## Shabbat Daf 142a

###### Shabbat 142a:1
[Shabbat 142a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:1)

מַאי אִירְיָא אֶבֶן, אֲפִילּוּ דִּינָר נָמֵי! אַלְּמָה אָמַר רָבָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא אֶבֶן, אֲבָל דִּינָר — אָסוּר! אֶבֶן, אִי נָפְלָה (לַהּ) — לָא אָתֵי אֲבוּהּ לְאֵיתוֹיֵי. דִּינָר, אִי נָפֵיל — אָתֵי אֲבוּהּ לְאֵתוֹיֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**why** does the mishna refer **specifically** to moving **a stone?** The same should hold true **even** for **a dinar, as well. Why,** then, **did Rava say: They only taught** this in a case where the child has **a stone** in his hand; **however,** if the child has **a dinar** in his hand, it is **prohibited** to lift the child? The Gemara answers: Actually, lifting the child with a dinar should also be permitted. However, the Sages issued a decree prohibiting lifting the child with a dinar because with regard to a **stone, if it falls, his father will not come to bring** it. However, with regard to **a dinar, if it falls, his father will come to bring it.**


###### Shabbat 142a:2
[Shabbat 142a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:2)

תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרָבָא: הַמּוֹצִיא כֵּלָיו מְקוּפָּלִים וּמוּנָּחִים עַל כְּתֵפוֹ, וְסַנְדָּלָיו וְטַבְּעוֹתָיו בְּיָדוֹ — חַיָּיב. וְאִם הָיָה מְלוּבָּשׁ בָּהֶן — פָּטוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was taught** in a *baraita* **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rava: On Shabbat, one who carries out his clothes** to the public domain while they are **folded and placed on his shoulder, and his sandals** on his feet **and his rings in his hand,** not on his fingers, **is liable. And if he was wearing them, he is exempt** for all of them, as they are negated relative to him.


###### Shabbat 142a:3
[Shabbat 142a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:3)

הַמּוֹצִיא אָדָם וְכֵלָיו עָלָיו, וְסַנְדָּלָיו בְּרַגְלָיו, וְטַבְּעוֹתָיו בְּיָדָיו — פָּטוּר, וְאִילּוּ הוֹצִיאָן כְּמוֹת שֶׁהֵן — חַיָּיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**One who carries out a person with his garments on him, and his sandals on his feet, and his rings on** the fingers of **his hands,** i.e., wearing all of his clothes and jewelry in the typical manner, **is exempt, whereas if he carried them out as they are,** i.e., the person was holding his clothes in his hands, **he is liable** for carrying out the clothes, just as Rava said.


###### Shabbat 142a:4
[Shabbat 142a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:4)

כַּלְכַּלָּה וְהָאֶבֶן בְּתוֹכָהּ. וְאַמַּאי? תֶּיהְוֵי כַּלְכָּלָה בָּסִיס לְדָבָר הָאָסוּר! אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הָכָא בְּכַלְכַּלָּה מְלֵאָה פֵּירוֹת עָסְקִינַן. וְלִישְׁדִּינְהוּ לְפֵירֵי, וְנִישְׁדֵּי לְאֶבֶן, וְנִינְקְטִינְהוּ בְּיָדַיִם! כִּדְרַבִּי אִלְעַי אָמַר רַב: בְּפֵירוֹת הַמִּיטַּנְּפִין, הָכָא נָמֵי: בְּפֵירוֹת הַמִּיטַּנְּפִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
We learned in the mishna: **And** it is permissible to take **a basket with a stone inside it** on Shabbat. The Gemara asks: **And why** may he do so? The **basket should be a base for a prohibited object,** and a base for a prohibited object is set-aside and may not be moved on Shabbat. **Rabba bar bar Ḥana said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Here, we are dealing with a basket full of fruit.** The basket is a base for permitted items as well, not only a base for the stone. The Gemara asks: Why may he move the basket and the stone? There is an alternative. **And let him throw the fruit and throw** the **stone** out of the basket, **and take** the fruit **in his hands,** and there will be no need to move the stone. The Gemara answers: **As Rabbi Elai** said that **Rav said** in a different context: It is referring **to fruits that become soiled** and ruined. **Here, too,** it is referring **to fruits that become soiled** and ruined if he throws them down.


