Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 1, scan section 39

no law of Muktza exists except in the case of raisins and dates which were placed on the roof to be dried." (In such a case there certainly was no intention to use them on the same Sab- bath.) Said Rabba b. b. Hana in the name of R. Johanan : " It was said the law remains in accordance with R. Simeon. When R. Itz'hak b. R. Joseph, however, came from Palestine, he said in the name of R. Johanan that the law (of Muktza) according to R. Jehudah prevails, and R. Jehoshua b. Levi said the law prevails with R. Simeon. Said R. Joseph: Now is understood what Rabba b. b. Hana said in name of R. Johanan, // was said that the Halakha prevails according to R. Simeon, which means that R. Johanan himself did not agree with their decision. Said Abayi to R. Joseph: "Didst thou not know before this that R. Johanan holds with the opinion of R. Jehu- dah ? Is it not a fact that when R. Abba and R. Assi met in the house of R. Abba of the city of Heifa and a candelabrum fell upon the coat of R. Assi, he (R. Assi) did not remove it ? Was it not because he was a disciple of R. Johanan and acted according to the opinion of his master ? " Answered R. Joseph : " Thou art speaking of a candelabrum. A candelabrum is a TRACT SABBATH. 79 different matter altogether, for R. Ahai b. Hanina in the name of R. Assi said: Resh Lakish has decided in Zidon, a candela- brum which can be removed with one hand may be handled, but if it has to be removed with both hands it may not ; and R. Johanan said : We only hold with R. Simeon in the matter of a lamp ; but as for a candelabrum, whether it can be removed with one or both hands, it is prohibited. And why so ? Both Rabba and R. Joseph said : Because a separate place must be designated for it. Said Abayi to R. Joseph: " Have we not observed the case of a baldaquin prepared for a bride and groom, for which a place must be designated ? And yet Samuel said in the name of R. Hyya that such may be put up and taken apart on the Sab- bath. ' ' Said Abayi : The prohibition to handle the candelabrum holds good only in a case where the same is made of several parts. If this be the case, what reason has R. Simeon b. Lakish for allowing this ? Say : Not a candelabrum made of various parts, but if it looks like a candelabrum of various parts. There- fore a candelabrum made of several parts, be it large or small, must not be handled. The handling of a large candelabrum, even if not made of several parts, is also prohibited on account of its marked lines, for fear one may handle such as are made of several parts. And the point of their differing is: With a small candelabrum which looks as if made of several parts, one takes the precautionary measure lest one handle that which is really made of several parts, while the other does not care for such a precaution. R, Malkia chanced to be in the house of R. Simlai and handled a candlestick, the light in which had been extinguished, and R. Simlai became angry on that account. R. Jose the Galilean happened to be in the town of R. Jose b. Hanina and did the same, whereupon R. Jose b. Hanina became angry. R. Abuhu, however, when he happened to be in the place of R. Jehoshua b. Levi, handled, but when he came to the place of R. Johanan he did not handle a candlestick in question out of respect to R. Johanan. R. Jehudah said : A lamp which has been filled with oil may be handled after the light has been extinguished (because it emits no bad odor), but one which con- tained naphtha may not be handled (on account of its bad odor). Both Rabba and R. Joseph also permit this. R. Avia once came to the house of Rabha with muddy shoes and sat on the bed in the presence of the latter. This made 8o THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. Rabha angry, and he tried to disconcert R. Avia with questions. Said he (Rabha): " Can you tell me why Rabba and R. Joseph both said that a lamp filled with naphtha may be handled ?" Answered R. Avia: "The reason of their decision is because the lamp is fit to cover a vessel with after being extinguished." And he rejoined: " If this is so, one may also handle shavings scattered in the yard, because they also can be used to cover a vessel with." Answered R. Avia: " A lamp, being a vessel itself, can be used to cover other things with, but shavings are not vessels in themselves and therefore cannot be used singly as covers " (and brought a Boraitha which states that nose jewels, rings, etc., are considered among the vessels which may be handled on Sabbath, and Ulla explained the reason why, because they are considered as vessels). Said R. Na'hman b. Itz'hak: " Praised be the Lord that Rabha did not put R. Avia to shame." Abayi pointed out to R. Joseph the following contradiction : " Did R. Simeon say that a light may be handled only when extinguished, but if burning it must not be handled ? For what reason ? Because there is a chance of extinguishing it while it is being handled ? " Have we not learned that R. Simeon said : "An act which is committed unintentionally is permissible." Such is the decision of R. Simeon ? (This presents no diffi- culty.) One must not take chances with an act which, if done intentionally, would cause a violation of a biblical ordinance; but if the violation would be only that of a rabbinical ordinance, chances may be taken. Objected Rabha: " We have learned : Dealers in clothing may sell clothes made of wool and cotton mixed. They are per- mitted to try on such clothes or to carry them (temporarily) on their shoulders, provided the intention to use them as a protec- tion against the sun and rain does not exist. Now, the wearing of a mixture of wool and cotton is biblically prohibited, still R. Simeon permits it to be done temporarily. Therefore said Rabha: " Discard the case of the lamp, oil, and wick; there is another reason entirely — viz., because one becomes a basis of a thing the handling of whch is in itself prohibited {i.e., the light in itself cannot be handled)." Said R. Zera in the name of R. Assi, quoting R. Johanan, who said in the name of R. Hanina that he was told by R. Romnas: " Rabbi permitted me to handle a pan containing glowing ashes." TRACT SABBATH. 8i And R. Zera himself was deliberating: Did indeed R. Johanan say so ? Have we not heard that Rabba b. b. Hana said in his (R. Johanan 's) name, referring to our Mishna, which states that a man may handle a box containing a stone: " He may do so providing the box also contains fruit." How, then, could R. Johanan permit a pan with glowing ashes to be handled ? " R. Assi was astounded for some time, but finally answered: " The pan referred to still contained some grains of incense." But Rabha said: While we were in R. Na'hman's house we handled a fire-pot on account of its ashes (the ashes were needed