## Shabbat Daf 101b

###### Shabbat 101b:1
[Shabbat 101b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/101b:1)

אֶלָּא בְּמַיִם, קַל הוּא שֶׁהֵקֵילּוּ חֲכָמִים בְּמַיִם. וְאַמַּאי, הָא אִיכָּא בְּקִיעַת דָּגִים? אֶלָּא שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ — בְּקִיעַת דָּגִים לֹא שְׁמָהּ בְּקִיעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**in water. It is a leniency the Sages instituted in water** but not in other circumstances. **And why** were they lenient with regard to a hanging partition in water? **Isn’t there the passage of fish? Rather, learn from this** that **the passage of fish is not considered passage.**


###### Shabbat 101b:2
[Shabbat 101b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/101b:2)

סְפִינוֹת קְשׁוּרוֹת כּוּ׳. פְּשִׁיטָא! אָמַר רָבָא: לֹא נִצְרְכָה אֶלָּא לְהַתִּיר בִּיצִּית שֶׁבֵּינֵיהֶן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
We learned in the mishna: If **boats** are **tied together,** one may carry an object from one to the other on Shabbat. The Gemara asks: That is **obvious,** since these boats are like a single domain. **Rava said: This** mishna **was necessary only to permit** carrying from one boat to another via **a small boat that is between them.**


###### Shabbat 101b:3
[Shabbat 101b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/101b:3)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב סָפְרָא: מֹשֶׁה, שַׁפִּיר קָאָמְרַתְּ?! ״מְטַלְטְלִין מִזּוֹ לָזוֹ״ תְּנַן! אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב סָפְרָא: לֹא נִצְרְכָה אֶלָּא לְעָרֵב וּלְטַלְטֵל מִזּוֹ לָזוֹ, וְכִדְתַנְיָא: סְפִינוֹת קְשׁוּרוֹת זוֹ בָּזוֹ — מְעָרְבִין וּמְטַלְטְלִין מִזּוֹ לָזוֹ. נִפְסְקוּ — נֶאֶסְרוּ. חָזְרוּ וְנִקְשְׁרוּ, בֵּין שׁוֹגְגִין וּבֵין מְזִידִין בֵּין אֲנוּסִין בֵּין מוּטְעִין — חָזְרוּ לְהֶיתֵּרָן הָרִאשׁוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Safra said to him:** You, who are as great in this generation as **Moses, did you speak well? We learned** in the mishna that **one may carry** only **from one to the other,** not via a small boat. **Rather, Rav Safra said:** The mishna **was only necessary** to obligate one **to place an *eiruv*,** a joining of courtyards, between the two boats. Since the boats belong to different people, they must be joined to form a single domain in order to permit **carrying from one to the other, as it was taught** in a *baraita*: With regard to **boats tied to one another, one places an *eiruv* and carries from one to the other.** If the ties between them **were severed,** the people on the boats **are prohibited** to carry from one to the other. If **they were then retied, whether unwittingly,** i.e., the one who retied them forgot that it was Shabbat, **whether intentionally, whether due to circumstances beyond one’s control, whether mistakenly,** the boats **are restored to their original permitted** status.


###### Shabbat 101b:4
[Shabbat 101b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/101b:4)

וְכֵן מַחְצָלוֹת הַפְּרוּסוֹת לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים — מְעָרְבִין וּמְטַלְטְלִין מִזּוֹ לָזוֹ. נִגְלְלוּ — נֶאְסְרוּ. חָזְרוּ וְנִפְרְשׂוּ, בֵּין שׁוֹגְגִין בֵּין מְזִידִין בֵּין אֲנוּסִין וּבֵין מוּטְעִין — חָזְרוּ לְהֶיתֵּרָן הָרִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁכׇּל מְחִיצָה שֶׁנַּעֲשֵׂת בַּשַּׁבָּת, בֵּין בְּשׁוֹגֵג בֵּין בְּמֵזִיד — שְׁמָהּ מְחִיצָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And similarly,** in the case of **mats that are unfurled** to create a partition between two people **and the public domain, one places an *eiruv* and carries from one to the other.** If the mats **were furled,** the people on the boats **are prohibited** to carry from one to the other. If the mats **were then unfurled** again, **whether unwittingly, whether intentionally, whether due to circumstances beyond one’s control, whether mistakenly, they are restored to their original permitted** status. That is **because any partition that is established on Shabbat, whether unwittingly, whether intentionally, is considered a partition.**