###### Shabbat 142a:5
[Shabbat 142a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:5)

וְלִינַעֲרִינְהוּ נַעוֹרֵי! אָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָשֵׁי אָמַר רָבָא: הָכָא בְּכַלְכַּלָּה פְּחוּתָה עָסְקִינַן, דְּאֶבֶן גּוּפָהּ נַעֲשֵׂית דּוֹפֶן לַכַּלְכַּלָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks a question: **And let him shake them** until the stone is on one side of the basket, enabling him to throw the stone out of the basket. **Rav Hiyya bar Ashi said** that **Rava said: Here, we are dealing with a broken basket** with a hole, in which the **stone serves as a side of the basket** by sealing the hole. Therefore, he cannot throw it out of the basket.


###### Shabbat 142a:6
[Shabbat 142a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:6)

מְטַלְטְלִין תְּרוּמָה וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁטְּהוֹרָה לְמַטָּה וּטְמֵאָה לְמַעְלָה. אֲבָל טְהוֹרָה לְמַעְלָה וּטְמֵאָה לְמַטָּה — שָׁקֵיל לֵיהּ לִטְהוֹרָה וְשָׁבֵיק לֵיהּ לִטְמֵאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
We learned in the mishna: **And one may move** ritually impure ***teruma*** with ritually pure *teruma***. Rav Ḥisda said: They only taught** this in a case **where** the **pure** *teruma* **is on the bottom and** the **impure** *teruma* **is on the top.** In that case, if one wants to reach the pure *teruma,* there is no alternative to taking the impure *teruma* as well. **However,** if the **pure** *teruma* **is on the top and the impure** *teruma **is*** **on the bottom, he takes the pure** *teruma* **and leaves the impure** *teruma.*


###### Shabbat 142a:7
[Shabbat 142a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:7)

וְכִי טְהוֹרָה לְמַטָּה נָמֵי, לִישְׁדִּינְהוּ וְלִינְקְטִינְהוּ! אָמַר רַבִּי אִלְעַי אָמַר רַב: בְּפֵירוֹת הַמִּיטַּנְּפִין עָסְקִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks a question: **And when** the **pure** *teruma* **is on the bottom too, let him throw** the impure fruit, **and take** the pure fruit. **Rabbi Elai said** that **Rav said:** It is referring **to fruits that become soiled** and ruined, which cannot be thrown from the basket.


###### Shabbat 142a:8
[Shabbat 142a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:8)

מֵיתִיבִי: מְטַלְטְלִין תְּרוּמָה טְמֵאָה עִם הַטְּהוֹרָה וְעִם הַחוּלִּין, בֵּין שֶׁטְּהוֹרָה לְמַעְלָה וּטְמֵאָה לְמַטָּה, בֵּין שֶׁטְּמֵאָה לְמַעְלָה וּטְהוֹרָה לְמַטָּה, תְּיוּבְתָּא דְּרַב חִסְדָּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** to the statement of Rav Ḥisda: **One may move impure *teruma* with the pure** *teruma* **and with the non-sacred produce, whether the pure is on the top and the impure is on the bottom, or whether the impure is on the top and the pure is on the bottom.** This is **a conclusive refutation of** the statement of **Rav Hisda.**


###### Shabbat 142a:9
[Shabbat 142a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:9)

אָמַר לְךָ רַב חִסְדָּא: מַתְנִיתִין — לְצוֹרֶךְ גּוּפוֹ, בָּרַיְיתָא — לְצוֹרֶךְ מְקוֹמוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **Rav Ḥisda** could have **said to you: The mishna,** which, according to Rav Ḥisda, permits moving the impure *teruma* with the pure *teruma* only when the pure *teruma* is on top, is referring to a case where he needs the basket **for the purpose of** utilizing the object **itself,** i.e., he wants to eat the fruit. The *baraita* is referring to a case where he needs the basket **for the purpose of** utilizing **its place,** i.e., he wants to move the basket in order to vacate its place, in which case he may move it even if it contains impure *teruma* exclusively.


###### Shabbat 142a:10
[Shabbat 142a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:10)

מַאי דּוּחְקֵיהּ דְּרַב חִסְדָּא לְאוֹקוֹמֵי מַתְנִיתִין לְצוֹרֶךְ גּוּפוֹ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What impelled Rav Ḥisda to establish the mishna** as referring specifically to a case where he needs the basket **for the purpose of** utilizing the object **itself?** Why can’t he explain the mishna as referring to any case?


