Shabbat 306

לא תצא לחולין מפני שהוא ספק

does not revert to hullin, because it is doubtful.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whether his action is valid or not, as his mind may have been clear. On that view a minor stands lower, and the purse must certainly be given to the minor. ');">¹</span>

כי תיבעי לך אליבא דרבנן דתנן חמשה לא יתרומו ואם תרמו אין תרומתן תרומה אלו הן חרש שוטה וקטן והתורם את שאינו שלו ונכרי שתרם את של ישראל אפילו ברשותו אין תרומתו תרומה

The question is on the Rabbis' view. For we learnt: Five must not separate <i>terumah</i>, and if they do their separation is not valid. And these are they: a deaf-mute, imbecile, minor, one who separates <i>terumah</i> on [produce] that is not his,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without having been previously authorized. ');">²</span>

מאי לחרש יהיב ליה דקטן אתי לכלל דעת או דילמא לקטן יהיב ליה דחרש אתי לאחלופי בגדול פיקח איכא דאמרי לחרש יהיב ליה איכא דאמרי לקטן יהיב ליה

and a Gentile who separates <i>terumah</i> on an Israelite's [produce] even with [the latter's] permission, his separation is not valid. What then? must he give it to the deaf-mute, seeing that the minor will arrive at understanding;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus he is at least potentially an adult of intelligence. ');">³</span>

אין שם לא נכרי ולא חמור ולא חרש ולא שוטה ולא קטן מאי אמר רבי יצחק עוד אחרת היתה ולא רצו חכמים לגלותה מאי עוד אחרת היתה מוליכו פחות פחות מד' אמות אמאי לא רצו חכמים לגלותה משום (משלי כה, ב) כבוד אלהים הסתר דבר וכבוד מלכים חקור דבר והכא מאי כבוד אלהים איכא דילמא אתי לאתויי ד' אמות ברה"ר

or perhaps he must give it to the minor, because a deaf-mute may be confused with an intelligent adult? — Some rule: He must give it to the deaf-mute; others maintain; he must entrust it to the minor.

תניא ר"א אומר בו ביום גדשו סאה ר' יהושע אומר בו ביום מחקו סאה

What if neither a Gentile, an ass, a deaf-mute, an imbecile nor a minor is there? — R. Isaac said: There was yet another [expedient], but the Sages did not wish to reveal it. What was the other [expedient]? — One may carry it in stretches of less than four cubits at a time.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 194, n. 5. ');">⁴</span>

תניא משל דר"א למה הדבר דומה לקופה מלאה קישואין ודילועין אדם נותן לתוכה חרדל והיא מחזקת משל דר' יהושע למה הדבר דומה לעריבה מלאה דבש נותן לתוכה רימונים ואגוזים והיא מקיאה

Why were the Sages unwilling to reveal it? Because, It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: But the glory of kings is to search out a matter.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prov. XXV, 2. ');">⁵</span>

אמר מר אין עמו נכרי מניחו על החמור והלא מחמר ורחמנא אמר (שמות כ, ט) לא תעשה כל מלאכה

Yet what glory of God is there here? — Lest one come to carry it four cubits in public ground.

א"ר אדא בר אהבה מניחו עליה כשהיא מהלכת והא אי אפשר דלא קיימא להשתין מים ולהטיל גללים ואיכא עקירה והנחה כשהיא מהלכת מניחו עליה כשהיא עומדת נוטלו הימנה אי הכי אפילו חברו נמי

It was taught, R. Eliezer said: On that day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When they entered the upper chambers of Hezekiah b. Garon for the eighteen enactments, v. supra 13b and p. 54, n. 1. ');">⁶</span>

אמר רב פפא כל שבגופו חייב חטאת בחברו פטור אבל אסור כל שחברו פטור אבל אסור בחמורו מותר לכתחלה

they overfilled the measure;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They did well in enacting so many preventive laws, thereby safeguarding Israel from transgression. ');">⁷</span>

א"ר אדא בר אהבה היתה חבילתו מונחת לו על כתיפו רץ תחתיה עד שמגיע לביתו דוקא רץ אבל קלי קלי לא

R. Joshua said: On that day they made the measure deficient.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or, they just levelled the measure. I.e., they imposed so many prohibitions as to defeat their own object, for by a reaction Israel would be more likely to sin now than hitherto. — This is mentioned here be cause the entrusting of one's purse to a Gentile was one of those eighteen laws. ');">⁸</span>

מאי טעמא כיון דלית ליה היכירא אתי למיעבד עקירה והנחה סוף סוף כי מטא לביתיה אי אפשר דלא קאי פורתא וקמעייל מרשות הרבים לרה"י דזריק ליה כלאחר יד

It was taught, As an illustration, what does this resemble on R. Eliezer's view? A basket full of cucumbers and gourds: a man puts mustard [grain] therein and it holds it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though full it is still capable of receiving more. ');">⁹</span>

