Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 2, scan section 10

Samuel said: " One who places a stone in the street for the purpose of paving the walk is culpable." An objection was made. We have learned elsewhere: If one furnish the stone for paving and another furnish the mortar, the latter is culpa- ble ? [Says the Gemara:] If you base your objection to Sam- uel's decree upon this Boraitha, why do you not also cite the latter decree of the Boraitha which reads: R. Jose says: " One who picks up a stone and places it upon a row of stones is also culpable " ? Hence we see that there are three different kinds of building. Building at the base, in the centre, and on the top. Building at the base only requires a solid foundation in the earth. Building in the centre requires mortar. Building on top needs only proper placing without the use of mortar. "Stone-masonry." In what category of labor can stone- 204 TRACT SABBATH. 205 masonty be placed, that its performance should make one culpa- ble? Rabh said it comes under the category of building, and Samuel said under the category of smoothing with a hammer. The same difference of opinion exists between Rabh and Samuel in the case of one who bores a hole in a chicken-coop that was not previously perforated. The former holds this to be build- ing, while the latter regards it the same as smoothing with a hammer. (It makes no difference to one who performs such labor unintentionally, for in either event he must bring a sin- offering, regardless of what class of labor he performed, if he does only one act ; but when he performs two acts there is a difference. If they are both of one category, he is bound to bring only one sin-offering, but if they are of different categories, he must bring two ; but in the case of one who performed such work with intention, even if he does only one act it does make a difference. The witnesses to his deed when warning him — of his wrong-doing — must inform him just what class of labor he is engaged in executing. Should they tell him incorrectly, he cannot be held guilty. This applies to all cases where the Gemara asks as to the category of labor performed.) The same difference of opinion also exists in the case of one who affixed a handle to a pickaxe, Rabh classing such work as building, and Samuel as smoothing with a hammer. A question was propounded by R. Nathan bar Oshiya to R. Johanan: " Under what category of labor is stone-masonry to be placed ? " R. Johanan answered him by making the sign of hammering with his hand. ''For this is the rule." What additional significance does the statement " for this is the rule " contain ? It applies to the hollowing out of a block of wood capable of holding a Kabh (about four lugs), a cavity a good deal smaller. " R. Simeon ben Gamaliel said" etc. What labor is per- formed by striking an anvil with a sledge ? The Tosephta in this chapter explains it as follows: " Said R. Simeon ben Gama- liel : He who during his work strikes the anvil with the sledge is culpable ; because at the construction of the Tabernacle those that covered the boards with metal-plate would strike the plates with their hammers." MISHNA: One who ploughs, grubs, weeds, or prunes ever so little is culpable. One who gathers wood for the purpose of using the space occupied by the wood is culpable if he gathers ever so little; but if he gathers it for the purpose of lighting a VOL. n, — 2 2o6 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. fire with it, he is culpable only if he gathered as much as is required to cook (an easily boiled egg). If one gathered grass for the sake of the space occupied by it, he is culpable for gath- ering even ever so little; if for the purpose of feeding cattle, he does not become liable unless he gathered as much as a goat's mouthful. GEMARA: Of what use is a place where a man ploughed ever so little ? It may be used to plant one seed of a cucumber in. This was also done at the Tabernacle, where one root was all that was necessary (for dyeing) and was pulled out of the ground, thereby making a hole. (This is not contradictory to what we have learned previously, that the minimum prescribed quantity for cucumber seeds was two, because a man will not take one cucumber seed out for sowing; but when sowing a separate hole is made for each seed and thus the prescribed quan- tity in this case is limited to one.) " One who ploughs, grubs, weeds, or prunes.'' The rabbis taught : One who tears out herbs (which when damp are good for human food) for the purpose of eating them is culpable if the quantity equals or exceeds the size of a dried fig. For cattle the prescribed quantity is that of a goat's mouthful. If for the purpose of using for fuel, the prescribed quantity is as much as is used to cook an easily boiled egg with ; if for the purpose of cleaning (weeding) his place, he is culpable even for ever so little. Is all this kind of work not done for the sake of cleaning the place ?* Said Rabba and R. Joseph: The Mishna treats of a case where even if the man was not standing in a garden belonging to an individual, but even if he did it in a public field (if his intention is to clean the place he is culpable). Abayi said : (The same is the case) even if he did it in a private field and had no intention to clean the place, as it did not belong to him but to some one else. MISHNA: One who writes two letters, with the right or with the left hand, be they of one denomination or of different denominations, or be they written with different inks or be they letters of different languages (alphabets), is culpable. R. Jose said : The only reason that one is declared culpable for writing two letters, is because they can serve as marks; for thus the boards used at the Tabernacle were marked in order to be able to tell which fit together. Rabbi (Jehuda Hanassi) said : We * This means that taking the thin^^s away cleans the place even unintentionally. TRACT SABBATH. 207 also often find a short name which forms part of a long name, as Sam for Simeon and Samuel, Noah for Nahor, Dan for Daniel, Gad for Gadiel. GEMARA: It would be right if the Mishna were to say that if one write with his right hand he is culpable, because writing with the right hand is the general way ; but writing with the left is entirely out of the ordinary. Why should he be culpable ? Said R. Jeremiah: "The Mishna also refers to a left-handed man." A left-handed man ? His left is his right and his right his left hand. Let him then not be culpable if he use his right hand ! Said Abayi : In the case of the Mishna a man is referred to who has equal strength in both hands ; but R. Jacob, son of the daughter of Jacob, said : The Mishna stands according to the decree of R. Jose that the reason of a man's culpability is