###### Shabbat 142a:11
[Shabbat 142a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:11)

אָמַר רָבָא: מַתְנִיתִין כְּווֹתֵיהּ דַּיְיקָא, דְּקָתָנֵי סֵיפָא: מָעוֹת שֶׁעַל הַכַּר — מְנַעֵר אֶת הַכַּר וְהֵן נוֹפְלוֹת. וְאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא לְצוֹרֶךְ גּוּפוֹ, אֲבָל לְצוֹרֶךְ מְקוֹמוֹ — מְטַלְטְלוֹ וְעוֹדָן עָלָיו. וּמִדְּסֵיפָא לְצוֹרֶךְ גּוּפוֹ — רֵישָׁא נָמֵי לְצוֹרֶךְ גּוּפוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: The mishna** is **precise in accordance with** the opinion of Rav Ḥisda, **as it is taught in the latter clause,** the next mishna: With regard to **coins that are on a cushion, he shakes the cushion and** the coins **fall. And Rabba bar bar Ḥana said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** They **only taught** that he may shake the cushion in a case where it is **for the purpose of** utilizing the cushion **itself. However,** if he needs it **for the purpose of** utilizing **its place, he may move it,** even though the coins **are still on it. And from** the fact **that the latter clause** of the mishna is referring to a case where he needs the cushion **for the purpose of** utilizing the cushion **itself, the first clause, too,** is referring to a case where he needs the basket **for the purpose of** utilizing the basket **itself.**


###### Shabbat 142a:12
[Shabbat 142a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:12)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף מַעֲלִין וְכוּ׳. וְאַמַּאי?! הָא קָא מְתַקֵּן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
We learned in the mishna that **Rabbi Yehuda says: One may even lift** a measure of *teruma* that was nullified from a mixture of one hundred measures of non-sacred produce and one measure of *teruma.* The Gemara asks: **And why** is it permitted? **Isn’t he rendering** the produce **fit** for consumption? The Sages issued a decree prohibiting the performance of any action that renders an item fit for use on Shabbat.


###### Shabbat 142a:13
[Shabbat 142a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:13)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר סְבִירָא לֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר: תְּרוּמָה בְּעֵינַהּ מַחֲתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Rabbi Yehuda holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer,** who **said: *Teruma*** is considered as if it is **placed in its pure** unadulterated **state.** By lifting the measure of *teruma,* one does not render the rest of the mixture fit for consumption. It is considered as if the measure of *teruma* never intermingled with the rest of the produce and the measure that he lifted from the produce is the measure that fell into the produce.


###### Shabbat 142a:14
[Shabbat 142a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:14)

דִּתְנַן: סְאָה תְּרוּמָה שֶׁנָּפְלָה לְפָחוֹת מִמֵּאָה, וְנִדְמְעוּ, וְנָפַל מִן הַמְדוּמָּע לְמָקוֹם אַחֵר, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: מְדַמַּעַת כִּתְרוּמַת וַדַּאי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As we learned** in a mishna: A ***se’a*** of ***teruma* that fell into less than one hundred** *se’a* of non-sacred produce causes it to become a prohibited **mixture.** The *teruma* is not nullified by the non-sacred produce. **And** then, if a *se’a* **from the mixture fell into a different place** with non-sacred produce, **Rabbi Eliezer says:** The *se’a* from the original mixture **renders it a** prohibited **mixture** in the same way that **definite *teruma*** would. This is due to the concern that the same *se’a* of *teruma* that fell into the first mixture never intermingled with the produce and subsequently fell into the second mixture. Therefore, it requires nullification like unadulterated *teruma.*


###### Shabbat 142a:15
[Shabbat 142a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:15)

וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֵין הַמְדוּמָּע מְדַמֵּעַ אֶלָּא לְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the Rabbis say:** The *se’a* from the original prohibited **mixture only renders** the second one **a** prohibited **mixture according to** the **proportion** of *teruma* in the entire mixture. In other words, the percentage of *teruma* in each *se’a* of the original mixture is representative of the percentage of *teruma* in the entire mixture. Only that measure of *teruma* need be nullified. Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion that the *teruma* in the mixture is not considered mixed, and it is considered as if it was placed in its pure unadulterated state, corresponds to Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion that by lifting the measure of *teruma,* one does not render the rest of the mixture fit for consumption.


