Shabbat 232

דהוה שקיל שמא דלא מקבל שוחדא בעו לאחוכי ביה אעיילא ליה שרגא דדהבא ואזול לקמיה אמרה ליה בעינא דניפלגי לי בנכסי דבי נשי אמר להו פלוגו א"ל כתיב לן במקום ברא ברתא לא תירות א"ל מן יומא דגליתון מארעכון איתנטלית אורייתא דמשה ואיתיהיבת ספרא אחריתי וכתיב ביה ברא וברתא כחדא ירתון

and he bore a reputation that he did not accept bribes.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He was a judge. ');">¹</span> They wished to expose him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'make sport of him'. ');">²</span> so she brought him a golden lamp, went before him, [and] said to him, 'I desire that a share be given me in my [deceased] father's estate.' 'Divide,' ordered he. Said he [R. Gamaliel] to him, 'It is decreed for us, Where there is a son, a daughter does not inherit.' [He replied], 'Since the day that you were exiled from your land the Law of Moses has been superseded<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'taken away'. ');">³</span>

למחר הדר עייל ליה איהו חמרא לובא אמר להו שפילית לסיפיה דספרא וכתב ביה אנא לא למיפחת מן אורייתא דמשה אתיתי [ולא] לאוספי על אורייתא דמשה אתיתי וכתיב ביה במקום ברא ברתא לא תירות אמרה ליה נהור נהוריך כשרגא א"ל רבן גמליאל אתא חמרא ובטש לשרגא:

and another book<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The reading in Cod. Oxford is: and the law of the Evangelium has been given. ');">⁴</span> given, wherein it is written, 'A son and a daughter inherit equally.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There is no passage in any known Gospel that a son and daughter inherit alike. ');">⁵</span> The next day, he [R. Gamaliel] brought him a Lybian ass. Said he to them, 'Look<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'descend to'. ');">⁶</span>

ומפני מה אין קורין כו': אמר רב לא שנו אלא בזמן בית המדרש אבל שלא בזמן בהמ"ד קורין ושמואל אמר אפילו שלא בזמן בית המדרש אין קורין איני והא נהרדעא אתריה דשמואל הוה ובנהרדעא פסקי סידרא בכתובים במנחתא דשבתא אלא אי איתמר הכי איתמר אמר רב לא שנו אלא במקום בהמ"ד אבל שלא במקום בהמ"ד קורין ושמואל אמר

at the end of the book, wherein it is written, I came not to destroy the Law of Moses nor<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec.: but; v. Weiss, Dor, I, p. 233, n. 1. ');">⁷</span> to add to the Law of Moses,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Matt. V, 17 seq. ');">⁸</span> and it is written therein, A daughter does not inherit where there is a son. Said she to him, 'Let thy light shine forth like a lamp.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Alluding to the lamp which she presented him on the preceding day. ');">⁹</span>

בין במקום בהמ"ד בין שלא במקום בהמ"ד בזמן בהמ"ד אין קורין שלא בזמן בית המדרש קורין ואזדא שמואל לטעמיה דבנהרדעא פסקי סידרא דכתובים במנחתא דשבתא

Said R. Gamaliel to him, 'An ass came and knocked the lamp over!'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This story is discussed in Bacher, Ag. d. Pal. Am. 11, p. 424 n. V. also R.T. Herford, op. cit., pp. 146-154, though his conjecture that the story ends with a covert gibe at Christianity is hardly substantiated. ');">¹⁰</span> AND WHY DO WE NOT READ [THEM], etc. Rab said: They learnt this only for the time of the <i>Beth Hamidrash</i>, but we may read [them] when it is not the time of the <i>Beth Hamidrash</i>. But Samuel said: We may not read them [on the Sabbath] even when it is not the time of the <i>Beth Hamidrash</i>. But that is not so, for Nehardea was Samuel's town, and in Nehardea they closed the prescribed lesson [of the Pentateuch] with [a reading from] the Hagiographa at minhah on the Sabbath?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a Haftarah (q.v. Glos.) after the Reading of the Law: so Jast. V. Rashi; cf. supra 24a. [Aliter: They expounded a part of Scripture from the Hagiographa etc. V. Bacher, Terminologie s.v. trsx ');">¹¹</span> Rather if stated it was thus stated: Rab said, They learnt this only in the place of the <i>Beth Hamidrash</i>; but we may read [them] elsewhere than in the <i>Beth Hamidrash</i>. While Samuel said: Whether in the place of the <i>Beth Hamidrash</i> or elsewhere, at the time of the <i>Beth Hamidrash</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., when the public lectures are given. ');">¹²</span>

רב אשי אמר לעולם כדאמרן מעיקרא ושמואל כרבי נחמיה דתניא אע"פ שאמרו כתבי הקדש אין קורין בהן אבל שונין בהן ודורשין בהן נצרך לפסוק מביא ורואה בו א"ר נחמיה מפני מה אמרו כתבי הקדש אין קורין בהן כדי שיאמרו בכתבי הקדש אין קורין וכ"ש בשטרי הדיוטות:

we may not read [them]; when it is not the time of the <i>Beth Hamidrash</i> we may read them. And Samuel is consistent with his view, for in Nehardea they closed the prescribed lesson [of the Pentateuch] with<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The text should read [H], as above, not [H]. ');">¹³</span> [a reading from] the Hagiographa. R. Ashi said, In truth, it is as we first stated, Samuel [ruling] according to R. Nehemiah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But he does not state his own view there. ');">¹⁴</span> For it was taught: Though they [the Sages] said, Holy writings may not be read, yet they may be studied, and lectures thereon may be given. If one needs a verse, he may bring [a Scroll] and see [it] therein. R. Nehemiah said: Why did they rule, Holy Writings may not be read? So that people may say, If Holy Writings may not be read, how much more so secular documents!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., bills, documents relating to business transactions, etc. ');">¹⁵</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> מצילין תיק הספר עם הספר ותיק התפילין עם התפילין ואע"פ שיש בתוכן מעות ולהיכן מצילין אותן למבוי שאינו מפולש בן בתירא אומר אף למפולש:

