Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 2, scan section 55

(and during the entire year they have no pleasures, so they take 332 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. advantage of the festivals)," was the answer. " Why are the scholars of Babylon so well dressed?" queried R. Hyya. "Because they are ignorami " (and must wear good clothes in order to command respect), answered R. Assi. At that moment R. Johanan awoke, and said to them: " Youngsters! Did I not tell you, that it is written [Proverbs vii. 4]: ' Say unto wisdom, Thou art my sister,* which means: If a thing is as certain to thee as the fact that thou canst not marry thy own sister, then say it ? Otherwise, thou shalt not say it, (Then why speak such foolishness ?) " Then said they: " Let Master tell some things (which would benefit us)!" Said R. Johanan: "The fowls of Babylon are fat because they were never driven away from home, as it is written [Jeremiah xlviii. ii]: ' Moab was ever at ease from his youth, and he was resting on his lees, and was not emptied from vessel to vessel, and had not gone into exile: therefore had his taste remained in him and his scent was not changed.' Whence do we know that the fowls of Pal- estine were driven from home ? It is written [ibid. ix. 9] : * Both the fowls of the heavens and the beasts are fled ; they are gone away.' — [R. Jacob said in the name of R. Johanan, that the fowls and the beasts and all else came back to Palestine with the exception of the Spanish kolias (the reason will be ex- plained in Tract Bechorath.] — ' Why are the Babylonians merry during the festivals ? ' Because they were not included in the curse of [Hosea ii. 13]: ' And I will cause to cease all her mirth, her festival, her new moon, and her Sabbath, and all her ap- pointed feasts.' " Said R. Itz'hak: " (Indeed it was so.) There was not a single feast in Palestine, that the military did not come to Seph- oris " ; and R. Hanina said: "There was not a single feast in Palestine, that captains, guards, and supervisors did not come to Tiberias. " — " Why are the scholars of Babylon so well dressed ? " " Because they are all strangers. As the saying goes: In a city where a man is known, he may wear whatever he chooses ; but where he is not suflficiently known he should dress well." R. Joseph taught: It is written [Isaiah xxvii. 6]: "In the future shall Jacob yet take root: Israel shall bud and blossom; and shall fill the face of the world with fruit." What is meant by " bud and blossom " ? The scholars of Babylon, who wind blossoms and wreaths around the Thorah. MISHNA: A man may break open a cask, to eat dry figs therefrom ; provided, he does not intend using the cask afterwards TRACT SABBATH. 333 as a vessel. He must not pierce the bunghole of a cask, such is the decree of R. Jehudah (or R. Jose) ; the sages permit this to be done. And one must not bore a hole in the side of it ; but if it was already perforated, he must not fill it up with wax, because he would smoothen the wax thereby. Said R. Jehudah: " Such a case was brought before R. Johanan ben Sachai, at Arab, and he observed: * I doubt whether that act does not involve liability to bring a sin-ofTering. ' " GEMARA: Said R. Oshea: " When may a man hold a dirk to open a cask of figs ? If the figs are very tightly packed, for then he would have to use a knife or a dirk to get the figs out ; but if they were packed loose he must not use a knife to open the cask." An objection was raised: We have learned, that R. Simeon ben Gamaliel said: " A man may bring in a cask of wine, cut off the bung-head with a knife, and serve it to the guests with impunity." This Boraitha is in accordance with the opinion of the sages, while our Mishna is in accordance with the decree of R. Nehemiah (who holds that no vessel may be used for any other purpose but that for which it was originally intended). What impelled R. Oshea to make the entire Mishna conform with the dictum of R. Nehemiah ? Let him say, that the cask may be opened with a knife even if the figs are loose, and thus be in accord with the sages ? Answered Rabha: " The reason is, that R. Oshea could not quite comprehend why the Mishna specified figs: it could have said fruit, and on that account he reasoned as stated." In one Boraitha we have learned: Palm-leaf baskets contain- ing dried figs and dates may be untied, taken apart, or cut ; and in another Boraitha we were taught, that they may be untied, but not taken apart or tied. This presents no difficulty; for one Boraitha is in accordance with the opinion of the sages, and the other is in accord with R. Nehemiah. A question was asked of R. Shesheth: " May a cask be bored with an auger on the Sabbath ? Shall we assume, that one intended to make an opening in the cask and hence it is prohibited, or that he intended merely to make a larger space for the flow of the wine and it is therefore permitted ?" The answer was: " The intention was to make an opening, and it is prohibited." An objection based upon the teaching of R. Sim- eon ben Gamaliel previousy mentioned was raised, and the an- swer was: " There the int.Mition certainly was to make the space VOL. IT. — 10 334 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. larger, while here it is obvious that the intention was to make an opening; otherwise, he would have broken open the cask with a knife." ' ' One must not pierce the bunghole of a cask. ' ' Said R. H una : " They differ only in reference to the top of a bunghole of a cask; but as for the side, all agree that it is not allowed, and this is carried out by the later clause in the Mishna; viz. : ' And he must not bore a hole in the side of it.' " R. Hisda, however, said: " They differ only as far as boring a hole in the side of the bunghole is concerned, but as for the top, all agree that it is per- mitted ; and the later clause of the Mishna means to state that one must not bore a hole in the side of the cask itself." The rabbis taught: One must not bore a new hole on Sab- bath, but if it was already made he may enlarge it ; and others say, that he must not enlarge it ; but all agree, that if the hole was merely stopped it may be reopened. The first Tana pro- hibits the boring of a new hole, because thereby an opening is made. Does not enlarging a hole improve the opening ? Said Rabba: According to biblical law, an opening through which one cannot enter or go out is not considered a door, but the rab- bis made this a precaution on account of chicken-coops, the holes of which are made for the purpose of admitting fresh air and emitting the foul. (Therefore making a hole in a coop is equivalent to making a whole coop, for without holes it is of no value.) Enlarging a hole, however, is permitted, because one would enlarge a hole in a chicken-coop, lest an ichneumon should