Shabbat 86

when there is honey; but what can be said of winter, when it does not contain honey?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The questioner assumes 'in the sun' and 'in the rain' to mean 'in the days of the sun' and 'in the days of rain' respectively, i.e., in summer and in winter. ');">¹</span> — It is in respect of two loaves.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of honey, left in the honeycomb for the bees themselves. ');">²</span>

— But they are mukzeh?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. Having been set apart for the bees, they may not be handled. ');">³</span> — It means that he designated them.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For food, before the Sabbath. ');">⁴</span>

Then what if he did not designate them? It is forbidden! If so, instead of teaching, 'providing be has no intention of capturing [the bees],' let a distinction be drawn and taught in that itself: [thus:] when is that said? When he designated them; but if he did not designate them, it is forbidden? — He [the Tanna] teaches us this: even if he designated them, yet there is the proviso that he must not intend to capture [the bees]. With whom does this agree?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Assuming that the reference 'is to one who designated the two loaves, who is the author of this Baraitha? ');">⁵</span> If R. Simeon, surely he rejects [the prohibition of] mukzeh! If R. Judah, then what matters if one does not intend [to capture the bees], — [surely he holds that] an unintentional act is forbidden?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the covering blocks the bees' exit, he does in fact capture them, not- withstanding his lack of intention. ');">⁶</span>

— In truth this agrees with R. Judah; and what is meant by, 'providing he has no intention of capturing [the bees]?' That he must not arrange it like a net, namely, he must leave an opening<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'space' ');">⁷</span> so that they [the bees] should not be automatically caught.

R. Ashi said:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In reply to the objection from the last cited Baraitha. ');">⁸</span> Is it then taught, 'in summer' and 'in winter'? Surely, it is stated, 'in the sun because of the sun and in the rain because of the rain.' [That means,] in the days of Nisan and Tishri,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first and seventh months of the Jewish year, corresponding roughly to mid-March-April and mid-September-October. ');">⁹</span>

when there is sun, rain, and honey. R. Shesheth said to them [his disciples], 'Go forth and tell R. Isaac, R. Huna has already stated your ruling in Babylon. For R. Huna said: A screen may be made for the dead for the sake of the living, but not for the sake of the dead. What does this mean? As R. Samuel b. Judah said, and Shila Mari recited likewise: If a dead man is lying in the sun, two men come and sit down at his side. If they feel hot underneath,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The sun having heated the pavement. ');">¹⁰</span>

each brings a couch and sits upon it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The prohibitions of carrying from domain to domain (v. supra 2a, 6a) must of course not be violated. ');">¹¹</span> If they feel hot above, they can bring a hanging and spread it above them: then each sets up his couch, slips away and departs, and thus the screen [for the dead] is found to have been made automatically.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus the awning is not made for the dead, but for the sake of the living. This is a legal fiction. ');">¹²</span>

It was stated: If a corpse is lying in the sun, — Rab Judah maintained in Samuel's name: It may be changed over from bier to bier.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Until it reaches the shade. ');">¹³</span> R. Hanina said on Rab's authority: A loaf or a child is placed upon it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra 30b; infra 142b. ');">¹⁴</span> and it is moved away. Now, if a loaf or a child is available, all agree that that is permitted. When do they differ? — When they are not available: one Master holds, Sidelong moving is designated moving;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Moving indirectly, by changing over from bier to bier, is nevertheless moving, and forbidden. ');">¹⁵</span> while the other Master holds, Sidelong moving is not designated moving. Shall we say that this is dependent on Tannaim? A corpse may not be rescued from a conflagration.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the Sabbath, because it must not be handled. ');">¹⁶</span> R. Judah b. Lakish said: I have heard that a corpse may be rescued from a fire. What are the circumstances? if a loaf or a child is available, what is the reason of the first Tanna? If it is not,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And consequently the point at issue is whether the dead may be rescued directly. ');">¹⁷</span> what is the reason of R. Judah b. Lakish? Hence they surely differ in respect to sidelong moving, one Master holding that such is designated moving, while the other Master holds that it is not? — No. All agree that sidelong moving is designated moving, but this is the reason of R. Judah b. Lakish: since a man is agitated over his dead,