Shabbat 224

דלמילתיה מנא הוא אבל הכא למילתיה לאו מנא הוא

it is a 'utensil' for its own function, but here it is not a 'utensil' for its own function.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And this is the statement referred to above that R. Johanan explained the law on the view of R. Judah. ');">¹</span> Now, did R. Johanan say thus?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the halachah is according to R. Judah. ');">²</span>

ומי א"ר יוחנן הכי והאמר רבי יוחנן הלכה כסתם משנה ותנן סנדל שנפסקה אחת מאזניו ותיקנה טמא מדרס (נפסקה שניה ותיקנה טהור מלטמא מדרס אבל טמא מגע מדרס) מאי לאו לא שנא פנימית ולא שנא חיצונה

Surely R. Johanan said, The <i>halachah</i> is as an anonymous Mishnah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., one not taught in the name of any Rabbi. ');">³</span> and we learnt: If one of the ears of a sandal is broken and he repairs it, it [the sandal] is unclean as midras.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If it belonged to a zab. V. p. 312, n. 9. ');">⁴</span>

לא פנימית דוקא אבל חיצונה מאי טהור אי הכי אדתני נפסקה שניה ותיקנה טהור מן המדרס אבל טמא מגע מדרס ניפלוג בדידה בד"א שנפסקה פנימית אבל חיצונה טהור אמר רב יצחק בן יוסף תהא משנתנו בסנדל שיש לו ארבע אזנים וארבע תרסיותים שלא לשבור דבריו של ר' יוחנן

(If the second is broken [too] and he repairs it, it is clean in that it is not defiled as midras,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., it loses the midras defilement which it contracted previously. ');">⁵</span> but it is unclean as that touched by midras.)<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., it is unclean in the first degree, which is one degree below midras itself. It retains this lesser degree of defilement, because we regard it as having touched itself, as it were, when it was unclean as midras. — Rashal deletes the bracketed passage here. ');">⁶</span>

כי אתא רבין אמר רב חנן בר אבא אמר רב הלכה כרבי יהודה ורבי יוחנן אמר אין הלכה כר' יהודה ומי א"ר יוחנן הכי והא מדמתרץ ר' יוחנן אליבא דר' יהודה ש"מ כר' יהודה סבירא ליה אמוראי נינהו ואליבא דרבי יוחנן

Does not [this mean that] there is no difference whether it is the inner or the outer?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is against R. Judah. ');">⁷</span> — No, [it refers] only [to] the inner. Then what if the outer [is broken]? [Would it be] clean! If so, instead of teaching, If the second is broken [too] and he repairs it, it is clean in that it is not defiled as midras, but it is unclean as that touched by midras, let him [the Tanna] draw a distinction in that very matter and teach: When is that? if the inner is broken; but [if] the outer [is broken] it is clean? — Said R. Isaac b. Joseph: Let our Mishnah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The cited anonymous Mishnah (Kel. XXVI, 4). ');">⁸</span>

תנן התם כל כלי בעלי בתים שיעורן כרמונים בעי (רבי) חזקיה ניקב כמוציא זית וסתמו וחזר וניקב כמוציא זית וסתמו עד שהשלימו למוציא רימון מהו

treat of a sandal which has four ears and four strappings, so as not to overthrow<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'break'. ');">⁹</span> the words of R. Johanan.

אמר ליה ר' יוחנן רבי שנית לנו סנדל שנפסקה אחת מאזניו ותיקנה טמא מדרס נפסקה שניה ותיקנה טהור מן המדרס אבל טמא מגע מדרס ואמרינן לך מאי שנא ראשונה דהא קיימא שניה שניה נמי מתקנה ראשונה

When Rabin came,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. P. 12, n. 9. ');">¹⁰</span> he said: R. Hanan b. Abba said in Rab's name: The <i>halachah</i> is as R. Judah; while R. Johanan said: The <i>halachah</i> is not as R. Judah. But did R. Johanan say thus: surely since R. Johanan explained [the law] on the basis of R. Judah's view, it follows that he agrees with R. Judah? — There is [a controversy of] amoraim as to R. Johanan' s opinion.

ואמרת לן עליה פנים חדשות באו לכאן הכא נמי פנים חדשות באו לכאן

We learnt elsewhere: As for all utensils belonging to private people, their standards are [holes as large] as pomegranates.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If they are unclean, and then broken, the holes being large enough to allow a pomegranate to fall through, they cease to be utensils and become clean; cf. supra 95b. ');">¹¹</span> Hezekiah asked: What if it [a utensil] receives a hole [large enough] for an olive to fall through, and he [the owner] closes it, then it receives another hole<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the side of the first. ');">¹²</span>

קרי עליה לית דין בר אינש איכא דאמרי כגון דין בר אינש אמר ר' זירא אמר רבא בר זימונא אם ראשונים בני מלאכים אנו בני אנשים ואם ראשונים בני אנשים אנו כחמורים ולא כחמורו של ר' חנינא בן דוסא ושל רבי פנחס בן יאיר אלא כשאר חמורים:

[large enough] for an olive to fall through, and he closes it, [and so on] until it is made large enough for a pomegranate to fall through? Said R. Johanan to him, You have taught us: If one of the ears of a sandal is broken and he repairs it, it [the sandal] is unclean as midras; if the second is broken and he repairs it, it is clean in that it is not defiled as midras, but it is unclean as that touched by midras. Now we asked you: Why is it different [when] the first [is broken], — because the second is sound? But [when] the second [too] is broken, the first is [already] repaired? And you answered us: A new entity<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'face'. ');">¹³</span> has arrived hither;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., subsequent to the shoe being defiled as midras, the breaking of both loops and their mending so change the shoe as to make it virtually a different utensil, not the one which was defiled. ');">¹⁴</span>

ונודות יין ושמן: פשיטא לא צריכא דאית ליה תרתי אוני מהו דתימא חדא מינייהו בטולי מבטל לה קמ"ל:

here too, a new entity has arrived hither! [Thereupon] he [Hezekiah] exclaimed concerning him, This one is not the son of man!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He is superhuman. ');">¹⁵</span> Others say, Such a one is indeed the son of man!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He is a man in the full sense of the word. ');">¹⁶</span>

קדירה של בשר: פשיטא לא צריכא דאית לה שלאכא מהו דתימא בטולי מבטל לה קמ"ל:

R. Zera said in Raba b. Zimuna's name: If the earlier [scholars] were sons of angels, we are sons of men; and if the earlier [scholars] were sons of men, we are like asses, and not [even] like asses of R. Hanina b. Dosa and R. Phinehas b. Jair,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The allusions are explained in Hul. 7a and Ta'an. 24a. ');">¹⁷</span> but like other asses.

רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר קושרה כו': פשיטא לא צריכא דאית לה תרתי איסרי מהו דתימא

PITCHERS OF WINE OR OIL. But that is obvious? — This is necessary only where they have two spouts;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the Mishnah refers to tying them up. ');">¹⁸</span> you might say, He [the owner] may completely disregard one:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'make it as nought', and use the other only; cf. p. 544, n. 7. ');">¹⁹</span> therefore he [the Tanna] informs us [that we do not fear this]. THE MEAT POT. But that is obvious? — This is necessary only where it has a [screwed-in] stopper: you might say, He [the owner] may completely abandon [it]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the cloth which he ties on top, as he can unscrew the stopper and take the food out that way. ');">²⁰</span> hence he informs us [that we do not fear this]. R. ELIEZER B. JACOB SAID: ONE MAY TIE, etc. But that is obvious? This is necessary only where there are two cords: you might say,