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. ONE MAY SAVE THE SHEATH OF A SCROLL TOGETHER WITH THE SCROLL, AND THE CONTAINER OF TEFILLIN<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the bag or box in which they are kept. ');">¹⁶</span> TOGETHER WITH THE TEFILLIN, EVEN IF IT [ALSO] CONTAINS MONEY. AND WHITHER MAY WE RESCUE THEM? INTO A CLOSED ALLEY; BEN BATHYRA RULED: EVEN INTO AN OPEN ONE.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is discussed infra. ');">¹⁷</span> <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Our Rabbis taught: If the fourteenth [of Nisan] falls on the Sabbath, the Passover sacrifice is flayed as far as the breast:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Starting from the hind legs. One can then remove the fats which 'are to be burnt on the altar (these are called emurim, lit., 'devoted objects'), the burning being permitted on the Sabbath. Since the rest of the skin must be flayed only in order to reach the portion which he himself will eat in the evening, this is regarded as having a secular purpose, and therefore must be left for the evening. ');">¹⁸</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> ת"ר ארבעה עשר שחל להיות בשבת מפשיטין את הפסח עד החזה דברי רבי ישמעאל בנו של רבי יוחנן בן ברוקה וחכ"א מפשיטין את כולו בשלמא לרבי ישמעאל בנו של ר' יוחנן בן ברוקה דהא איתעביד ליה צורך גבוה אלא לרבנן מ"ט אמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן דאמר קרא (משלי טז, ד) כל פעל ה' למענהו והכא מאי למענהו איכא רב יוסף אמר שלא יסריח רבא אמר שלא יהו קדשי שמים מוטלין כנבלה

this is the view of R. Ishmael son of R. Johanan b. Berokah. But the Sages maintain: We flay the whole of it. As for R. Ishmael son of R. Johanan b. Berokah, it is well, [the reason being] that the requirements for the Sanctuary<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the Most High'. ');">¹⁹</span> have been fulfilled;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When it is flayed thus far, as explained supra note 1. ');">²⁰</span> but what is the reason of the Rabbis? — Said Rabbah b. Bar Hanah in R. Johanan's name: Because Scripture saith, The Lord hath made every thing for his own purpose.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., His honour. Prov. XVI, 4. ');">²¹</span>

מאי בינייהו איכא בינייהו דמנח אפתורא דדהבא אי נמי יומא דאסתנא ורבי ישמעאל בנו של רבי יוחנן בן ברוקה האי פעל ה' למענהו מאי עביד ליה שלא יוציא את האימורין קודם הפשטת העור מ"ט אמר רב הונא בריה דרב נתן משום נימין

But what is there here 'for his own purpose?' R. Joseph said: So that it should not putrefy.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One may still fear putrefaction, but it is certainly not lying like a nebelah. Hence according to R. Joseph it must be completely stripped even so, but not according to Raba. ');">²²</span> Raba said: So that Divine sacrifices should not lie like a <i>nebelah</i>. Wherein do they differ? — They differ where it is lying on a gold table,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is not in keeping with the honour due to God that the meat of the sacrifices offered to Him should turn putrid. ');">²³</span> or if it is a day of the north wind.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which keeps the meat fresh. ');">²⁴</span>

אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא מאי אהדרו ליה חברייא לרבי ישמעאל בנו של רבי יוחנן בן ברוקה הכי קאמרי ליה אם מצילין תיק הספר עם הספר לא נפשיט את הפסח מעורו מי דמי התם טלטול הכא מלאכה אמר רב אשי בתרתי פליגי פליגי בטלטול ופליגי במלאכה והכי קאמרי ליה אם מצילין תיק הספר עם הספר לא נטלטל עור אגב בשר

Now R. Ishmael son of R. Johanan b. Berokah, how does he dispose of this [verse], 'The Lord hath made every thing for his own purpose'? — [That teaches] that one must not draw out the emurim<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. n. 1. ');">²⁵</span> before the stripping of the skin.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As far as the breast. ');">²⁶</span> What is the reason? — Said R. Huna son of R. Nathan: On account of the threads.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of wool, which would otherwise adhere to the fats, etc. ');">²⁷</span> R. Hisda observed in Mar 'Ukba's name: What did his companions answer to R. Ishmael son of R. Johanan b. Berokah? They argued thus with him: If the sheath of a Scroll may be rescued together with the Scroll, shall we then not flay the Passover sacrifice of its skin?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Surely the two are identical, for the sheath too is not sacred, just as the flaying of the skin after the breast has been reached serves a secular purpose only. ');">²⁸</span> How compare! There it is [mere] handling, whereas here it is work.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Flaying being a principal labour, v. supra 73a. ');">²⁹</span> — Said R. Ashi, They differ in two things, viz., in respect of both handling and labour, and they argue thus with him: If the sheath of a Scroll may be saved together with the Scroll, shall we not handle the skin on account of the flesh.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rashi: R. Ishmael holding that once the emurim have been drawn out the animal may not be handled because of the skin, while the Rabbis argue that on the contrary since the flesh itself might be handled the skin may be likewise in virtue thereof. According to this they differ where the animal has only been partially flayed. Tosaf. interprets the passage differently. ');">³⁰</span>