(32a:1)הוא דאמר כי האי תנא דתניא חותמות שבקרקע מתיר אבל לא מפקיע ולא חותך אחד שבת ואחד יו"ט ושבכלי בשבת מתיר אבל לא מפקיע ולא חותך ביום טוב מתיר ומפקיע וחותך
(32a:1)The Gemara responds: It was he, Shmuel, who spoke in accordance with the opinion of that tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to fastenings that are to the ground, e.g., those on doors, one may untie them but not unravel or cut them, both on Shabbat and on a Festival. And with regard to those fastenings of a vessel, on Shabbat one may untie them, but one may not unravel or cut them; on a Festival one may untie, or unravel, or cut them.
(32a:2)תרצת לך רישא אלא סיפא קשיא
(32a:2)The Gemara challenges further: You have thereby answered the first clause of Shmuel’s statement, with regard to fastenings attached to the ground, e.g., those on doors, by finding a tanna who permits untying them, as does Shmuel. However, the latter clause is difficult because the baraita states that one may not unravel even ropes of vessels on Shabbat, whereas Shmuel permits unraveling in all cases.
(32a:3)הא מני ר' נחמיה היא דאמר כל הכלים אין ניטלין אלא דרך תשמישן
(32a:3)The Gemara answers: In accordance with whose opinion is this baraita? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya, whose opinion is a minority view, as he said: All vessels may be handled only in the manner of their designated use. Therefore, the rope may not be cut, not because it is prohibited to unravel it but because one may not handle a knife for this purpose, as the designated use of the knife is cutting food rather than rope.
(32a:4)אי רבי נחמיה מאי איריא שבת אפילו יום טוב נמי וכי תימא שניא ליה לר' נחמיה בין שבות שבת לשבות יום טוב ומי שניא ליה
(32a:4)The Gemara challenges: If it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya, why discuss particularly Shabbat? The same halakha should apply even on a Festival, as there is no distinction between Shabbat and Festivals with regard to the halakhot of handling items. And if you say that there is a distinction according to Rabbi Neḥemya between a rabbinic decree of Shabbat, when a vessel may be moved only for its designated purpose, and a rabbinic decree of a Festival, when it may not be moved for any purpose, there is a problem. Does he differentiate between them in this manner?
(32a:5)והתני חדא מסיקין בכלים ואין מסיקין בשברי כלים ותניא אידך מסיקין בין בכלים בין בשברי כלים ותניא אידך אין מסיקין לא בכלים ולא בשברי כלים
(32a:5)But isn’t it taught in one baraita: On a Festival one may kindle fire with vessels, but one may not kindle fire with shards of vessels, as they are muktze? And it is taught in another baraita: One may kindle fire both with vessels and with shards of vessels. And it is taught in yet another baraita: One may kindle fire neither with vessels nor with shards of vessels.
(32a:6)ומשני לא קשיא הא ר' יהודה הא ר"ש הא ר' נחמיה
(32a:6)And this contradiction between the baraitot is resolved in the following manner: It is not difficult; this first baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who accepts the law of muktze. One may therefore kindle fire with vessels, as they are not muktze, but not with shards of vessels, as they are muktze and may not be handled. This second baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who does not accept the law of muktze. According to him, one may use shards of vessels as well. This one that prohibits using even vessels that are intact is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya, who allows vessels to be used only for their designated purpose. This indicates that Rabbi Neḥemya prohibits handling even whole vessels on Festivals as well.
(32a:7)תרי תנאי ואליבא דר' נחמיה:
(32a:7)The Gemara replies: These are two tanna’im who both hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya. Two later tanna’im disagreed with each other in reporting the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya. Both agree that one may use vessels only for their designated purpose, but they disagree with regard to whether this halakha applies only on Shabbat or on Festivals as well.
(32a:8)מתני׳ אין פוחתין את הנר מפני שהוא עושה כלי ואין עושין פחמין ביום טוב ואין חותכין את הפתילה ר' יהודה אומר חותכה באור:
(32a:8)MISHNA: On a Festival, one may not hollow out a piece of clay to form a lamp into which he will place oil and a wick because he thereby creates a vessel. And similarly, one may not produce charcoal at all on a Festival because this is not labor for sustenance. And similarly, one may not cut the wick, as this is considered mending a vessel. Rabbi Yehuda says: If one requires a wick of a particular length, he may cut it by burning it in a fire but not by cutting it with a knife.