###### Shabbat 142a:16
[Shabbat 142a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:16)

אֵימַר דְּשָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ לְחוּמְרָא, לְקוּלָּא מִי שָׁמְעַתְּ לֵיהּ?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this: **Say that you heard** that Rabbi Eliezer expresses his opinion in this matter **to** rule **stringently. Did you hear** him express his opinion **to** rule **leniently?** He expressed concern lest the fallen *teruma* might not have intermingled with the non-sacred produce in the first mixture, and therefore, the second mixture is prohibited. However, he does not consider this a certainty.


###### Shabbat 142a:17
[Shabbat 142a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:17)

אֶלָּא: הוּא דְּאָמַר כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, כְּדִתְנַן: סְאָה תְּרוּמָה שֶׁנָּפְלָה לְמֵאָה, וְלֹא הִסְפִּיק לְהַגְבִּיהַּ עַד שֶׁנָּפְלָה אַחֶרֶת — הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַתִּיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** Rabbi Yehuda **stated his** *halakha* **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon, as we learned** in a mishna: If a ***se’a*** of ***teruma* fell into one hundred** *se’a* of non-sacred produce, **and he did not manage to lift** that *se’a* from the mixture **until another** *se’a* of *teruma* **fell** into the mixture, **this** entire mixture **is prohibited.** This is because two *se’a* of *teruma* are mixed with one hundred *se’a* of non-sacred produce. **And Rabbi Shimon permits** the mixture. Rabbi Shimon holds that the first *se’a* that fell into the produce is not mixed with it; it is placed in its unadulterated state. When the second *se’a* falls, it is also placed in its unadulterated state, and the two *se’a* do not join together.


###### Shabbat 142a:18
[Shabbat 142a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:18)

וּמִמַּאי? דִילְמָא הָתָם בְּהָא קָמִיפַּלְגִי, דְּתַנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר אַף עַל גַּב דְּנָפְלוּ בָּזֶה אַחַר זֶה — כְּמַאן דְּנָפַל בְּבַת אַחַת דָּמֵי. וְהָא לְחַמְשִׁין נְפַלָה, וְהָא לְחַמְשִׁין נְפַלָה. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן סָבַר: קַמַּיְיתָא בְּטִיל בִּמְאָה, וְהָא תִּיבְטֵיל בִּמְאָה וְחַד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this comparison: **And from what** does that conclusion ensue? **Perhaps there, they are disagreeing with regard to this: That the first *tanna* holds: Even though** two *se’a* of *teruma* **fell one after another, it is as** though **they fell at once, and this** *se’a* of *teruma* **fell into fifty** *se’a* of non-sacred produce, **and this** *se’a* of *teruma* **fell into fifty** *se’a* of non-sacred produce, which are insufficient to nullify *teruma.* **And Rabbi Shimon holds: The first** *se’a* **was nullified** immediately when it fell **into one hundred** *se’a,* **and this** *se’a* **will be nullified in one hundred and one** *se’a.* There is no connection between this dispute and the opinion that by lifting the measure of *teruma,* one does not render the rest of the mixture fit for consumption.


###### Shabbat 142a:19
[Shabbat 142a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:19)

אֶלָּא: הוּא דְּאָמַר כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר. דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: נוֹתֵן עֵינָיו בְּצַד זֶה, וְאוֹכֵל מִצַּד אַחֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** Rabbi Yehuda **stated his** *halakha* **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar. As it was taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says:** One need not lift a *se’a* from the mixture in order to render it permitted to eat. It is sufficient if **he casts his eyes on this side** of the mixture and decides to separate a *se’a* from the produce on that side, **and he eats from a different side** of the mixture and physically separates the *se’a* later. Lifting a *se’a* from the mixture does not render the mixture fit for consumption, as it is permitted to partake from the mixture even without removing a *se’a***.** That is the rationale for Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion.


###### Shabbat 142a:20
[Shabbat 142a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/142a:20)

וּמִי סָבַר לֵיהּ כְּווֹתֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And does** Rabbi Yehuda **hold in accordance with** the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar?