלאכות וקא טעה בשיעורין אלא לרבא דאמר פטור היכי משכחת לה בזדון שבת ושגגת מלאכות

Raba said: He is not culpable, since he had no intention of a four [cubits'] throw. Abaye ruled, He is culpable, since he intended throwing in general. If he thinks it private ground but it is learnt to be public ground, Raba ruled: He is not culpable; Abaye said: He is culpable. Raba ruled, He is not culpable, since he had no intention of a forbidden throw. While Abaye ruled that he is culpable, since he intended throwing in general. Now, it is necessary.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the three controversies — i.e., these two and that on 72b top — to be stated, though apparently two are superfluous, since the same principle underlies all. ');">⁶</span>

הניחא אי סבר לה כר' יוחנן דאמר כיון ששגג בכרת אע"פ שהזיד בלאו משכחת לה דידע לה לשבת בלאו אלא אי סבר לה כרשב"ל דאמר עד שישגוג בלאו וכרת דידע לה לשבת במאי דידע לה בתחומין ואליבא דר"ע:

For if we were informed of the first, [it might be argued] there [only] does Raba rule thus, since he did not intend [to perform] a forbidden eating, but if he intended throwing [an object] two [cubits] but throws it four, since four cannot be thrown without two,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in throwing it four cubits he did fulfil his intention. ');">⁷</span> I would say that he agrees with Abaye. And if we were informed of this, [it might be argued] here [only] does Raba rule thus, since he did not intend a four [cubits'] throw; but if he thought it private ground but it was discovered to be public ground, seeing that he intended a four [cubits'] throw, I would say that he agrees with Abaye. Thus they are [all] necessary.

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> אבות מלאכות ארבעים חסר אחת הזורע והחורש והקוצר והמעמר והדש והזורה הבורר הטוחן והמרקד והלש והאופה

We learnt: The primary labours are forty less one. Now we questioned this, Why state the number? And R. Johanan answered: [To teach] that if one performs all of them in one state of unawareness, he is liable [to a sacrifice] on account of each separately. Now, as for Abaye who ruled that in such a case one is liable, this is well: for this is conceivable where one knows the interdict of the Sabbath and the interdicts of labours, but errs in respect of the standards.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In each case he intended performing less than the standard for which liability is incurred, but actually performed the full standard. ');">⁸</span> But according to Raba who maintained that one is not culpable [for this], how is this conceivable? [Presumably] [only] where he was conscious of the Sabbath but unaware of [the forbidden character of his] labors. Now that is well if he agrees with R. Johanan who ruled, Since he was ignorant of <i>kareth</i>, even if he was conscious of the negative injunction, [he is liable]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 329, n. 2. ');">⁹</span>

הגוזז את הצמר המלבנו והמנפצו והצובעו והטווה והמיסך והעושה שתי בתי נירין והאורג שני חוטין והפוצע שני חוטין הקושר והמתיר והתופר שתי תפירות הקורע על מנת לתפור [שתי תפירות]

then it is possible where he knew [that his labors are prohibited on] Sabbath by a negative injunction. But if he holds with R. Simeon b. Lakish, who maintained, He must offend unwittingly in respect of both the negative injunction and <i>kareth</i>, then wherein did he know of the Sabbath?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 330, n. 3. ');">¹⁰</span> — He knew it by the law of boundaries, this being in accordance with R. Akiba.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 330, nn. 5-6. ');">¹¹</span>

הצד צבי השוחטו והמפשיטו המולחו והמעבד את עורו והממחקו והמחתכו

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. THE PRIMARY LABOURS ARE FORTY LESS ONE, [VIZ.:] SOWING,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he who sows', and similarly with the others that follow. ');">¹²</span> PLOUGHING, REAPING, BINDING SHEAVES, THRESHING, WINNOWING, SELECTING,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By hand, the unfit food from the fit. ');">¹³</span>

הכותב שתי אותיות והמוחק על מנת לכתוב שתי אותיות הבונה והסותר המכבה והמבעיר המכה בפטיש המוציא מרשות לרשות הרי אלו אבות מלאכות ארבעים חסר אחת:

GRINDING, SIFTING, KNEADING, BAKING, SHEARING WOOL, BLEACHING, HACKLING, DYEING, SPINNING, STRETCHING THE THREADS,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the loom. ');">¹⁴</span> THE MAKING OF TWO MESHES, WEAVING TWO THREADS, DIVIDING TWO THREADS,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., dividing the ends of the web. ');">¹⁵</span> TYING [KNOTTING] AND UNTYING, SEWING TWO STITCHES, TEARING IN ORDER TO SEW TWO STITCHES,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where it is inconvenient to sew unless one tears the cloth first, that tearing is a primary labour. ');">¹⁶</span> CAPTURING A DEER, SLAUGHTERING, OR FLAYING, OR SALTING IT,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. its skin. ');">¹⁷</span> CURING ITS HIDE, SCRAPING IT [OF ITS HAIR], CUTTING IT UP, WRITING TWO LETTERS, ERASING IN ORDER TO WRITE TWO LETTERS [OVER THE ERASURE], BUILDING, PULLING DOWN, EXTINGUISHING, KINDLING, STRIKING WITH A HAMMER,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., giving the finishing blow with the hammer. ');">¹⁸</span> [AND] CARRYING OUT FROM ONE DOMAIN TO ANOTHER: THESE ARE THE FORTY PRIMARY LABOURS LESS ONE.