(32a:9)גמ׳ מאן תנא דפחיתת נר מנא הוא אמר רב יוסף ר' מאיר היא דתניא כלי חרס מאימתי מקבל טומאה משנגמרה מלאכתו דברי ר' מאיר ר' יהושע אומר משיצרפו בכבשן
(32a:9)GEMARA: Who is the tanna who taught that hollowing out a lamp is considered creating a vessel, even if it is not fired in a furnace? Rav Yosef said: It is Rabbi Meir, as it is taught in a baraita with regard to the halakhot of ritual impurity: From when is an earthenware vessel susceptible to ritual impurity? It is from when its work is completed, i.e., when the clay has been made into the form of a vessel; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehoshua says: It is from when the vessel is fired in the furnace.
(32a:10)א"ל אביי ממאי דלמא עד כאן לא קאמר ר' מאיר התם אלא דחזי לקבולי ביה מידי אבל הכא למאי חזי לקבולי ביה פשיטי
(32a:10)Abaye said to him: From where do you conclude that this is the same opinion? Perhaps Rabbi Meir stated his opinion only there, with regard to vessels, since they are fit to contain something. Although they cannot hold liquids before being fired in a furnace, they can contain other items. But here, for what use is this lamp fit? The Gemara responds: It can be used to contain small coins.
(32a:11)איכא דאמרי אמר רב יוסף ר' אליעזר בר' צדוק היא דתנן אלפסין חרניות טהורות באהל המת וטמאות במשא הזב
(32a:11)Some say the following version of the discussion: Rav Yosef said: The mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, as we learned: Ḥaraniyyot pots [ilpasin] are unfinished earthenware pots made together with their covers. The covers are removed after they are fired in a furnace. They are pure with regard to contracting the impurity of a tent over a corpse, as they do not have a receptacle. Earthenware vessels can contract impurity imparted by a corpse only if they have a hollow space that can contain something. But ḥaraniyyot pots are rendered impure by the carrying of a zav, even if the zav moved them without actually touching them, as this impurity applies to any earthenware vessels that serve some purpose.
(32a:12)ר' אליעזר בר' צדוק אומר אף טהורות במשא הזב לפי שלא נגמרה מלאכתן
(32a:12)Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: These vessels are even pure with regard to the impurity imparted by the carrying of a zav because their labor is not completed; therefore, they are not fully formed. This implies that when the pots are completed, they are considered full-fledged vessels, even before they have been fired in a furnace.
(32a:13)א"ל אביי דלמא עד כאן לא קאמר רבי אליעזר ברבי צדוק התם אלא דחזי לקבולי ביה מידי אבל הכא למאי חזי לקבולי ביה פשיטי
(32a:13)Abaye said to him: Perhaps it is not so, as it is possible to say that Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, stated his opinion only there, in the case of ḥaraniyyot pots, since they are fit to contain something. But here, in the case of a lamp, for what is it fit? The Gemara replies: It is fit to contain small coins.
(32a:14)תנו רבנן אין פוחתין את הנר ואין עושין אלפסין חרניות ביום טוב רבן שמעון בן גמליאל מתיר באלפסין חרניות מאי חרניות אמר רב יהודה ערניות מאי ערניות אמר אביי צעי חקלייתא
(32a:14)The Sages taught: One may not hollow out a lamp, and one may not create ḥaraniyyot pots on a Festival. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel permits creating ḥaraniyyot pots. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of ḥaraniyyot? Rav Yehuda said: They are pots of a city [iraniyyot]. The Gemara again inquires: What is the meaning of iraniyyot? Abaye said: It means villagers’ bowls who will use even clay vessels that have not been fully formed or fired, as they are not particular with regard to half-finished utensils.
