Commento su Shabbat 1:18

יציאות השבת – transferring an object from one domain to [another] domain (i.e., removing taking out of the house – see Talmud Shabbat 2b) that are mentioned concerning the Sabbath and carrying in are also called transferring since one takes out from one domain to another domain. And the fact that [the Mishnah] teaches יציאות /carrying (on the Sabbath) and it does not teach הוצאות /transferring, is because it uses the language of the Bible, as it is written (Exodus 16:29): “Let no one leave his place [on the seventh day],” and from it, we derive transferring, that a person should not leave with a utensil in his hand to collect the Manna.

Introduction Tractate Shabbat begins with a formulaic teaching about the prohibition of carrying. The remainder of the chapter discusses preparations before Shabbat, but it seems that the Mishnah’s editors wanted to begin with a mishnah that contains the formula “two which are four”. This is the same way that tractate Shevuoth began, and it seems that this type of opening was often preferred by the Mishnah. Indeed, Abraham Goldberg (whose Hebrew critical commentary on Shabbat I will use from time to time published by the Jewish Theological Seminary of America) notes that about half of the tractates of the Mishnah begin with numbers or an issue related to numbers. Goldberg also believes that opening the tractate with a mishnah concerning carrying something from one domain to another was intended as a polemic against the Sadducees who did not agree with the Pharisees in all of the details of these laws. The prohibition of carrying will be further discussed later on in chapter five and will continue to be discussed through chapter eleven.

שתים שהן ארבע – two from the Torah, transferring an object and carrying [it] in to the house owner who stands inside in the private domain, and on these two, a person is liable for a sin-offering for his inadvertent violation, and divine punishment by premature/sudden death for a willful violation, and stoning for his being warned, like in all the rest of the prohibited labors of Shabbat.

The mishnah lists eight slightly different scenarios in which an object is brought from outside in the public domain to inside the house, the private domain. These scenarios can be divided twice. In the first four examples a person has performed a complete action, taking something from one domain and bringing into another and is therefore liable. In two of these cases the object is brought in and in two it is taken out. In the second four cases, the two people share in bringing the object in or taking it out and hence they are both exempt (remember that this does not mean that this is permitted.) These cases can also be divided into two subcategories. The mishnah probably uses the example of a poor person standing outside and a householder inside because this is a realistic situation and it will be easier to remember.

שהן ארבע – from their words (i.e., the Rabbis), they added two, to prohibit ab initio a case where the work is done by two people – this one uprooting and this place setting it down, for two who did it are exempt, as it states (Leviticus 4:27): “by doing any of the things which by the LORD’s commandments ought not to be done, [and he realizes his guilt].” The one who does all of it, but not the one who does part of it, and similarly, in all the labors of Shabbat we say that an individual who did it is liable; two who did it are exempt.

The carryings out of Shabbat are two which are four from the inside, and two which are four from the outside. How is this so? The poor man stands outside and the householder stands inside:
If the poor man reaches his hand inside and places [something] into the hand of the householder, The poor man is liable because he took something from the public domain and brought it in.

שתים שהן ארבע בחוץ – two from the Torah, taking out and carrying in for the poor person who stands outside in the public domain.

or if he takes [something] from it and carries it out, the poor man is liable, and the householder is exempt. The poor man is liable because he took something out. In both cases the householder has not done anything and hence he is exempt.

שהן ארבע – from their words (i.e., the Rabbis), they added two to prohibit ab initio, as this person uproots it and the other person sets it down.

If the householder reaches his hand outside and places [an object] in the poor man's hand, The householder has brought something out and is liable.

פשט העני את ידו – and in it is a box or a basket that he receives in it loaves of bread from the owner of the house, and for this reason, [the Mishnah] took hold of the language of הוצאה /removal in the language of the poor person and the rich person, for it incidentally comes to teach us that a commandment that comes through a transgression is prohibited and they are liable upon it.

or takes [something] and carries it in, the master is liable, while the poor man is exempt. The householder brought something in.

ונתן לתוך ידו של בעל הבית – that he performs uprooting from the public domain and placement in the private domain.

If the poor man reaches his hand inside and the master takes [an object] from it, The poor man brought something in, but is not liable because he didn’t put it down in the private domain. Rather the householder took it out of his hands. Both are exempt even though together they have performed a forbidden act of work. We now learn that in order to be liable the person must uproot something from one domain and put it down in another domain. One is not liable for half of an activity.

או שנטל מתוכה והוציא – the object, and placed it in the public domain, and performed uprooting and placing down.

העני חייב – as he did complete work, for it is two from the Torah for the person standing outside, and even though we require uprooting from the place where he will be four handbreadths by four handbreadths and setting down in a place where he will be four-by-four [handbreadths] and there isn’t found there [that amount] for the hand of the poor person and the owner of the house, there isn’t there a place where there will be four-by-four [handbreadths] , we say in the Gemara (Talmud Shabbat 5a) that the hand of a person is considered as four-by-four [handbreadths], since it is made to place it down and to take from it objects and even many large ones.

or places [an object] in it and he carries it out, both are exempt; The poor man didn’t pick the object up so he’s not liable and the householder didn’t bring it out so he’s not liable. Both are exempt.