אמר רמי בר חמא המחמר אחר בהמתו בשבת בשוגג חייב חטאת במזיד חייב סקילה מאי טעמא אמר רבא דאמר קרא לא תעשה כל מלאכה אתה ובהמתך בהמתו דומיא דידיה מה הוא בשוגג חייב חטאת במזיד חייב סקילה אף בהמתו נמי בשוגג חייב חטאת במזיד חייב סקילה

As an illustration, what does this resemble on R. Joshua's view? A tub full of honey: if one puts pomegranates and nuts therein, it [the tub] overflows.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'it spews forth' — some of the honey itself. ');">¹⁰</span>

אמר רבא שתי תשובות בדבר חדא דכתיב (במדבר טו, כט) תורה אחת יהיה לכם לעושה בשגגה והנפש אשר תעשה ביד רמה הוקשה כל התורה כולה לע"ז מה ע"ז דעביד מעשה בגופיה ה"נ עד דעביד מעשה בגופיה

The Master said: 'If there is no Gentile with him, he places it on his ass'. But he [thereby] leads a [laden] ass, whereas Scripture saith, [In it] thou shalt not do any work, [thou&nbsp;… nor thy cattle]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XX, 10. ');">¹¹</span>

ועוד תנן המחלל את השבת בדבר שחייבין על שגגתו חטאת ועל זדונו סקילה מכלל דאיכא מידי דאין חייבין על שגגתו חטאת ולא על זדונו סקילה

Said R. Adda b. Ahabah: He places it upon her while she is walking.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If one places a burden on a man while he is walking he is not culpable, because there is no 'removal' in a technical sense; v. supra 3a. Hence it does not constitute labour, and therefore the same applies here too. ');">¹²</span>

ומאי ניהו לאו דמחמר לא תחומין ואליבא דר"ע והבערה אליבא דר' יוסי

But it is impossible that she shall not stop for the calls of Nature,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And when she recommences there is 'removal', and when she stops again there is 'depositing', which together constitute 'work'. ');">¹³</span> and so there is removing and depositing? — When she is walking he places it upon her, and when she stops he removes it from her. If so, [the same may be done] even [to] his neighbour too? — R. Papa answered: Where one is liable to a sin-offering in his own case, in the case of his neighbour though he is not culpable nevertheless it is forbidden;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For if a man carries an article four cubits in public ground, even if he picks it up while walking, he is culpable. Consequently one must not put a burden upon another person while walking, though there is no culpability. ');">¹⁴</span> and wherever in the case of one's neighbour he is not culpable though it is forbidden, in the case of one's ass it is permitted at the outset. R. Adda b. Ahabah said: If one's bundle is lying on his shoulder, he must run with it until he arrives home. He may only run, but not walk leisurely. What is the reason? — Since he has nothing to mark a distinction, he will come to perform removing and depositing. Yet after all, when he arrives at the house it is impossible that he shall not stop for a moment, and so he carries it from public to private ground? — He throws it in a 'back-handed manner.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 188, n. 2. ');">¹⁵</span> Rami b. Hama said: If one leads a laden ass on the Sabbath unwittingly, he is liable to a sin-offering; if deliberately, he is liable to stoning.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In theory only. In actual practice the death penalty was restricted by so many conditions as to be non-existent in all but cases of murder (cf. Herzog. Main Institutions of Jewish Law, Vol. I, Introduction, XXI). ');">¹⁶</span> What is the reason? Said Rabbah, because Scripture said, Thou shalt not do any work, — thou, … — nor thy cattle: his cattle is assimilated to himself. Just as when he [himself does work], if unwittingly, he is liable to a sin-offering: if deliberately, he is liable to stoning: so [when he works with] his cattle too, if unwittingly, he is liable to a sin-offering; if deliberately, he is liable to stoning. Raba observed, There are two objections to this. Firstly, because it is written, Ye shall have one law for him that doeth aught unwittingly&nbsp;… But the soul that doeth aught with a high hand, [etc.]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XV, 29f, q.v. The latter refers to idolatry. ');">¹⁷</span> all laws are assimilated to idolatry: just as in the case of idolatry, he personally performs an action, so here too [one does not incur a sin-offering] unless he personally performs work. Moreover, we learnt: He who desecrates the Sabbath [is stoned], provided that it is an offence punished by stoning<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In Sanh. 66a the reading is: kareth. ');">¹⁸</span> if deliberate, and by a sin-offering if unwitting. Hence it follows that there is an offence for which if done unwittingly one does not incur a sin-offering, nor stoning if deliberate: and what is that? Surely leading a laden ass? — No: [the violation of] tehumin,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tehum, pl. tehumin, v. Glos. ');">¹⁹</span> in accordance with R. Akiba's view,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who regards the prohibition as Biblical, v. Sot. 36b. ');">²⁰</span> or kindling, in accordance with R. Jose s view.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 70a. ');">²¹</span>