(32a:15)ואין עושין פחמין פשיטא למאי חזי תני רבי חייא לא נצרכה אלא למוסרן לאוליירין לבו ביום
(32a:15)It is taught in the mishna: And one may not produce charcoal on a Festival. The Gemara challenges: It is obvious that one may perform only labor for sustenance. For what is charcoal fit; what purpose does it have for the sake of sustenance? Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: It is necessary to teach this halakha only in the case of handing the charcoal over to bathhouse attendants [olyarin] who heat up the bathhouse for that day. One might have thought that since charcoal is used for the sake of washing on a Festival, producing it should be permitted.
(32a:16)ובו ביום מי שרי כדאמר רבא להזיע וקודם גזרה הכא נמי להזיע וקודם גזרה:
(32a:16)The Gemara questions this: And on that day is it permitted to heat up water for washing? The Sages decreed that one may not wash in a bathhouse on a Festival, even if the water was heated up the day before, and certainly it is prohibited if the water was heated on the Festival itself. The Gemara replies: As Rava said with regard to a different issue, this decree does not refer to actual washing but to entering a bathhouse merely in order to sweat, and it was stated before the enactment of the decree against sweating in a bathhouse. Here, too, one can explain that the statement of Rabbi Ḥiyya is referring to a case where one entered to sweat, and he entered at a time before the decree was enacted.
(32a:17)ואין חותכין את הפתילה לשנים מ"ש בסכין דלא
(32a:17)It was taught in the mishna: And one may not cut a wick into two, but Rabbi Yehuda permits cutting it by means of fire. The Gemara asks: What is different about cutting a wick with fire as opposed to with a knife, that one may not cut a wick with a knife?
(32b:1)דקמתקן מנא באור נמי קא מתקן מנא תני ר' חייא חותכה באור בפי שתי נרות אמר רב נתן בר אבא אמר רב מוחטין את הפתילה ביום טוב מאי מוחטין אמר רב חנינא בר שלמיא (משמיה דרב) לעדויי חושכא
(32b:1)Is it because he thereby mends a vessel? If so, when one cuts it in the fire, he is also preparing a vessel for use. Rabbi Ḥiyya taught in explanation: He cuts it by fire in the mouth of two candles. In other words, he does not simply cut a wick, but rather inserts a long wick into two lamps, which he subsequently lights in the middle. This indeed leads to the formation of two separate wicks, but only as a result of kindling two lamps. Rav Natan bar Abba said that Rav said: One may moḥet a wick on a Festival. The term moḥet was unknown, and the Gemara therefore asks: What is the meaning of the word moḥet? Rav Ḥanina bar Shelemya said in the name of Rav: To remove the dark; in other words, it is permitted to remove the burnt, charcoaled section to make the lamp shine more brightly.
(32b:2)תני בר קפרא ו' דברים נאמרו בפתילה ג' להחמיר וג' להקל להחמיר אין גודלין אותה לכתחלה ביו"ט ואין מהבהבין אותה באור ואין חותכין אותה לשנים להקל ממעכה ביד ושורה בשמן וחותכה באור בפי שתי נרות
(32b:2)Bar Kappara taught: Six matters were stated with regard to the halakhot of a wick on a Festival, three of which are to be stringent and three of which are to be lenient. The three halakhot to be stringent are: One may not spin or twist it ab initio on a Festival, and one may not singe it in fire before lighting it so that it will burn well, and one may not cut it into two. The three halakhot to be lenient are: One may crush it by hand, as although it is prohibited to twist it into a wick, one may adjust its shape in an unusual manner; and one may soak it in oil so that it will later burn well; and one may cut it by fire in the mouth of two candles.
(32b:3)ואמר רב נתן בר אבא אמר רב עתירי בבל יורדי גיהנם הם כי הא דשבתאי בר מרינוס אקלע לבבל בעא מנייהו עסקא ולא יהבו ליה מזוני מיזן נמי לא זינוהו
(32b:3)§ After citing one teaching in the name of Rav Natan bar Abba, the Gemara quotes a few more statements attributed to the same scholar. Since he is not mentioned often, Rav Natan’s teachings are arranged together, so that they can be remembered more easily. Rav Natan bar Abba said that Rav said: The wealthy Jews of Babylonia will descend to Gehenna because they do not have compassion on others. This is illustrated by incidents such as this: Shabbetai bar Marinus happened to come to Babylonia. He requested their participation in a business venture, to lend him money and receive half the profits in return, and they did not give it to him. Furthermore, when he asked them to sustain him with food, they likewise refused to sustain him.
