Shabbat 149 - How to count guests and read cartoons on Shabbat

One can count his invited guests, to know how many loaves of bread he will need, and the deserts he will serve - if he does it orally, but he should not read them from a written note. Why? Because he might come to erase someone from the list, and erasing is prohibited on Shabbat. Another reason is that he might get accustomed to it and start reading business documentation. Some forbid even reading social correspondence.

What practical difference is there between the two reasons, erasing on Shabbat and reading business documentation? If the writing is very high on the wall, he will not come to erase it there. 

Can one read captions under a picture? Not on Shabbat! And the picture itself is forbidden to look at, even on a weekday. Why? Because of "do not turn to idols" which are born of your imagination. Some say that a cursory look is allowed, and others that it refers only to idols that were prepared but never worshiped.

Art: Girl Reading a Letter at an Open Window by Johannes Vermeer

Shabbat 148 - How to borrow on Shabbat

In general, financial transactions are forbidden on Shabbat. Prophet Isaiah said that you should honor Shabbat by not pursuing business. However, one can run out of oil or wine on Shabbat or on a Yom Tov and may need more. Enjoying the holidays is also important. How did the Sages solve this dilemma? 

One is allowed to borrow pitches on wine or oil, provided he does not use the term "lend me" but instead says "can I borrow?" In Hebrew, these two terms are different. The first implies a financial loan and may lead to writing down a contract. The second implies consumable goods, where the borrower can return the same kind of produce.

If the lender wants to do good but does not trust the borrower without a written agreement? The lender can offer his cloak as a guarantee

Art: Still Life with Apples and Pitcher by Camille Pissarro

Shabbat 147 - Wet clothes, wet towels

If your clothes got wet on Shabbat, you can continue walking in them. You do not have to worry that people will suspect you of having washed your clothes on Shabbat. Neither are the Sages concerned that you may come to wring them dry, out of respect for human dignity. However, once you arrive at a safe place, you should take them off, and you can spread them in the sun to dry - but not in front of people.

If you bathe on Shabbat and dry yourself, you should not carry the towels back to your home, lest you squeeze them, even if you used ten towels. However, if there were ten people bathing, it would be the opposite: they could carry the towels back home, even if they all used the same towel. They will remind each other not to squeeze the towel.

Art: Bathroom Scene by Carl Larsson  

Shabbat 146 - How to open coke on Shabbat and other sundry issues

Let's say you have a cask of dried figs on Shabbat. You can open it and take out figs, but you should not plan to use this cask for storage afterward. You might think that making an opening somehow violates Shabbat, but in truth, it does not because you need the food, and for that, even destructive acts are permitted.

Similarly, you can open a Coke can on Shabbat. And yet, very careful people may squash the can afterward. 

Why did our rule mention dry figs? It wanted to address a complication we would otherwise not have guessed. Dried figs were usually pressed into a cake, and one would need a knife or a sword to cut them. Since he is allowed to use the knife to cut the figs, he would also be allowed to use it to open the barrel. However, this was a stringent position of only one Sage, Rabbi Nechemia, and therefore would not represent the final law. The Talmud derives this from the ruling and goes on to draw many other subtle observations.

Art: Still Life with Figs and Bread by Luis Melendez

Shabbat 145 - Squeezing grapes, honeycomb, and cooked vegetables - and Rabbi Yochanan dozing

Squeezing grapes for grape juice is prohibited on Shabbat because it was done in the Temple. You might think that squeezing grapes, honeycomb, and cooked vegetables follow the same law, but they do not. For example, squeezing cooked vegetables to make them taste better is completely permitted, but getting their juice might be prohibited by the Sages.

Rabbi Yochanan was dozing off while his two students discussed their questions. However, their answers were based on logic. For example, they asked, why are Holidays in Babylon more joyous than in Israel? Because they are poor and reserve celebrations for the Holidays, and so on.

At that, Rabbi Yochanan awoke and said, "Children! If something is clear, certain, and wise, say it. If not - do not say." Then he gave the Torah explanations. For example, the Holidays in Babylon are joyous because they were not included in the curse of "Your new moons and Holidays My soul hates - says the Holy One." That applied only to Israel but not to Babylon.

Art: Still Life with Four Bunches of Grapes by Juan Fernandez

Shabbat 100 - A nut on the water in a box in a cistern

In order to transgress Shabbat by "carrying," one must pick the object up in one place, move it four steps, and lay it at rest in a new place. Since one should not carry on Shabbat, one should NOT do so; thus, we have defined what one should NOT do.

If one takes water from a container with water, he has picked the water up from its (water's) natural resting place. That is an honest "picking up", and for that he will be liable on Shabbat. 

If one picks up a nut (I am thinking walnut) that is floating on the surface of the water, then he has not violated Shabbat because this is not the nut's natural resting place.

