Tout ce qui sort d'un arbre n'est pas utilisé pour le petit bois [c'est-à-dire pour en faire une mèche] sauf le lin, [qui est appelé un «arbre», c'est-à-dire. (Josué 1: 6): «Et elle les cacha parmi le lin de l'arbre», malgré lequel nous allumons avec une mèche faite de lui. Et le chanvre et le coton ne sortent pas d'un arbre, mais sont des sortes de graines, raison pour laquelle ils sont allumés. Et le lin, aussi, est une sorte de graine, et est ajouté (comme étant autorisé) uniquement parce qu'il est appelé un arbre, à savoir: "Et elle les a cachés parmi l'arbre-lin."] Et tout ce qui sort d'un arbre fait ne pas produire la souillure de la tente [(Si l'on en faisait une tente, et que le cadavre était sous elle, c'est comme toute autre maison et ne nécessite pas d'aspersion et d'immersion; car la tente elle-même n'acquiert pas d'impureté, mais seulement les vases sous elle.)] sauf le lin, [auquel cas la tente elle-même devient impure, il est écrit (Nombres 19:18): "Et il répandra sur la tente"; et il est dérivé (par identité) "tente" - "tente" de ce qui est dit en ce qui concerne le Tabernacle, à savoir. (Exode 40:19): "Et il étendit la tente sur le tabernacle." Et dans la tente du tabernacle, il n'y avait rien qui sortait d'un arbre mais du lin, à savoir. (Ibid. 26: 1): "dix rideaux de lin torsadé."] Une mèche (faite à partir) d'un vêtement, qui était tordu, mais pas encore roussi [sur une flamme pour un allumage approprié (Nous parlons d'un fragment de vêtement qui est exactement trois par trois doigts)]—R. Eliezer dit: C'est impur, et nous n'allumons pas avec. R. Akiva dit: C'est propre et nous allumons avec. [("Il est impur" :) Car le fait d'avoir été tordu ne le retire pas du statut de "vêtement", il n'a pas été brûlé. ("Il est propre" :) Le fait d'avoir été tordu le retire du statut de "vêtement", de sorte que c'est comme s'il lui manquait trois doigts sur trois; et rien de moins que cette taille n'acquiert ni impureté de peste ni impureté de cadavre. ("et nous ne nous allumons pas avec cela" :) Nous parlons d'une fête qui tombe la veille du sabbat, où l'interdit de muktzeh obtient, et nous ne pouvons pas allumer avec des morceaux d'articles (kelim), qui ont été brisés ce jour-là , car ce serait "nolad" (lit., "né" ce jour-là). Mais nous pouvons allumer avec des articles (complets), car il est permis de les déplacer. Et tous soutiennent qu'il faut allumer la plupart de la mèche émergeant de la lampe avant d'enlever sa main. Ainsi, le raisonnement de R. Eliezer, qui dit qu'on ne s'enflamme pas avec lui: son avoir été tordu ne le retire pas du statut d '«article» (complet), de sorte que lorsqu'il en allume un peu, puisque c'est exactement trois par trois, il en fait un morceau d'article (car moins de trois par trois n'est pas un article), et quand il l'allume avec ses mains pour compléter (l'exigence d'éclairage) la majorité de ce qui sort (de la lampe), il est en train d'allumer un morceau d'un article qui a été cassé pendant le festival (car quand on dit qu'il est permis d'allumer des articles, ce n'est que lorsqu'ils ne sont pas touchés après leur réduction de taille ). Et R. Akiva dit que nous pouvons allumer avec. Il soutient que le fait d'avoir été tordu le retire du statut d '«article». Et il l'a tordu à la veille du festival, car il n'est pas permis de tordre une mèche sur un festival. Par conséquent, nous n'avons pas un morceau d'article qui a été cassé lors d'un festival, et il est permis de s'enflammer avec lui. La halakha est conforme à R. Akiva.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
כל היוצא מן העץ אין מדליקין בו – to make of it a wick.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shabbat
Introduction
This mishnah returns to discussing what may be used as wicks for Shabbat lights.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
אלא פשתן – which is called a tree, as it is written (Joshua 2:6): “[Now she had taken them up to the roof] and hidden them under some stalks of flax [which she had lying on the roof],” and nevertheless, we kindle with wicks that we make from this. But hemp and vine wool do not come from the tree, but they are kinds of seeds, therefore, we kindle from them. And flax also is a kind of seed and it is not necessary to include it, but because it is called a tree, as it written: “and hidden under some stalks of flax.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shabbat
Whatever comes from a tree they may not light [the Shabbat light] except for flax. The only type of material which comes from a tree which may be used as a wick is flax, which is used to make linen. Although we would not consider flax to be a tree, it is called a tree in Joshua 2:6.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
