📖 SATURDAY PRAYER: GEVURAH-YESHIVAT HAVERIM יְשִׁיבָה חברים – BABYLONIAN TALMUD p137

READING: BETWEEN MIDNIGHT AND DAWN OF SATURDAY

“Binding into sheaves.” Rabha said: One who gathers salt from salt works is guilty of the act of
binding into sheaves. Abayi, however, said that binding into sheaves applies only to produce of
the soil.
“Threshing.” There is a Boraitha: Threshing, carding, and hackling belong to one and the same
class of labor.
“Threshing, winnowing, fruit-cleaning,” etc. Is not winnowing, fruit-cleaning, and sifting one
and the same class of labor? Abayi and Rabha both said: “Acts of labor executed during the
construction of the tabernacle are enumerated separately, though they are of an analogous
nature.” Let pounding then also be enumerated (as labor, inasmuch as the spices for incense had
to be pounded). Said Abayi: (It is true! This is also one of the acts of labor performed at the
construction of the tabernacle.) But as the poor people do not pound their grain, generally using
it in its natural state, it is not included in the principal acts of labor. Rabha, however, said: “The
Mishna should be understood in the sense Rabbi expounded it: The principal acts of labor are
forty less one. Should pounding be included, there would be forty even.” Let then one of the
principal acts (enumerated in the Mishna) be stricken out and substituted by pounding. Hence it
is best to accept Abayi’s reason.
The rabbis taught: If there are several kinds of food before a man on the Sabbath, he may select
such as he desires and even set it aside, but he must not separate the good from the spoilt. If he
does this, he is liable for a sin-offering. How is this to be understood? R. Hamnuna explained it
thus: “One may select the good from the spoilt for immediate or later consumption, but he must
not pick out the spoilt, leaving the good for later consumption. If he does this, he is liable.”
Abayi opposed: “Is there anything mentioned (in the Mishna) about separating the good from
the spoilt?” He therefore explained the Boraitha as follows: “Food may be selected for
immediate consumption and setting aside, but not for later consumption. If this is done, it is
considered the same as storing it, and involves the liability.” This was reported to Rabha by the
rabbis, and he said: Na’hmeni (Abayi) has explained it correctly.
When two kinds of food were before a man and he selected part of one kind and ate it, then
selected part of the other kind and set it aside, R. Ashi learned in the Boraitha that the man is
free, but R. Jeremiah of Diphti learned that he is culpable.