(32b:4)אמר הני מערב רב קא אתו דכתיב (דברים יג, יח) ונתן לך רחמים ורחמך כל המרחם על הבריות בידוע שהוא מזרעו של אברהם אבינו וכל מי שאינו מרחם על הבריות בידוע שאינו מזרעו של אברהם אבינו
(32b:4)He said: These wealthy people are not descendants of our forefathers, but they came from the mixed multitude, as it is written: “And show you compassion, and have compassion upon you, and multiply you, as He has sworn to your fathers” (Deuteronomy 13:18), from which it is derived: Anyone who has compassion for God’s creatures, it is known that he is of the descendants of Abraham, our father, and anyone who does not have compassion for God’s creatures, it is known that he is not of the descendants of Abraham, our father. Since these wealthy Babylonians do not have compassion on people, clearly they are not descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
(32b:5)ואמר רב נתן בר אבא אמר רב כל המצפה על שלחן אחרים עולם חשך בעדו שנאמר (איוב טו, כג) נודד הוא ללחם איה ידע כי נכון בידו יום חשך רב חסדא אמר אף חייו אינן חיים
(32b:5)This is another teaching that Rav Natan bar Abba said that Rav said: Whoever looks to the table of others for his sustenance, the world is dark for him. Everything looks bleak and hopeless to him, for it is stated: “He wanders abroad for bread: Where is it? He knows the day of darkness is ready at his hand” (Job 15:23). Rav Ḥisda said: Even his life is no life, as he receives no satisfaction from it.
(32b:6)ת"ר ג' חייהן אינם חיים ואלו הן המצפה לשלחן חבירו ומי שאשתו מושלת עליו ומי שיסורין מושלין בגופו ויש אומרים אף מי שאין לו אלא חלוק אחד ות"ק אפשר דמעיין במניה:
(32b:6)In support of this last claim, the Gemara cites a baraita in which the Sages taught: There are three whose lives are not lives, and they are as follows: One who looks to the table of others for his sustenance; and one whose wife rules over him; and one whose body is ruled by suffering. And some say: Even one who has only one robe. Since he cannot wash it properly, he suffers from lice and dirt. The Gemara comments: And the first tanna, who did not include such a person, maintains: It is possible for him to examine his clothes and remove the lice, which would alleviate his suffering.
(32b:7)מתני׳ אין שוברין את החרס ואין חותכין הנייר לצלות בו מליח
(32b:7)MISHNA: One may not break earthenware on a Festival. And one may not cut paper in order to roast salted fish on it. Earthenware shards or pieces of paper that have been soaked in water were placed on the metal surface or in the oven in which the fish was roasted, so that it would not be burned by the heat.
(32b:8)ואין גורפין תנור וכירים אבל מכבשין
(32b:8)And one may not sweep out anything that has fallen into an oven or stove that interferes with the baking, such as plaster. But one may press down and flatten any accumulated dust and ashes at the bottom of the oven, which might prevent it from lighting properly.
(32b:9)ואין מקיפין שתי חביות לשפות עליהן את הקדרה ואין סומכין את הקדרה בבקעת וכן בדלת ואין מנהיגין את הבהמה במקל ביום טוב ורבי אלעזר בר' שמעון מתיר:
(32b:9)And one may not draw two barrels together in order to place a pot on them, so that its contents will be cooked by a fire lit between the barrels. And one may not prop a pot that does not stand straight with a piece of wood, in order to prevent it from falling. And similarly, with a door. And one may not lead an animal with a stick in the public domain on a Festival; and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, permits it.
(32b:10)גמ׳ מ"ט משם דקא מתקן מנא
(32b:10)GEMARA: With regard to the issue of breaking earthenware and cutting paper, the Gemara explains: What is the reason for this prohibition? Because one is thereby preparing a vessel for use.
