HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
7b
{Shabbat 19a continues}
With respect to what were these words stated?There is one who says that this that the brayta states that one may not set out in a ship less than three days before Shabbat is when the ship sails near to the seabed, and there is not in the water {a height of} ten handbreadths, and because of a decree of techumin {Shabbat boundaries} they decreed, but higher than ten handbreadths, they did not decree, and therefore the nation is accustomed to set out in the Great Sea {the Mediterranean Sea}.
For a voluntary purpose, but [if] for a mitzvah, they may set out. And he stipulates {a fee} with him {the gentile owner of the ship} that it is on condition that he will rest [on the Sabbath], yet he does not {need to} rest. These are the words of Rabbi.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: He does not need {to so stipulate}.
And from Tyre to Tzidon {both on the Phoenician coast, about thirty miles apart}, even on erev Shabbat he may set out.
And this reason should be rejected, for if it is for this reason that one does not set out, they should have taught {in the brayta} that one should not set out in a small ship. Why did they simply write a ship, plain, which implies whether it is small or large?
And further, why should it be specifically three days? Even more, also {should be forbidden, for one will travel past the techum on Shabbat}!
And further, for the sake of a mitzvah, why is it permitted? We know that they {the Sages} maintain their words even in the face of a positive commandment?! As we learn in a Mishna in Pesachim 91b: An onen {a mourner before the burial of the dead} immerses and eats his Paschal offering come eve, but not by kodoshim {other sacrifices}. And they say upon this that by the Paschal offering, they do not maintain their words {and thus they allow an onen to eat it} in the place of karet {"cutting off," the punishment in certain instances for not bringing the Pesach}; by kodoshim {other sacrifices} they maintained there words in the place of {in the face of} a positive commandment.
But rather, this is the reason that one may not set out in a ship three days before Shabbat - because of nullification of the mitzvah of enjoying the Shabbat. For the first three days there is a changing of the pattern, because of the rocking of the ship, as is written regarding it {in Tehillim 107:27}
| כז יָחוֹגּוּ וְיָנוּעוּ, כַּשִּׁכּוֹר; וְכָל-חָכְמָתָם, תִּתְבַּלָּע. | 27 They reeled to and fro, and staggered like a drunken man, and all their wisdom was swallowed up-- |
And this is the reason that for the sake of a mitzvah it is permitted, for they are exempt from the mitzvah of enjoying {the Shabbat} for the master said {Succah 25a}: One who is involved with a mitzvah is exempt from a mitzvah, and we also learn in a Mishna {Succah 25a} that messengers for a mitzvah are exempt from Succah. And therefore we also say {ibid, 44b} that it is forbidden to travel on erev Shabbat {Friday} more than 4 parasangs, which are equal to 12 mil, for he thus nullifies the commandment of enjoying the Shabbat, as they explain explicitly, and the law is the same that one does not beseige cities of gentiles less than three days before Shabbat, for they will not take benefit {enjoyment} from food and drink within the first three days because of bother and fear of the heart, and after three days their fear flies away, and they can have their enjoyment of Shabbat.
We learn in perek lulav veArava {Succah 4th perek, daf 44b}: Aivu cited Rabbi Eleazar beRabbi Tzadok: a man should not travel on erev Shabbat more than the parasangs.
Rav Kahana said: They only said this in terms of his going to his house {such that he will come to his house and food will not be ready}, but going to an inn, on what they give he relies {that is, they will have provisions at the inn}.
There are those that say {a different version}: Rav Kahana said: This is only needed to say even to his house {and certainly to an inn}.
And Rav Kahana said: there was an incident with me, and even a pie of fish-hash and flour I did not find.
The Sages learnt {in a brayta}: They should not beseige cities of gentiles less than three days before Shabbat, and if they began, they do not break off, and so did Shammai darshen {from Devarim 20:20:}
A brayta also says so: Jewish cities which are beseiged by gentiles, they do not go out against them with weapons and they do not desecrate for them the Shabbat. When are these words said? When they come regarding matters of money. But when they come regarding matters of life {that is, to attack and kill}, they go out to them with weapons and they do desecrate for them the Shabbat. And in a city close to the border, even if they come over matters of stubble {the bottom parts of the stalks} and straw, they go out to them with weapons and desecrate for them the Shabbat.
{Shabbat 18a}
MISHNA:
RABBAN SHIMON BEN GAMLIEL, SAID: IT WAS THE PRACTICE IN MY FATHER'S HOUSE TO GIVE WHITE GARMENTS TO A GENTILE FULLER THREE DAYS BEFORE THE SABBATH.
AND BOTH [SCHOOLS] AGREE THAT THE BEAM OF THE [OIL] PRESS AND THE CIRCULAR WINE PRESS MAY BE LADEN {by day, though the fluid goes on oozing during the Sabbath}
{Shabbat 19a}
Gemara:
(What is the difference in that all the other cases they {Bet Shammai - Bach} argue, and in these cases {the oil press and wine press} that Bet Shammai do not argue?
All of them {the aforementioned cases} since if they are done on Shabbat he is obligated to bring a sin offering, on erev Shabbat as night falls the Sages decreed. These {the oil and wine press}, whch if he does them on Shabbat he is not obligated to bring a sin-offering, the Sages did not decree upon.)
Who is the Tanna who maintains that anything that happens of its own accord, it is fine?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment