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 do not agree with this principle.

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

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

Brachot 63 - When to Nullify the Torah and When to Uphold It - (Blessings)

There are times when one must nullify the Torah. The key is in the phrase, "Time to act for God; they have nullified Your law." It should be understood as thus: the righteous nullified the Law! Why? Because the time has come to act for God.

The classic example is Elijah bringing a sacrifice on Mount Carmel while it is prohibited outside the Temple. Another example is writing down the Talmud. Initially, it was forbidden to commit Talmud to writing. But when people's memory weakened, the Sages permitted it based on the same rule.

In general, learning the Torah is the source of strength and also of pleasure. But to understand and remember it, one must die for it. It says, "This is the Torah of a man who dies in a tent." On the surface, it talks about the purity laws for a corpse. But the Torah gives many lessons, and this one can be obtained by analyzing the phrase and seeing a different meaning in it.

One who wants to become wise should study monetary judgments because they require patience and exact knowledge of the Law. One should never be ashamed to ask even stupid questions.

Art: The Sacrifice of Elijah by Aert Jansz. Marienhof

Brachot 61 - All that God does is for the good (Blessings)

A person should accustom himself to saying, "All that God goes is for the good," like in the following story.

Rabbi Akiva was once traveling. He reached a city where no one would provide lodging for him. He said, "All that God does is for the good." He went to sleep in the fields. He had a rooster, a donkey, and a lamp. The wind came and blew out the lamp; a cat came and ate the rooster; a lion came and ate the donkey. At night, the army came and captured the city. He told his students, "Didn't I tell you, all that God does is for good."

Once, the Roman Empire decreed that Jews should not engage in Torah study. Pappus came and found Rabbi Akiva publicly teaching the Torah. Pappus said, "Akiva, are you not afraid of the regime?" Akiva answered with a parable. A fox saw schools of fish looking for a refuge. It said, "Why are you running away?" The fish replied, "From the people spreading their nets." The fox said, "Come live with me on dry land." The fish replied, "If we are in danger in water, how much more so would be on land!" 

If now, when we study the Torah, which says, "For it is your life and the length of your days," we are in danger, if we stop studying, how much more so!?

Art: A Scholar in His Study by the School of Rembrandt