(32b:11)ואין גורפין תנור וכירים תני רב חייא בר יוסף קמיה דרב נחמן ואם אי אפשר לאפות אלא אם כן גורפו מותר דביתהו דר' חייא נפל לה אריחא בתנורא ביומא טבא אמר לה ר' חייא חזי דאנא רפתא מעלייתא בעינא א"ל רבא לשמעיה טוי לי בר אווזא ואזדהר מחרוכא
(32b:11)It was taught in the mishna: And one may not sweep out an oven or stove. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef taught before Rav Naḥman: And if it is not possible to bake unless one sweeps it out, it is permitted. The Gemara relates an incident with regard to the wife of Rabbi Ḥiyya: A part of a brick fell into her oven on a Festival, preventing her from baking. Rav Ḥiyya said to her: See, you should know that I want good-quality bread. He thereby stated that it would be impossible unless she removed the brick, making it permissible for her to do so. Similarly, Rava said to his attendant: Roast for me a duck in an oven, and be careful not to singe it. He thereby implied that the attendant may remove all impediments from the oven in order to fulfill this requirement because otherwise it would not be possible to cook without singeing.
(32b:12)א"ל רבינא לרב אשי אמר לן רב אחא מהוצל דמר שרקין ליה תנורא ביומא טבא אמר ליה אנן ארקתא דפרת סמכינן והנ"מ הוא דצייריה מאתמול אמר רבינא וקטמא שרי:
(32b:12)In a related case, Ravina said to Rav Ashi: Rav Aḥa from Hutzal said to us that the master, Rav Ashi, allows his attendants to plaster the mouth of the oven for him on a Festival. This was done in order to ensure that the roasted or cooked dish would be fully prepared. Why does this not constitute the prohibited labor of kneading on a Festival? He said to him: We rely on the bank of the Euphrates River. We avoid the labor of kneading by taking sufficiently kneaded mud from the riverbank. The Gemara comments: And this applies only when one wrapped or made some mark on the mud the day before, so that it not be muktze. Ravina said: And as for kneading with ashes for this purpose, it is permitted, since the labor of kneading does not apply to ashes.
(32b:13)ואין מקיפין שתי חביות: אמר רב נחמן אבנים של בית הכסא מותר לצדדן ביום טוב איתיביה רבה לרב נחמן אין מקיפין שתי חביות לשפות עליהן את הקדרה אמר ליה שאני התם משום דקא עביד אהלא
(32b:13)§ It was taught in the mishna: One may not draw two barrels together in order to place a pot on them. Rav Naḥman said: With regard to large stones of a lavatory, upon which one sits to attend to his needs, it is permitted to put them together in the proper manner, so that they may be used on a Festival. Rabba raised an objection to Rav Naḥman: Wasn’t it taught that one may not draw two barrels together in order to place a pot on them? This seems to indicate that any arrangement resembling building is prohibited. He said to him: There, with regard to barrels, it is different, because one makes a tent. It is not the drawing of the barrels close together that is prohibited. Rather, the placement of the pot over them forms a kind of covering, which is similar to building a tent.
(32b:14)א"ל רבה זוטא לרב אשי אלא מעתה בנה אצטבא ביו"ט דלא עביד אהלא הכי נמי דשרי א"ל התם בנין קבע אסרה תורה בנין עראי לא אסרה תורה וגזרו רבנן על בנין עראי משום בנין קבע והכא משום כבודו לא גזרו ביה רבנן
(32b:14)Rabba the Younger, so called to distinguish him from the more famous amora known as Rabba, said to Rav Ashi: However, if that is so, then if, on a Festival, one built a solid bench [itztaba], without a gap below the seat, a situation in which one does not make a tent, so too, will you say that it is permitted? He said to him: The two cases are not comparable: There, with regard to a proper construction, such as a bench, the Torah prohibited erecting a permanent construction, but the Torah did not prohibit erecting a temporary construction. The Sages, however, decreed against creating a temporary construction on a Festival due to a permanent construction. However, here, with regard to a lavatory, due to the dignity of the user, the Sages did not decree with regard to it.
(32b:15)אמר רב יהודה האי מדורתא מלמעלה למטה שרי מלמטה למעלה אסור
(32b:15)Rav Yehuda said: With regard to this bonfire, in which the wood is arranged in the form of a house, if one arranges it from above to below it is permitted, as this is not the regular manner of building. However, if one prepares it in the usual fashion, from below to above, it is prohibited, for this is considered building.
