Rif Shabbat 62a {Shabbat 146b continues ... 147a}

HIDE/SHOW IMAGE
62a

{Shabbat 146b continues}
on account of [the making of] a pipe.
Rav Ashi said: It is a preventive measure lest one pluck it [from the tree].

Wherein do they differ? They differ where it is [already] plucked and [others too] are lying about.

MISHNA:
A DISH MAY BE PLACED IN A PIT FOR IT TO BE GUARDED, AND WHOLESOME WATER INTO NOISOME WATER FOR IT TO BE COOLED, OR COLD WATER IN THE SUN FOR IT TO BE HEATED.

IF ONE'S GARMENTS FALL INTO WATER ON THE ROAD, HE MAY WALK IN THEM WITHOUT FEAR.
WHEN HE REACHES THE OUTERMOST COURTYARD {within the town} HE MAY SPREAD THEM OUT IN THE SUN, BUT NOT IN SIGHT OF THE PEOPLE {lest they suspect him of having washed them on Shabbat}.

Gemara:
Rav Yehuda cited Rav: Wherever the Sages forbade [aught] for appearance's sake, it is forbidden even in the innermost chambers.

But we {just} learnt {in the Mishna}: HE MAY SPREAD THEM OUT IN THE SUN, BUT NOT IN SIGHT OF THE PEOPLE?
It is a matter of Tannaitic dispute. For we learnt {in a brayta}: He may spread them out in the sun, but not in sight of the people; Rabbi Eleazar and Rabbi Shimon forbid it.

In this matter, even though there is a straightforward {stam} Mishna and a dispute in a brayta, the halacha is like the disputants in the brayta, for Rav holds like it. For we ask from this statement of Rav in the first perek of Avoda Zara {Avoda Zara 12a}. For it states

{the following based on a brayta which contains the statement: If a splinter has got into his [foot] while in front of an idol, he should not bend down to get it out, because he may appear as bowing to the idol; but if not apparent it is permitted.}

What is meant by 'not being apparent' — Shall we say that he is not seen? But Rav Yehuda cited Rav: Wherever the Sages forbade [aught] for appearance's sake, it is forbidden even in the innermost chambers.

{And the gemara concludes: It can only mean that if [by bending] he will not appear as bowing to the idol.}

Thus, it is clear that so is the halacha {like Rav}.

{Shabbat 146b continues}
Rav Huna said:

{Shabbat 147a}
If one shakes out his cloak {Rashi: too free it of dust. Tosafot: to free it of dew} on Shabbat, he is liable to a sin-offering.
Now, we said this only of new ones, but in the case of old ones we have nought against it; and this is said only of black ones, but in the case of white or red ones we have nought against it; [but in any case there is no culpability] unless he is particular about them.

Ulla visited Pumbeditha. Seeing the scholars shaking their garments he observed, 'The scholars are desecrating Shabbat.'
Rav Yehuda said to them: Shake them in his presence, [for] we are not particular at all [about the clothes].

Abaye was standing before Rav Yosef. He {Rav Yosef} said to him: Give me my hat. Seeing some dew upon it he {Abaye} hesitated to give it to him. He {Rav Yosef} said to him: Shake it and throw it off, [for] we are not particular at all.

Rabbi Yitzchak bar Yosef cited Rabbi Yochanan: If one goes out on Shabbat with a cloak folded up [and] lying on his shoulders, he is liable to a sin-offering.

A brayta also says so: Clothes vendors who go out on Shabbat with cloaks folded up [and] lying on their shoulders are liable to a sin-offering. And they [the Sages] said this not of clothes vendors alone but of all men, but that it is the nature of merchants to go out thus. Again, if a shopkeeper goes out with coins bound up in his wrapper, he is liable to a sin-offering. And they said this not of a shopkeeper alone but of all men, but that it is a shopkeeper's nature to go out thus. And runners may go out with the scarfs on their shoulders on Shabbat; and they said this not of runners alone but of all men, but that it is the nature of runners to go out thus.

Rav Yehuda said: It once happened that Hyrcanus, son of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, went out on Shabbat with the scarf on his shoulder, but that a thread [thereof] was wound round his finger. But when the matter came before the Sages they said, [It is permitted] even if a thread is not wound about one's finger.

Rav Nahman {our gemara: Rav Nachman bar Rav Chisda} lectured in Rav Chisda's name, who {in turn} cited Rabbi Yochanan {our gemara omits Rabbi Yochanan}: [it is permissible] even if a thread is not wound about his finger.

Ulla visited the academy {lit. house} of Assi bar Hini [and] was asked: Is it permitted to make a marzev on Shabbat?
He said to them: So said Rabbi Eleazar {our gemara: Rabbi Ilai}: It is forbidden to make a marzev on Shabbat.

What is marzev?
Rabbi Zera said: kishei bavlaita {=The capes worn by Babylonian women. Formed by drawing up the skirts of their garments backwards and attaching it with ribbons, thus shaping it like a tube or gutter, which is the meaning of marzev.}

There are those who say that this marzev is: when one dons his cloak, and folds over its two corners in the form of a fold, and places it over his left shoulder, and turns and folds the rest of his cloak such that it drapes over his right side, and places it over his right shoulder, such that his cloak is folder over both here and there, and drapes over his shoulder, and its hollow {chalal} is by the spine, and it appears like a marzev {tube or gutter, which is the meaning of marzev}. And in this manner was the kishei bavlaita, for they tied the two strips, and called it kisha.

Rabbi Yirmiya was sitting before Rabbi Zera.
He {Rabbi Yirmiya} said to him: How is it thus? {gathering up his garment in a specific way}
He {Rabbi Zera} said to him: It is forbidden. {on Shabbat}
"And how is thus?" {gathering up his garment in another way}
He {Rabbi Zera} said to him: It is forbidden.
Rav Papa said: Adopt this general rule: Whatever [is done] with the intention of gathering it [the skirts] up* is forbidden; whatever is for adornment is permitted. Just as Rav Shisha son of Rav Idi used to adorn himself with his cloak.

{*: Rashi: to remain so permanently. Vilna Gaon, citing Rambam: to prevent it from being torn or soiled. Jastrow translates: with the intention of creasing.}

When Rav Dimi came {from Eretz Yisrael}, he said: On one occasion Rabbi went out into the field with the two ends of his cloak lying on his shoulder. [Thereupon] Rabbi {our gemara omits Rabbi} Yehoshua ben Ziruz, the son of Rabbi Meir's father-in-law, said to him {Rabbi}: Did not Rabbi Meir declare one liable to a sin-offering in such a case? He {Rabbi} said to him: Was R. Meir so very particular {as to call this a burden}?