If the householder stretches his hand outside and the poor man takes [an object] from it, The householder picks up an object and brings his hand out of the house but the poor man takes the object out of his hand. Both have performed half of a forbidden labor and both are exempt.

ובעל הבית פטור – he (i.e., the owner of the house) is exempt and it is completely permitted, for he had not done anything.

or places [an article] in it and he carries it inside, both are exempt. Finally, the poor man puts the object in the householder’s hand and the householder brings it inside, so again both have performed half of a forbidden labor and again both are exempt.

פשט בעל הבית כו' בעל הבית חייב – for this is two from the Torah for the person who stands inside.

פשט העני כו' – for the poor person made an uprooting from the public domain.

ונטל בעל הבית מתוכה – and placed it inside, for the owner of the house did a placing down [of the object] in the private domain.

והוציא – the poor person [removed it] and placed it down in the public domain.

שניהם פטורים – for neither of them had done a complete [cycle] of work/labor. But it is prohibited to do this lest everyone come on his own to do a complete [cycle of] work on the Sabbath day. There are two [forms of work] “from their words” (i.e., from the Rabbis), one for the poor person outside and one for the owner of the house inside. But it is not considered two for each one of them, uprooting for the poor person and uprooting for owner of the house, placing down for the poor person and placing down for the owner of the house, because it is not considered other than uprooting [of things] which are the beginning of the work and there is a fear lest he complete it, but placing down, which is the end of the work, is not considered.

לא ישב אדם לפני הספר – and even on weekdays, and since it (i.e., the Mishnah) had to teach (in Tractate Shabbat, Chapter 1, Mishnah 3) that a tailor must not go out with his needle, etc., lest he forget and leave, which is similar to the decree that a person should not sit before the barber close to [the time] for the afternoon prayer, lest he forget and not pray, because of this, it [the Mishnah] teaches this here, and since their words are small/short, he makes a decision and teaches it in the first part of the Mishnah, and then explains the matters of Shabbat and expands upon them.

Introduction After an introductory mishnah, the Mishnah continues with laws relevant to the day before Shabbat. Our mishnah deals with things that one shouldn’t do once the time for the afternoon prayer, minhah, has arrived. The problem is that if one becomes engaged with one of these activities, he may become swept away and forget to pray minhah. These laws apply not only to the day before Shabbat, but to any day of the week. The minhah referred to here is from the time of 9 1/2 hours, the day being divided into 12 daylight hours. So on a day where daylight begins at 6 AM and ends at 6 PM, minhah is from 3:30 in the afternoon. In the Northern Hemisphere the hours will be longer in the summer months and shorter during the winter. We should note that one can also pray minhah at an earlier time of day, from 6 1/2 hours.

סמוך למנחה – the “Great Minha”, from six-and-one-half [Halakhic] hours and beyond, and סמוך למנחה – close to the afternoon prayer , that is from the beginning of the seventh hour, and even though its time period is great, a decree was made lest the bell/body of the bell of the barbers breaks after he began to cut the hair, and the time of the prayer will pass over prior to his repairing it and he will complete the haircut.

One may not sit down before a barber near Minhah until he has prayed. One shouldn’t begin to get a hair cut right before Minhah, lest the hair cut take a long time and he forget that he must pray his minhah prayers. After the sun has set, he will not be able to pray minhah.

ולא יכנס למרחץ – near the time for the afternoon prayer lest his swoon [in the vapor bath – see Tractate Shabbat 9b].

One may not enter the baths or a tannery, or [sit down] to eat or [begin] a court case. Similarly, a person shouldn’t begin any of these activities close to minhah time, lest he forget to pray. A tannery is an example of any type of work which is somewhat complicated and may cause him to forget that the time to pray has arrived.

ולא לבורסקי – a place where hides are made, perhaps he would see a loss and ruin of the hides if he did not move them from their place and repair them, and he would continue in his work until the time for the [Minha/afternoon] prayer had passed.

But if they began, they need not break off. However, if he began one of these things, then he need not stop in order to pray. Rather he may complete his haircut, etc. and then pray afterwards.

ולא לאכול – even a small repast, lest the meal continue on.

One must break off for the reading of the Shema, but not for prayer. This section explains that one must stop what he is doing to recite the Shema but one doesn’t have to stop for “prayer”, otherwise known as the Shmoneh Esreh, or the Amidah. The reason is that the obligation to say Shema is from the Torah whereas the obligation to recite the Shmoneh Esreh is only derabbanan, of rabbinic origin.

