Талмуд к Кила́им 4:15

Rebbi Jeremiah¹⁸All his questions deal with the problem that the rabbis cannot institute rules which contradict Biblical prohibitions; they can only abrogate rabbinical rules under certain circumstances. asked before Rebbi Zeïra: Is he not like somebody who makes repairs on the Sabbath¹⁹To repair something otherwise unusable on the Sabbath is a capital crime under the heading of מכה בפטיש.? He said to him, because of his proviso²⁰The essence of giving heave is to give it the name of heave, not the actual separation. Since the name was given on Friday, the actual separation is not the act that makes the food edible and is not Biblically forbidden.. Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Zeïra: Is it not forbidden because of destruction of edibles²⁰The essence of giving heave is to give it the name of heave, not the actual separation. Since the name was given on Friday, the actual separation is not the act that makes the food edible and is not Biblically forbidden.? He said to him, he crumbles a small amount and eats²¹It is a general prohibition, בל תשחית, to wantonly destroy usable things. In particular, foodstuffs may not be destroyed. The tiny amount the guest set aside for heave of the tithe must somehow be destroyed since under the circumstances it cannot be given to a Cohen.. Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Zeïra: Is it not forbidden because of robbery²³To take some of the host’s property without the latter’s knowledge is a violation of the host’s property rights and therefore should be forbidden (even if its value is less than a peruṭa and, hence, is not claimable in court).? He said to him, the host desires the satisfaction of his guest²⁴Since without it, the guest would not eat at his place, the invitation implies the host’s acquiescence to the guest’s actions. Hence, it is not against the will of the host..

And it was stated thus¹⁰Tosephta Sukkah1:13.: “Two regular and the third even one hand-breadth is qualified.” Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Two of four hand-breadths each and the third even one hand-breadth is qualified. Rav Hoshaia asked, what if the one hand-breadth one is put in the middle⁷⁴Normally one would expect that the two large walls form a right angle Γ with the third (rabbinic) rudimentary wall parallel to one of the larger ones. He asks whether the two large ones may be parallel and the third at right angles to them: ׀ _ ׀. Since up to three hand-breadths open space are disregarded, the distance between the two parallel walls can be up to 7 hand-breadths, qualified according to everybody. Therefore the answer has to be positive.? He came back and asked, if one of the four hand-breadths ones was put in the middle⁷⁵That the shape is ׀ _׀. In this case there are three walls of 4 cubits each but the missing part is larger than 3 hand-breadths., how is it? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: Such a case came before Rebbi Yasa and he qualified it. And it was stated thus⁷⁶Tosephta 1:8. Since later the rule is compared to those for eruvin and kilaim, one has to assume that on each side the total length of the open space is less than the sum of the diameters of the columns (cf. Eruvin Chapter 1, Note 246.): “If a courtyard is enclosed by pillars, the pillars are like walls.” Does not a baraita disagree? If they are made according to the rules they are qualified, not according to the rules disqualified. They wanted to say, in the middle⁷⁷That “not according to the rules” means the small (rabbinic) wall in the middle.. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, if these are not opposite those⁷⁸A configuration like^׀ _ _׀ is disqualified.. Rav said, that one of one hand-breadth must be removed from the wall by one hand-breadth⁷⁹As explained in Note 74, with the permitted empty spaces the theoretical space covered by the one hand-breadth wall must be 7 hand-breadths.. Samuel said, even if it is arbitrarily close, one considers it as if distant⁸⁰It is enough if one has one hand-breadth and adjacent three empty ones.. Rebbi Abba, Ḥinena bar Shelemiah, Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: even if it is arbitrarily close, one considers it as if distant. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, one follows this one, the other one the other. Cahana and Assi came and asked before Rav following that of Samuel⁸¹Since the answer is not given, we do not know Rav’s real position.. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Only if it is within three hand-breadths like a lathe⁸²In order to be able to carry in a dead-end street (bordered by the walls of houses) with an eruv, the dead-end street must be separated from the public domain by a visible entrance. This can be effected either by making a symbolic door by putting a horizontal beam over the entrance (Note 6) or creating a symbolic entrance post by putting up a vertical lathe. As door-post it has to be on the wall bordering the street. According to our rules, “on” always means “within three hand-breadths.”.

HALAKHAH: “One may surround by three ropes,” etc. Rebbi Zeˋira said, they said this only about ten or more than ten²⁵²The Mishnah requires a wall for the Sabbath to be at least 10 hand-breadths high; similarly Mishnah Sukkah 1:10 requires walls of a least 10 hand-breadths. R. Zeˋira states that in contrast to the rules of the Sabbath where only slightly more than 50% actually must be wall, the rules for a sukkah for which walls are hanging down actually require 10 hand-breadths. The consensus of all commentators is to read here “10” in the masculine even though it is written in the feminine since “10 cubits” would make no sense at all.; therefore no less than ten. But was it stated thus? If one brought a wall of seven hand-breadths and raised it less than three from the ground, is it permitted²⁵³Since דוֹפָן always is used for walls of a sukkah, the baraita refers to a sukkah. It is stated that if the wall almost reaches to the roof but is almost 3 hand-breadths from the ground, it is considered a wall standing on the ground since distances of less than 3 hand-breadths are disregarded. The text is repeated in Chapter 7, Note 44.? There you are saying, everything less than three [handbreadths] is considered closed, and here you should be saying, everything less than three [handbreadths] is considered closed. If you want to object, object to the following: If one brought a wall of slightly more than (four) [seven]²⁵⁴The text in (parentheses) was written by the scribe, the one in [brackets] is the corrector’s. The correction is erroneous. hand-breadths and raised it less than two hand-breadths from the ground²⁵⁵If the rules of the Sabbath were applicable to Sukkah, this should qualify as a wall since its upper rim is 7 hand-breadths from the ground, and be acceptable for a roof 10 hand-breadths high. R. Zeˋira disqualifies it since the rules were meant only for the ground, not the roof., should it come following what Rebbi Joḥanan said, what is standing and empty space combine for four hand-breadths, on condition that what is standing be more than the empty space⁹⁸A general principle in constructing separations for the rules of the Sabbath, cf. Mishnah 1:8..