###### Shabbat 101b:5
[Shabbat 101b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/101b:5)

אִינִי?! וְהָאָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא לִזְרוֹק, אֲבָל לְטַלְטֵל אָסוּר! כִּי אִיתְּמַר דְּרַב נַחְמָן — אַמֵּזִיד אִיתְּמַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Is that so? Didn’t Rav Naḥman say: They only taught** the principle that a partition established on Shabbat is considered a partition with regard **to throwing.** In that case, a partition creates a domain unto itself, and one who throws an object into it from another domain is liable. **However,** with regard **to carrying** within that domain, it is certainly **prohibited.** The Gemara answers: **When** that statement of **Rav Naḥman was stated, it was stated** with regard to an act performed **intentionally.** One who intentionally establishes a partition is penalized and is not permitted to benefit from it. In principle, though, that partition is considered a full-fledged partition.


###### Shabbat 101b:6
[Shabbat 101b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/101b:6)

אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: וַאֲפִילּוּ קְשׁוּרוֹת בְּחוּט הַסַּרְבָּל. הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִי דְּיָכוֹל לְהַעֲמִידָן — פְּשִׁיטָא. אִי דְּאֵין יָכוֹל לְהַעֲמִידָן — אַמַּאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Shmuel said:** The *halakha* that one may carry from one ship to another if they are tied together applies **even** if they were **tied with a string** used to close the neckline of **a cloak.** The Gemara asks: **What are the circumstances? If** the string **is capable of holding** the ships together, it is **obvious** that carrying between the ships is permitted as they are tied together. However, **if** the string **is incapable of holding them, why** is it permitted?


###### Shabbat 101b:7
[Shabbat 101b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/101b:7)

לְעוֹלָם דְּיָכוֹל לְהַעֲמִידָן. וּשְׁמוּאֵל לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ קָאָתֵי. דִּתְנַן: קְשָׁרָהּ בְּדָבָר הַמַּעֲמִידָהּ — מֵבִיא לָהּ טוּמְאָה. בְּדָבָר שֶׁאֵין מַעֲמִידָהּ — אֵין מֵבִיא לָהּ טוּמְאָה. וְאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: וְהוּא שֶׁקְּשׁוּרָה בְּשַׁלְשֶׁלֶת שֶׁל בַּרְזֶל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **Actually,** it refers to a string that **can hold them, and Shmuel** said this **to exclude** this case **from his own statement. As we learned** in a mishna: If **one tied** a ship **with an item capable of holding it** and the end of that item was in a tent with a corpse, **it transmits impurity to** the ship. And if one tied it **with something that is incapable of holding it, it does not transmit impurity to** the ship. **And Shmuel said:** When the mishna refers to an item capable of holding it, it is referring to a case where **it is tied with an iron chain.** It was necessary for Shmuel to establish that although with regard to ritual impurity the *halakha* applies only to an iron chain, with regard to Shabbat the *halakha* applies to any item capable of holding the ships together.


###### Shabbat 101b:8
[Shabbat 101b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/101b:8)

לְעִנְיַן טוּמְאָה הוּא, דִּכְתִיב: ״בַּחֲלַל חֶרֶב״ — חֶרֶב הֲרֵי הוּא כְּחָלָל. (אִין) אֲבָל לְעִנְיַן שַׁבָּת, כֵּיוָן דְּיָכוֹל לְהַעֲמִידָהּ, הֶיכֵּר בְּעָלְמָא הוּא — אֲפִילּוּ בְּחוּט הַסַּרְבָּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The reason that the *halakha* is different **with regard to impurity is as it is written:** “And whoever touches in the open field **one slain by sword,** or one who dies by himself, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be unclean seven days” (Numbers 19:16). The Sages derived from the phrase: One slain by sword that **a sword is like one slain,** i.e., a corpse. A metal instrument that comes into contact with a corpse assumes the same level of ritual impurity as the corpse itself, the ultimate primary source of ritual impurity. Therefore, it is only an iron chain in a tent with a corpse in it that can render a boat tied to the other end a primary source of ritual impurity. A string made of other materials cannot. **However, with regard to Shabbat, since** it is **capable of holding it** and it is **a mere distinctive sign** that is necessary, **even the string of a cloak** is sufficient.