ולא לדין – even at the close of legal proceedings, when they already had heard the claims of the litigants and there does not remain anything upon them other than only to decide the law, perhaps they see a reason and they will contradict what they want to decide and return to be the beginning of judgment.

ואם התחילו – in one of all of these, we state, that we don’t interrupt, but rather he should finish and afterwards prayer, and this is the case when there is a delay during the day to complete it prior to the time for prayer passing. But the beginning of a haircut is from when he places the apron/garment for the protection of the clothing of the barber between his knees, and this is the scarf that the person who has his hair cut upon his knees in order that the hair doesn’t fall on his clothing. And the beginning of the bath is from when he removes/undresses the clothing that is closest to his skin. And there are those who explain that the scarf that is upon him which is the first to be removed when he gets undressed. And the beginning of the tannery is when he girds himself between his shoulders the coverings of his arms in order to engage with the hides, and the beginning of eating is when he washes his hands. The beginning of judgment is when the judges cover themselves with their shawls to sit in judgment with terror and fear, and if they were covered and sitting in judgment and another case came before them near the time for Minhah, it would be the beginning of that case when the litigants would open with their pleas/claims.

מפסיקין לק"ש – he took another matter, and this is how it should be read: colleagues engaged in the study of Torah interrupt their Torah study for the recitation of the Shema for its time is fixed, as it is written (Deuteronomy 6:9): “when you lie down and when you rise up.”

ואין מפסיקין לתפילה – which has no fixed time according to the Torah. But we are not teaching other than in the case of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and his colleagues where their study of Torah is their craft, but for us, since we interrupt our Torah [study] for our craft/professions, all the more so we interrupt for our recitation of the Amidah.

לא יצא חייט במחטו – even if it is inserted in his clothing, lest he forget and go out, and for an artisan, it is the manner of his craft, he liable for it is way of artisans to insert them in their clothing when they go out to the market.

Introduction The mishnah continues to deal with laws that are concerned with the day before the Sabbath. However, through associative thought, this mishnah also includes one law that is not concerned with the Sabbath eve and one law that is concerned with another topic altogether.

שמא ישכח ויצא – when it gets dark.

A tailor must not go out with his needle near nightfall, lest he forget and go out. Nor a scribe with his quill. On the Sabbath itself, it will be prohibited for the tailor to carry his needle around (or anything else). Therefore, even as nightfall draws near, he should take his needle out of his coat where he typically stores it, lest he forget and accidentally carry it on the Sabbath. Similarly, a scribe should not go out on the Sabbath eve with his quill. Both of these things, the scribe’s quill and the tailor’s needle are small items that can easily be carried without a person knowing. Therefore, he should make sure he puts them away before the Sabbath. In essence, this is part of his Shabbat preparation.

הלבלר – the scribe.

And one may not search his garments [for lice or fleas], nor read by the light of a lamp. This halakhah is concerned not with the eve of Shabbat but with Shabbat itself. It is brought here because the nature of the halakhah is similar to the nature of the other halakhot. They are all “gezerot” that is prohibitions created to prevent a situation which might cause a person to transgress. A person should not check his clothes for lice or fleas or read by candlelight on Shabbat lest he tilt the candle to bring more oil to the wick an activity considered to be prohibited due to the prohibition of lighting a fire.

בקולמוסו – which is inserted at the back of their ears like the manner of scribes.

In truth it was said, the hazzan may see where the children are reading from, but he himself must not read. Although a person shouldn’t read by candlelight, children may do so because their teacher will stop them from tilting the candle. The Palestinian Talmud explains that children want the candle to go out so that they won’t have to read anymore, hence they won’t tilt it. Their teacher, the hazzan (today the word is used to refer to the cantor, but in the Mishnah it has a different meaning), may also help them read with the candlelight. However, he must not use the candle for his own reading. A note on the phrase “in truth” be’emet: According to Goldberg, this phrase is used to introduce an exception to the previous rule which was taught above. The Talmud claims that this phrase means that the law was given directly to Moses on Sinai.

ולא יפלה את כליו – to remove vermin from his clothing. The Aramaic translation/Targum of “I have cleared out the consecrated portion” (Deuteronomy 26:13) “I searched my garment for vermin.”

Similarly, a zav must not eat together with a zavah, because it may lead to sin. This section contains another “gezerah” a prohibition meant to keep a person from transgressing. A zav and a zavah are a man and woman who have abnormal genital flows. They are both impure. A pure person should not eat together with a zav or a zavah because the zav or zavah will cause the food they share to become impure. Seemingly, there should be no problem with a zav eating with a zavah, because they are both impure. However, in order to prevent people from becoming accustomed to eating with zavim, even this is prohibited.

ולא יקרא לאור הנר – in a book, lest he tilt the candle to bring the oil in front of the lick in order that it will kindle well and is found that he is starting a fire on Shabbat, and even if the candle was the height of two or three men, it is always forbidden to read by the light of a candle unless there is another person with him to watch him, or if he is an important individual who is never accustomed to fix the candle.