אינו מטמא טומאת אהלים – if he made from them a tent and the dead person underneath it is like the rest of the house and does not require sprinkling and immersion, for the tent itself is not susceptible to becoming impure other than the utensils that are underneath it.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shabbat
And whatever comes from a tree cannot be defiled with tent-uncleanness except linen. There is a connection between what type of material can be used as a Shabbat candle wick and what type of material contracts tent-uncleanness. If a corpse or piece thereof is under a tent and something else is under the tent is well, the corpse transmits its impurity to the other thing under the tent. Any type of material except linen which covers both the corpse and the other thing will carry the impurity but it itself will remain pure. A tent made of linen not only causes the impurity to go from the corpse to the other thing but it itself becomes impure.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
אלא פשתן – for the tent itself is impure, as it is written (Numbers 19:18): “and sprinkle on the tent” and we derive “tent,” “tent” from the Tabernacle, as it is written concerning it (Exodus 40:19): “He spread the tent over the Tabernacle,” but there was nothing in the tent of the Tabernacle that comes out from the wood other than flax as it written (Exodus 26:1): “[As for the Tabernacle,] make it of ten strips of cloth; make these of fine twisted linen.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shabbat
A wick made of cloth which was twisted but not singed: Rabbi Eliezer says: it is unclean, and one may not light with it; Rabbi Akiva says: it is clean and one may light with it. They would make wicks by twisting cloth and then singing them. Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiba debate the status of twisted cloth that has not been singed. According to Rabbi Eliezer it is still considered to be a cloth and hence it can still receive impurities. Since it has not been singed it should not however be used as a wick. Rabbi Akiva holds that since it has been twisted it is no longer considered cloth, but even though it has not been singed one may light with it.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
שקפלה – in the manner that the wicks are grown.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
הבהבה – on the flame in order that it will be charred and kindle nicely and we are dealing with a cloth that has confined three fingers in length by three fingers in length.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
טמאה היא – that is folded is not voided from being considered as cloth since it has not parched.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
טהורה היא – that is folded is voided from being considered as cloth and it is as if it does not have three-by-three, and anything that is less than three-by-three is pure from being defiled either by plagues (i.e., suspected leprosy) and defilement through contact with the dead.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shabbat
אין מדליקין בה – we are dealing with the case of a Jewish holy day that occurs on the Eve of the Sabbath (i.e., Friday) for the prohibition of Muktzeh/that which is not counted upon for use on the Sabbath or Holy Days (i.e., which is prohibited to be handled on these days) and we do not start a fire with shards of utensils that were broken on that day that were [considered as] “born” but we may start a fire with utensils that are appropriate to be carried which everyone has, the individual who is kindling [the fire] must kindle most of what comes out from the wick outside of the candle before he removes his hands. Therefore, the reason of Rabbi Eliezer who said that we don’t kindle it holds that something that is folded does not removed from the notion of a utensil for when I kindle it a bit, since there is three-by-three defined exactly, it is considered a utensil, for less than three-by-three is not a utensil, and when one kindles with one’s hands to complete the majority of what comes out from it, it is found that he is kindling a shard of a utensil that was broken on the Jewish holy day/Yom Tov, and when we say that one may kindle a fire with utensils, specifically it refers that one has not come in contact with it after it has become defective. But Rabbi Akiva states that we kindle with it as he holds that something folded is removed from the status of a utensil for when it is folded from the eve of the Jewish holy day/Yom Tov, it does not grow wicks on the Jewish holy day and hence we find that we don’t have ere shards of a utensil that was broken on the Jewish holy day, and therefore we kindle it. And the Halakha follows Rabbi Akiva.