What is that nut is floating on the water that is in a box, and the box is floating on the water in its turn? The nut is at rest in the vessel, and he is liable? Or maybe we look at the box and see it floating on the water, and he is not liable?

The answer is "silence" or "teiku." Some say that the four letters of teiku stand for "Tishby iteretz kushiot veibayot", that is, "Eliyahu will explain all hard places and questions."

Art: Still Life of Fruit and Nuts by Giuseppe Ruoppolo

Shabbat 99 - Creating new areas on Shabbat

On Shabbat, there is a public area, like a street, and a private area, like a home, and one is prohibited from carrying objects from one to the other. Bringing into the house is forbidden, and taking out is forbidden. There are precise definitions of what a public area is, but you can think of it as a desert where Jews lived.

There are thus two major types of areas: public and private. In addition, there are many areas that are not as populous as a public area in the desert, but the Sages prohibited carrying there, because one might then come carry in a real public area. These are called "Karmelit." The root of this word is "Karmel," which means a field, cultivated or not.

To make yourself work hard, you can think of the following question. If you have a ditch nine tefachim (handbreadth) deep, it is not yet a real private area. One is allowed to carry things there. However, if he takes earth from that pit, he makes it into a private place. Has he violated Shabbat? When he started digging, it was not a private area, but by the time he finished, it was! The major question is when the area acquires the new status.

Art: Peasant Woman Digging by Van Gogh

Shabbat 98 - What precisely is allowed on Shabbat and what not?

When we derive Shabbat laws, for example, what and how we can carry on Shabbat, we compare everything to the building of the Temple. But why the Temple, of all things? The Temple existed to rectify all of Creation. Study its laws and their deeper meaning, and you will see it - but for now, you will have to take my word for it.

For example, at first it seems obvious to the Talmud that if one wanted to throw something eight amot in the public area (amot means elbows), and threw only four amot, then it is the same as if one wanted to write the name Shimon, and wrote only Shem, which is also a name, then he has violated Shabbat.

Many things require explanation here. What is a public area? That is similar to the Temple building site, which is visited by 600,000 people daily and has no roof or walls. And where did they throw objects when building the Temple? That is what they did with construction materials. And what is the size of the public area? - Sixteen amot, just as the size of the construction site that could fit the carriages used by the Levites.

But later, the Talmud changes its mind about what it thought was obvious. It has to define "carrying" or "throwing" as a sequence of two acts: picking up the object in one place and then letting it land in another. With this definition of carrying, logic becomes much clearer.

Art: Peasant Women with Brushwood by Jean-Francois Millet

Shabbat 96 - Throwing things on Shabbat

We know that carrying things on Shabbat is not permitted if we are carrying them from the home (private domain) to the street (public domain). What about throwing? - This is also prohibited. In effect, one uproots from the home and lands it in the street, so it has the two elements of the transgression.

What if he hands an object over or throws it from one home to another, with the public street in between? Here, Rabbi Akiva makes him liable, while the other Sages do not. What is the argument about? Rabbi Akiva says that there is another principle: an object flying in the street is as if resting there. Thus, we view it as if having landed in the street. The Sages disagree with this principle.

But why is handing over forbidden at all? All kinds of labor needed for constructing the Temple are forbidden on Shabbat. And why - because the Temple is the microcosm of Creation. Since the Levites were handling beams from one wagon to another in building the Temple in the desert, this labor is forbidden.

Art: Girl Carrying a Basket by Winslow Homer

Shabbat 94 - Carrying a live person on a bed on Shabbat is allowed!

When a person carries foodstuff in a container, he really needs the food, and the container is there only for the food. Therefore, he is not violating Shabbat by carrying the container. Furthermore, if the amount of food is less than the violation limit (volume of a dried fig), he has not violated the Shabbat at all.

In the same way, if he carries a live person in a bed, he has not violated Shabbat because of the principle that a "live person carries himself," nor is he liable for carrying the bed because it is secondary to the person. "Live person carries himself" is explained thus: a person adjusts his weight and body position, and in this way, helps his carrying.

Finally, if one carries a corpse or an animal carcass or part of it - he is liable. Rabbi Shimon exempts him because of the principle of "work that is not needed for its own sake." That is, he is not interested in having the corpse in the street; rather, he just wants it out of this home. For that, says Rabbi Shimon, he is not liable on Shabbat.

Art: Man Carrying a Boy by Paul August Renoir

Shabbat 5 - Airspace, is it the same as resting on the ground?

So, after all, why is the poor man liable for violating Shabbat when he brings an object from the street into the hand of the householder inside? Complete Shabbat violation includes taking an object from a significant area of four by four cubits; a hand is much smaller.