החזן – one who teaches young children.

מהיכן התינוקות קורין – from where should they begin to read, for with a bit of investigation such as this, we do not make a decree lest he tilt it, and the young children read before their teacher by the light of the candle since their fear of their teacher is upon them.

אבל הוא לא יקרא – the entire portion, because his fear of them is not upon him, and their guarding is not considered guarding, and for this reason also, there is an opinion that a woman who guards for her husband, her guarding is not [considered] guarding, for fear of her is not upon him.

כיוצא בו – to make a distance from transgression, they said that a person with a flux should not eat with his wife who has a flux, and even though both of them are ritually impure.

מפני הרגל עבירה – for since they engaged in sexual intercourse, he will go to engage in sex with a woman with a flux which is punishable by extirpation, and the man with a flux and a woman with a flux are taken as something remarkable, for sexual relations is hard for them, and it is possible to say that they definitely will not lead to transgression, and even so, they should not eat one with the other.

ואלו מן ההלכות – the don’t remove vermin nor read by the light of a candle as it is taught in our Mishnah (Tractate Shabbat, Chapter One, Mishnah Three).

Introduction This mishnah does not actually teach any halakhah. Rather it places the halakhot which we learned above in an historical context.

בעליית חנניה בן חזקיה – that the Sages requested to hide the [biblical] Book of Ezekiel since his words seem to contradict the words of the Torah, such as {Ezekiel 44:31): “Priests shall not eat anything, whether bird or animal, that died or was torn by beasts,” priests are those who should not eat it, but Israelites [can] eat it (which obviously, are also forbidden to all Israelites), and similarly (Ezekiel 45:20): “You shall do the same on the seventh day of the month [to purge the Temple from uncleanness caused by unwitting or ignorant persons],” for where is this sacrifice hinted at in the Torah? Hananiah ben Chizkiah hid himself in the attic and sat there and explained the Book of Ezekiel.

And these are of halakhot which they stated in the upper chamber of Hananiah ben Hezekiah ben Gurion, when they went up to visit him. They took a count, and Bet Shammai outnumbered Beth Hillel and on that day they enacted eighteen measures. This mishnah begins by teaching that the halakhot which were taught in the previous several mishnayot were stated on a famous, somewhat legendary and obscure, day in the history of the rabbis when the Sages visited the upper chamber of Hananiah ben Hezekiah ben Gurion. According to the Rambam, the “eighteen measures” mentioned in section two refer to eighteen halakhot stated from the beginning of the tractate until this point. According to this interpretation, these were eighteen prohibitions about which Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel agreed. Mishnah 1 lists eight things, and there are five in both mishnayot 2 and 3 (these could be counted in different ways). The Rambam holds that on that day they made eighteen enactments, which are not listed in our mishnah. They also disagreed over eighteen issues, and thirteen of these will be listed in the upcoming mishnayot. The remainder of the disagreements are listed elsewhere. There are several other ways to understand this mishnah, but the Rambam’s seems to be straightforward. Some explain that the mishnah does not refer to those things halakhoth that are found in the above mishnayot but that it refers to a list preserved in the Talmud. However, we understand the mishnah, we should note how unusual it is. Rarely do mishnayoth provide us with information about where or when they were taught. Although we cannot be sure of what happened on that day in the upper chamber, it certainly was a day that became legendary in the mind of the rabbis.

ושמונה עשר דברים גזרו בו ביום – that the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel disputed on and were decided by a vote and the [opinions of] School of Shammai grew and they (i.e., the Rabbis) decided [the Halakha] according to them, as it is written (Exodus 23:2): “[You shall neither side with the mighty to do wrong- you shall not give perverse testimony in a dispute so as] to pervert it in favor of the mighty/multitude.” And all eighteen things they brought to them in the Talmud (Tractate Shabbat 13b-17b), and these are as follows: 1-2) He who eats something which is first degree of ritual impurity or second degree of ritual impurity, they decreed that its essence becomes second degree of ritual impurity, and it defiles Terumah/priest’s due by contact, for something that is second degree of ritual impurity defiles Terumah, these are two decrees – the person who eats something which is first degree of ritual impurity or one who eats something that is second degree of ritual impurity. 3) a person who drinks impure liquids also becomes second degree of ritual defilement, and defiles Terumah, that is third. But the reason that it is decreed in these, is that sometimes, when one eats impure foods and sprinkles/pours impure liquids in his face while the impure foods are in his mouth and he defiles them. 4) And they made a decree on a person after immersing from his defilement on that same day who had drawn water come upon his head and most of his body and 5) on the completely pure person upon fell three LOGS (i.e., a LOG is equivalent to six eggs) of drawn water on his body, that is five decrees. And the reason that defilement was decreed on these to defile others, is because they would immerse in putrid (i.e., badly smelling) cave waters, and they would place upon them afterwards drawn waters to remove the putridness of the waters, they began and made a fixed ruling to state, that the cave waters did not purify but rather the drawn waters purify, and they (i.e., the Rabbis) stood and decreed defilement upon them, lest they come to nullify the teachings/laws of the Mikveh and they would immerse in drawn waters. 6) The sixth decree is that Books of Holy Writ defile Terumah through contact, for at first, they would hide the food of Terumah with Torah scrolls, people would say that this (i.e., the Torah scroll) and that (i.e., the Terumah) are holy, when they saw that the Books [of Holy Writ] were being damaged, since the mice that are found near the food-stuffs would cause damage to the Books [of Holy Writ], they decreed that these Books, that is, Torah, Prophets and Writings, through their contact would defile the Terumah. 7) The seventh decree that they made concerns mere (i.e., undefined] hands defile the Terumah, because the hands are busy (i.e., they touch things automatically) and touch the flesh in the place of filth/defilement, and it is a reproach for the Terumah if filthy/offensive-smelling hands touched it and it would be detestable for those who eat it. 8) The eighth decree [concerns] foods that were defiled by liquids, as those liquids were defiled on account of hands that came in contact with them prior to ritual washing, they decreed on the liquids that they would the food-stuffs [of Terumah], for all things that disqualify the Terumah defile liquids to become first-degree of ritual impurity, a decree made because of liquids that come on account of a moving creature/unclean reptile, as we find concerning hem that they are first-level of ritual defilement according to the Torah, and this that [the Rabbis] decreed on the defilement of liquids to become first-degree of ritual impurity and it was not decreed regarding food-stuffs as a decree, because [food-stuffs] that come from a moving creature/unclean reptile, and that is the reason that the Rabbis were stringent with liquids because they are liable to receive uncleanness, for they don’t require fitness to become unclean (arising from contact with certain liquids) to bring them to receive defilement such as foods which require putting water on them to make them susceptible to receive defilement. 9) And the ninth (see Mishnah Zavim, Chapter Five, Mishnah Thirteen which summarizes much of these opening decrees) concerns utensils that were defiled by liquids that had been defiled by a reptile/moving creature, even though they are of first degree defilement according to the Torah, they cannot defile a person nor utensils, for a person and utensils only receive defilement from a primary source of ritual impurity, and not from liquids that had been defiled by a reptile/moving creature, which are first-level of ritual defilement, and the Rabbis decreed concerning them that the utensils would become ritually defiled, as a decree because of the liquid of a man or woman with a flux, which are their spittle and the urine which are a primary source of ritual impurity and according to the Torah, defile utensils. 10) The tenth decree is that the daughters of the Cutheans (i.e., members of a sect of the Samaritans) are considered as menstruating from their cradle (i.e., earliest childhood), that is to say, from the day that they were born, as a baby one-day old defiles through her period of menstruation, but the Cutheans lack this Midrash and when it pointed out, it is not explained to them, therefore, the Rabbis decreed this about them. 11) And the eleventh decree is that all movables bring the defilement into the beam of the handle of a plough, and this is the ox-goad of the cattle, and there is what has the circumference of a handbreadth, but it lacks the thickness of a handbreadth, and even though, from the Torah, the tent is not less than a handbreadth, the Rabbis decreed on all movables that have the circumference of a handbreadth that if its heads – one forms a tent over the dead person and one forms a head over the utensils, it brings to them the defilement of the tent, a decree was made on account of that of that whose beam is one-handbreadth that brings the defilement from the Torah. 12) And the twelfth decree [concerns] one who cuts grapes to press them in the vat for wine pressing, the liquid that comes out from them at the time of the cutting of the grapes makes them susceptible to receive ritual defilement, and even though it goes to waste and one doesn’t care about it, the decree is made lest he should cut grapes in pitch-lined vessels/baskets, for then it is not appropriate for the liquid coming out from them they do not go to waste, and are susceptible [to receive defilement] from the Torah. 13) The thirteenth decree – that Terumah that has grown of their seeds is considered Terumah, and even with a thing whose seed is gone, such as grain and pulse/peas, the degree was made because impure Terumah in the hands of Kohen which is forbidden to be eaten and he comes to sow it, and it was decreed that it would be with its first name – and that it Is ritually impure grain, for we suspect lest he leaves it until the time of sowing and comes to eat of it in impurity. 14) The fourteenth decree is that he who was overtaken by the Sabbath night fall should give his money to a heathen, and not carry it for less than four cubits. 15-16) And the fifteenth and sixteenth decrees, that he should not remove vermin nor read by the light of a candle as it is taught in our Mishnah (see Mishnah three of this chapter). 17) And the seventeenth decree that was made on the bread of idolaters, and on the oil and wine of and on their daughters, they are all one decree, as we have said – they decreed on their bread on account of their oil, and on their oil on account of their wine, and on their wine on account of their daughters, and on their daughters because of another thing, that is to say, because of idolatry. 18) And the eighteenth decree they made on the baby of an idolater that would defile through flux/gonorrhea, in order that a Jewish baby not become accustomed to be near him [out of a concern] for pederasty.

אין שורין דיו – dyes that they make for them ink for writing.

Introduction The next four mishnayot contain disputes between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel over things that can be done before the Sabbath. Most of the disputes revolve around one central issue: can a person’s vessels perform work for them on the Sabbath? It is clear that a person herself cannot perform a forbidden act of work on the Sabbath; the debate is whether a person can set in motion a process which will cause work to be done on the Sabbath. Today it is clear to us that this is permitted. For instance, I can set a timer on my clock and it can go on on Shabbat and light my house. Bet Shammai, however, would say that such an act is forbidden. We should note, the it seems that the sect of Jews who lived in Qumran and produced the Dead Sea Scrolls probably held like Bet Shammai. According to this understanding, work may not be done for a Jew on the Sabbath. The verse from the Ten Commandments which reads, “Six days you shall labor and do all your work” (Exodus 20:9) is interpreted to mean that all of a person’s work must be done within six day. In contrast, the Hillelites would hold that a Jew may not perform work on the Sabbath. They interpret the verse to mean that a person can do work for only six days, not that all of a person’s work must be done in six days. Although these positions might seem similar, they are based on different understandings of the Sabbath and indeed of halakhah in general.

וסממנים – to dye.

Beth Shammai says: ink, dyes and vetch may not be soaked [on Friday afternoon] unless they can be fully soaked while it is yet day; And Bet Hillel permits it. Inks, dyes and vetch (a legume soaked and then used as animal food) are all processed by soaking a plant in water to soften it. According to Bet Shammai it is forbidden to start such a process on Friday unless the person can sure that she can complete the process before Shabbat. As we learned above in the introduction, Bet Shammai forbids a person from having her “things” work for her on Shabbat. Bet Hillel permits this.

וכרשינים – food for cattle, and it is customary to soak them in water first, and we call them in Arabic “Karsena” and in the foreign tongue “vetch.” And the School of Shammai holds that a person is careful concerning observing the Sabbath abstention from labor with his utensils like the abstention form labor on the Sabbath of his animal, and it is for the same reason that we don’t give him bundles of wet flax, and that is the reason that we don’t spread out nets for traps. But the candle that burns on Shabbat and the pot that is on top of the portable stove on feet (with caves for two pots) that the School of Shammai admits to, since [he has renounced] ownership for the utensils, he furthermore is not commanded concerning their abstention from labor on the Sabbath.

וב"ה מתירין – from when he placed water in them while it was still day (i.e., on Friday), even though they are continuing to soak on the Sabbath, as they (i.e., the School of Hillel) hold that a person is warned regarding the Sabbath rest of the animals because there is the suffering of animals connected with the case (which must be relieved).

אונין – bundles of beaten [wet] flax, and we put them in the oven and heated.

Introduction Today’s mishnah contains two more debates between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel over whether work may be begun on Friday before Shabbat, if that work will continue on its own throughout Shabbat.

שיבהילו – when they are warmed, the steam would rise up on them

Beth Shammai says: bundles of wet flax may not be placed in an oven unless they can begin to steam while it is still day, nor wool in the dyer’s kettle unless it can [absorb the color] such that [the color] is visible. But Bet Hillel permits it. Bet Shammai prohibits putting flax in the oven or wool in the dyer’s kettle if the work will continue to be performed on Shabbat. If the essential part of drying the flax or dying the wool has been done before Shabbat, then she may leave her things over Shabbat. But if not, Bet Shammai prohibits. Bet Hillel again permits this.

ליורה – of the dyers.

Bet Shammai says: traps for wild beasts, fowl, and fish may not be spread unless they can be caught while it is still day; But Bet Hillel permits it. This is in essence the same debate as above. The one innovation is that Bet Hillel permits even though the whole work might end up being done on the Shabbat, as opposed to the other cases where the work began on Friday. Similarly, Bet Shammai forbids this, even though there is no certainty that the traps will catch anything on Shabbat.

אלא כדי שיקלוט את העין – that it would absorb the color while it is still day (i.e., on Friday).

וב"ה מתירין – to put them into it while it still day so that it would absorb it all night long. But the School of Hillel did not permit other than with a dyer’s kettle uprooted from the fire, for if there is fire underneath it on Shabbat, it is prohibited, as a preventive decree lest he rake the coals underneath the ashes (Talmud Shabbat 18b and 34b). But he also needs that the kettle is sealed with plaster, as a preventive decree lest he stir it and turn it over on Shabbat (Talmud Shabbat 18b), and he would be liable because of [the prohibition against] cooking.

ולא טוענין עמו – on the donkey.

Introduction This mishnah is related to the last couple of mishnayot in that again Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel debate and yet the subject is different. In this mishnah a Jew gives something to a non-Jew before Shabbat for the non-Jew to carry away on Shabbat.

ולא מגביהין – on to it a burden on its shoulder, for it appears as if he is assisting it to carry the burden on the Sabbath.

Bet Shammai says: one must not sell [something] to a non-Jew, or help him to load [a donkey], or lift up [an article] upon him unless he can reach a near place [before Shabbat]. But Bet Hillel permits it. Bet Shammai holds that one shouldn’t create a situation where it will look like the non-Jew is doing forbidden work for the Jew on Shabbat. A non-Jew may not perform work for a Jew on Shabbat. Despite the prevalence of the “shabbes goy”, a non-Jew who does things for a Jew on Shabbat that the Jew cannot herself do, this is actually prohibited. Bet Shammai says that if a Jew sells something to a non-Jew on Friday or helps the non-Jew load up a donkey or the non-Jew himself, it will look as if the non-Jew is setting out to do the Jew’s work. Therefore, it is prohibited. In order for it to be permitted, he must arrive either at his own home (according to one opinion in the Talmud) or at least to his home city (according to another opinion). Bet Hillel is not concerned with creating such an appearance, and hence this is permitted.

אלא כדי שיגיע למקום קרוב – that is to say, that the place that he wants to carry it to is close that he would be able to arrive there while it is still day (i.e., on Friday).

וב"ה מתירין – in order that he leaves from the opening of his house while it is still daylight.

לעבדן – to prepare the hides.

Introduction This is the final debate between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel over work that is begun on Friday.

מתירין עם השמש – while the sun is on the land prior to its setting.

Bet Shammai says: hides must not be given to a [non-Jewish] tanner, nor clothing to a non-Jewish launderer, unless they can be done while it is yet day; But in all these [cases] Bet Hillel, permits as long as the sun is still shining. Like yesterday’s mishnah, this mishnah continues to deal with a Jew giving things to a gentile with which the gentile will work on the Sabbath. In the case of today’s mishnah we might have thought that Bet Hillel would prohibit because it looks like the non-Jew will be doing work for the Jew on the Sabbath. The last part of the mishnah refers to all of the debates above. In all of these cases, Bet Hillel permits the Jew to set the motion in process as long as the sun has not yet set. The addition of “as long as the sun is still shining” also signals that this is the end of the series of debates.

כלי לבן – which is difficult to launder, it requires three days, and they are stringent upon themselves like the School of Shammai. But the Halakha is not according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel, but rather according to the School of Hillel that permits it with the sunlight.

Introduction The first section of this mishnah is a continuation of the previous mishnayot. Here we learn that Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel’s house behaved like Bet Shamma and refrained from doing work on Friday if that work would continue onto Shabbat. The second section begins to list things that may be done on Friday, even according to Bet Shammai.

ושוין – The School of Shammai and the School of Hillel, that they load the olives while it is still daylight on the beam of the building containing the tank [and all the implements for pressing olives], after they crush the olives, they load them on heaven beams and the liquid flows on its own throughout the Sabbath.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said: My father’s house was accustomed to giving white clothing to a non-Jewish launderer three days before Shabbat. The custom of Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel’s house was that of Bet Shammai. In the Tosefta (a text from the same time period as the Mishnah) it is related that they would give colored laundry on Friday, because colored laundry is easier to clean than white laundry.

ועגולי הגת – these of the winepress are called weights (clay cylinders), in which there were thick planks made in a round mold, and in this the School of Shammai agrees with the School of Hillel, because if they were to work these on the Sabbath, there would be no liability of transgression, because they don’t place the beam on the olives until they first mill them with a millstone and similarly with grapes that they first tread on them with their feet, and without the beam the liquid would come forth on its own, but it would not come out well until now, therefore, it is not similar to threshing.

And these and these agree that they lay down an olive press beams and wine press rollers. Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel agree that one can begin the process of pressing olives and grapes on Friday, even though the work will continue on Shabbat. Since as soon as she lays down the beams, most of the good juices will come out and the grapes and olives are crushed, the continuation of such a process is not considered to be work forbidden by the Torah on Shabbat. Therefore, Bet Shammai allows this. Even on Shabbat, crushing already crushed grapes and already pressed olives is not considered to be work forbidden by the Torah, but rather only prohibited by rabbinic law derabbanan.

כדי שיצולו – like the food of Ben Drosai (who, according to Rashi, was a pirate; see Talmud Shabbat 20a, s.v. קן דרוסאי) and would cook his food one-third through, and as such, it would be eatable but further, there was no decree made lest he stir the coals.

Meat, onion[s], and egg[s] may not be roasted unless they can be [fully] roasted while it is still day.
Bread may not be put into an oven just before nightfall, nor a cake upon coals, unless its surface can form a crust while it is still day. Rabbi Elazar says: there must be time for the bottom to form a crust.
In today’s mishnah we learn that Bet Hillel agrees with Bet Shammai that food may not be put into an oven on Friday in order for it to cook on Shabbat, unless it has already been fully cooked before Shabbat begins.
Note that in yesterday’s mishnah we learned of a case where Bet Shammai agrees with Bet Hillel and in today’s mishnah we learn of a case where Bet Hillel agrees with Bet Shammai.
We can explain both of these sections together, since they are both in essence the same halakhah. Bet Hillel does not allow food to be left in the oven if the food is uncooked lest someone rakes the coals in the oven in order to increase the heat and cook the food faster. Since unlike the items in the previous mishnayot, the person will want her food on the Shabbat itself there is a fear that she will do something to hurry the food’s cooking. Raking the coals is forbidden on Shabbat under the category of lighting a fire. Hence, to “keep one away from sin” it is prohibited to even have uncooked food in the fire.
Cooking cakes or bread involved placing them on the sides of ovens. The bottom would crust before the top. Rabbi Elazar is therefore more lenient. He allows leaving the bread in the oven as long as the bottom has already crusted over, which will be before the top.

חררה – a thick cake baked on coals

שיקרמו – at the beginning of its baking it forms a crust.

פניה – which was towards the atmosphere of the oven.

כדי שיקרום התחתון – which cleaves to the earthenware of the oven, which is baked first prior to the crust forming on its face towards the atmosphere of the oven, and with this it is sufficient. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer.

משלשלין את הפסוח – their ovens have their mouths above and they lower the roasted [Passover offering] into it, and for that reason, it [i.e., the Mishnah] teaches, משלשלין /they lower/let down.

Introduction This mishnah continues to discuss lighting fires in ovens on Friday so that they will stay lit over Shabbat. Since the prohibition of putting something into an oven on Friday was only “derabbanan”—of rabbinic origin—and intended to prevent a person from committing a transgression of biblical law, there are cases where this prohibition may be suspended. This is generally the case with rabbinic law—it is more flexible than toraitic law.

עם חשיכה – and even though generally, we do not roast it, as we have stated, here it is permitted, for the members of the group are zealous and they remind each other [that today is Shabbat] and they don’t come to stir the coals.

The passover sacrifice may be lowered into the oven just before nightfall; In yesterday’s mishnah we learned that one is not allowed to put meat into an oven on Friday unless it will already be cooked before Shabbat begins. Today’s mishnah relates an exception to this rule: the Passover sacrifice. The reason that one is not allowed to put meat into an oven is that we are concerned lest on Shabbat itself she come to rake the coals in order to speed up the cooking, which is prohibited on Shabbat. However, in this case, since people eat the passover sacrifice in a group setting, we are not concerned that one of them will rake the coals, because others will stop her. These people are engaged in fulfilling a commandment and it is unlikely that they would transgress a commandment at this time. In addition, because of the quantity of people who had to sacrifice their passover sacrifices, not everybody could roast theirs before the Shabbat began. Hence the usual restrictions did not apply.

ומאחיזין את האור – [they ignite with kindling wood] a bit, with the pile of wood of the House of the Hearth (see Mishnah Tamid, Chapter 1, Mishnah 12), and we don’t suspect lest the Kohanim will come to start a fire once it gets dark, since the Kohanim are zealous.

And the fire may be lighted in the fireplace of the Chamber of the Hearth. The Chamber of the Hearth was where the fire was kept constantly lit in the Temple. The priests would gather around there to keep warm. Hence, they could add to the fire there on Friday without fear that someone would stoke the fire, since the priests would make sure that would not happen.

בית המוקד – a large chamber in the [Temple] courtyard where they would always start a fire with wood and the Kohanim would warm themselves there, since they walk barefoot on the alabaster floor.

But in the provinces there must be time for the fire to take hold of its greater part. Outside of the Temple it is forbidden to light a fire on Friday unless it the fire has time to take hold before the Shabbat. Small fires need to be stoked, and therefore the fire must be fully lit before Shabbat begins.

ובגבולין – a person needs to start a fire with his wood while it is still daylight (i.e., on Friday), in order that it catches the majority of the wood, and that the flame will go up on its own and does not need thin chips underneath it to flame the fire.

Rabbi Judah says: in the case of charcoal, just a little [is sufficient]. Rabbi Judah adds in a leniency concerning lighting coals on Friday. Once coals are lit, they will stay lit and therefore there is little fear that he will stoke them. Hence it is permitted to light them on Friday afternoon as long as they will be at least a little bit lit before Shabbat begins.

אף בפחמים כל שהוא – just as in the fire of the House of the Hearth, we are lenient in the House of the Hearth for the Kohanim, similarly, in a fire of charcoals, we are lenient for all people, and there is no need for anything other than any quantity that catches fire, for it is not accustomed to be extinguished and it continues and no one comes to stir it. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda for there is no one who disputes him.