The Talmud tries to ascribe this rule to Rabbi Akiva, who considers being in the airspace the same as resting on the ground. By extension, an object in the hand is resting on the ground. But it considers such attribution too tenuous. 

Then, it tries to say that it is the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah the Prince, who seemingly did not require the area of four by four. That does not work either because Rabbi Yehudah only talked about an area with a roof, and we have no roof in the street.

It tries to change the ruling, saying it should be "basket in his hand." The problem is that the rule needs to mention a basket, and it does not.

Finally, the Talmud concludes that because the hand can grasp things, it is considered by the person as if it were four by four "arms" (amot) - and that is why the poor man is liable.

Art: Breton Woman with a Basket by John Singer Sargent

Shabbat 4 - Do not confuse a scholar

Rav asked Rabbi Yehudah the Prince (his uncle) a question: if someone loaded a person with food and drink, and then this person carried his load into the street on Shabbat, what is the law? Since this person did not pick up the food, he did not perform the complete carrying on Shabbat, which requires both picking up and then putting it down. Or when he started moving his body, it was akin to picking up, and the person is liable.

Rabbi Yehudah replied, "He is liable." He added, "It is not the same as a hand." Rabbi Yehudah was anticipating a question of why putting it in his hand does not make him liable, but putting it on his shoulder does."

Rabbi Chiya (son of Rabbi Yehudah) addressed himself to Rav, "Son of scholars! When Rabbi Yehudah is teaching another area of law, do not distract him with questions about Shabbat. What if he does answer right? It might prove an embarrassment. Here, however, he answered correctly." His hand, unlike his body, is not at rest. So, it never performs the start of the first part of the Shabbat violation.

Shabbat 3 - Two that are four

On the previous page, we discussed two ways to break Shabbat, which are really four. Thus, there are four ways for one outside and four more for one inside, with a total of eight cases.

However, in another place in the Talmud where the idea of "two that are four" is discussed, only four cases of Shabbat violations are mentioned, and not eight. Here is what it says there. There are two kinds of oaths to violate: to do something in the future or not to do it. These are really four - adding oaths that he did or did not do something in the past. The list continues - two ways to remember that one was ritually impure when he went to the Temple, which is four. Two ways the spiritual leprosy (tzaraat) can look, which is four. So it is four or eight?

The Talmud answers: here in tractate Shabbat, it describes all the variations and details; thus, there are eight. But in another list, where the subject is oaths and Shabbat is only incidental, only the four major categories are discussed.

Art: Shabbat by Marc Chagall

Shabbat 95 - Nail biting and painting eyes on Shabbat

If one bites his nails on Shabbat or removes pieces of his nail with the help of the other - has he violated Shabbat? Rabbi Eliezer says that he has because it is similar to shearing. But the Sages say that the Torah did not prohibit it. Why? Let us look at similar examples.

The same disagreement applies if one paints her eyes, plucks the hair of the head or a mustache, or braids her hair. The Sages say that this is not how the work was done in building the Temple. Why would Rabbi Eliezer prohibit braiding the hair? God has "built" Eve out of Adam's rib, and the word "built" also means that he braided her hair and then brought her to Adam.

What if one plucks the flowers in a pot? Has he violated Shabbat? No, because these flowers do not draw sustenance from the ground. The exception is a flower pot with a hole at the bottom facing the earth. In this case, we have an imaginary connection between the flower and the earth.

Art: Brading Her Hair by Christian Krohg

Shabbat 93 - Giant loaf of bread

If one takes a loaf of bread and carries it from his home to the street, then, of course, he is liable for violating Shabbat. We learned it throughout this chapter. 

If, however, two people carry the loaf together, neither of them is liable. Why is that? To be liable, one has to complete the action of a Shabat violation by "committing it that may not be done." The grammar points to him committing the act entirely without any help.

What if the loaf was so big that neither one nor the other could carry it alone, and they had to carry it together? They are again liable. Here, however, Rabbi Shimon considers them both exempt. Both Rabbi Shimon and his opponents are based on the same phrase. However, they disagree on what exactly the other phrases exclude from liability.

Art: Still life with stoneware jug, wine glass, herring, and bread by Pieter Claesz

Shabbat 91 - Storing food, and then carrying it

Previously, we learned that one should not carry food on Shabbat in the street. We also detailed the amount of food one must carry to incur liability, depending on the type of food.

Now, if he first stores food in a designated place, then his action shows that this stored amount is significant in his eyes. Then, he is liable for even a smaller amount of food if he carries it. Let's see the details.

If one stores a minute amount of seed for planting, or as a sample to show to prospective customers, or to use as medicine - and then he carries it to the street on Shabbat, he is liable. All other people, however, are only liable for standard amounts.

If he (the one who stored the grain) decides against planting, the seed loses the importance he attached to it. If he carries it back, he is only liable for the standard amounts.

A dissenting opinion: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says that once the first person stores the food intending it for planting, anyone else becomes liable if he carries this amount. Thus, the thought of the first one made the second one liable.

Art: Sower With Setting Sun - Vincent van Gogh

Shabbat 92 - How tall was Moses?

On Shabbat, one is not allowed to carry objects in public areas. However, he is only liable for regular way of carrying.

For example, whether he carries objects in his right hand or in his left, in his bosom, or on his shoulders, he is liable because this was the normal way the priests carried objects in the Tabernacle. In general, the laws of Shabbat are determined by how things were done in the Tabernacle. Since building the Tabernacle was a model of construction for the whole world, "labor" is determined through that. On the other hand, if he carries it with his foot or in his mouth, in his armpit or in his ear, he is not liable for that.

In addition, if one carries an item above 10 handbreadths from the ground, he is also liable. But that is not a normal way of carrying?! - For the Levites, it is! We learn it from the Altar, which was 10 handbreadths high and which the Levites carried on their shoulders, leaving 10 handbreadths to the ground. 

But learn it from Moses, who was 10 cubits (3 meters) high? And all other Levites must have been the same height? - Not necessarily. Perhaps Moses was much taller than the other Levites. After all, we have a rule that Divine presence rests only upon someone who is wise, strong, wealthy, and tall.

Art: Bedouin Women Carrying Water Jars by John Singer Sargent

Shabbat 2 - From the house to the street

On Shabbat, one should not take things from his house into the street and vice versa. This is one of the thirty-nine "labors" prohibited on Shabbat.

At first glance, it seems strange and hard to find in the Torah. However, "and the people were restrained from bringing more" refers to this. The people were not allowed to carry from their private domain into a public one, and it happened on Yom Kippur, which has the same laws as Shabbat.

For example, if a poor man is standing outside a house and a householder is inside - and if the poor man extends his hand with an object and places it into the hand of a householder - the poor man is liable for bringing the object in on Shabbat. Similarly, the poor man should not take objects out of the house.

Thus, there are two prohibited acts that the man can do while standing outside. However, if the poor man extends his hand inside, but now the householder takes the basket from him - since the poor man performed only half of the act - he has not violated Shabbat. The Sages prohibited it, nevertheless, to prevent him from doing a complete act.

Thus, the rule is that "there are two ways to violate Shabbat, which are really four" - two more were added by the Sages.

Art: Pittoco Sitting by Giacomo Ceruti

Shabbat 144 – Milk purity

Earlier we discussed the juice that oozed out of a fruit, where the intention of the owner played a role. What if the owner had no specific intention for his fruit? In elucidating this, the Talmud discussed the laws of milk.

The basic rule of food is that it can becomes ritually impure only after it has been washed in a liquid. This liquid can be woman's milk; whether the milk came out with the woman's knowledge and satisfaction (she wanted to feed her baby) or if it was unintentional. By comparison, cow's milk makes food susceptible to impurity only if the owner milked the cow, but not if it dripped by itself.

This rule seems strange, and Rabbi Akiva objected: cow's milk has much wider use than the milk of a woman, and therefore it certainly should be able to prepare the food for impurity, even when it dripped by itself. And the Sages, who initially composed the rule, what do they answer? They say that a human is different and is more stringent in many respects, so you cannot derive laws from humans to animals. For example, human blood is also considered a beverage, based on the phrase “Blood of the slain he will drink.” A person is usually slain against his will, and still his blood can prepare food for impurity; therefore the milk of a woman, even coming out against her will, has the same property. This is not true for animals.

Art: Albert Neuhuys - A saucer of milk

Shabbat 143 – Bones left on the table

After one eats a piece of meat and places the bone on the table, there is nothing that he can do with it, and the bone is now muktzeh – set aside from Shabbat use. Neither may one move husks. All this is what one would logically expect, but Beit Shammai do not agree to it: rather they say that the prohibitions of muktzeh do not extend thus far. Beit Hillel, indeed, do not allow handing the bones and request one to shake them off them table by moving the table.

How could the above be true? We know that Beit Shammai is usually more stringent than base Hillel, and here it is the reverse!? Indeed, Rav Nachman corrects the version: it is Beit Hillel who follow the more lenient view of Rabbi Shimon on muktzeh and allow moving the bones, while Beit Shammai forbid this.

One is not allowed to squeeze fruit for the juice. If the juice oozed on its own, then it depends. If the fruit are stored for the juice, then there is a danger that after trying the liquid that oozed out by itself, one may be tempted to squeeze some more, and will thus violate Shabbat. However, if the fruit are normally stored for food, then one does not desire for more juice to come out. In this case one my drink the juice that oozed out by itself.

Art: Fernando Botero - Man Drinking Orange Juice