## Shabbat Daf 154b

###### Shabbat 154b:1
[Shabbat 154b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:1)

וַאֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר לוֹקִין, לִיכְתּוֹב רַחֲמָנָא ״לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה כׇל מְלָאכָה וּבְהֶמְתֶּךָ״, ״אַתָּה״ לְמָה לִי? הוּא נִיהוּ דְּמִיחַיַּיב, בִּבְהֶמְתּוֹ לָא מִיחַיַּיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And even according to the one who said** that **one is flogged** for violating a prohibition that was given as a warning of court-imposed capital punishment, the *halakha* with regard to driving a laden animal can be derived by means of an inference from the language of the verse. **Let the Torah write: “You shall not perform any manner of labor…and** neither shall **your animal.” Why do I need** the superfluous word **you** in the phrase: You and your animal? Rather it is to teach that **it is he** himself **who is liable** for performing a prohibited labor on Shabbat; however, for a prohibited labor performed by **his animal, he is not liable.**


###### Shabbat 154b:2
[Shabbat 154b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:2)

הִגִּיעַ לֶחָצֵר הַחִיצוֹנָה. אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: הָיְתָה בְּהֶמְתּוֹ טְעוּנָה כְּלֵי זְכוּכִית, מֵבִיא כָּרִים וּכְסָתוֹת וּמַנִּיחַ תַּחְתֶּיהָ, וּמַתִּיר הַחֲבָלִים וְהַשַּׂקִּין נוֹפְלִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
We learned in the mishna: Once **he reached the outer courtyard,** he may untie the ropes that attach his bags to the donkey, **and the bags** of vessels that may not be moved on Shabbat fall on their own. **Rav Huna said:** If **one’s animal was laden with glass vessels,** which would break if he let them fall to the ground, **he may bring cushions and blankets and place** them **beneath** the animal **and untie the ropes and** let **the bags fall** onto the cushions.


###### Shabbat 154b:3
[Shabbat 154b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:3)

וְהָאֲנַן תְּנַן: נוֹטֵל אֶת הַכֵּלִים הַנִּיטָּלִין בְּשַׁבָּת?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Why is it necessary to unload glass vessels in so complicated a manner? **Didn’t we learn** in the mishna: **He takes the vessels that may be moved on Shabbat** off the donkey? As glass vessels fall into that category, why not simply remove the glass vessels and then untie the bags?


###### Shabbat 154b:4
[Shabbat 154b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:4)

כִּי קָאָמַר רַב הוּנָא, בְּקַרְנֵי דְאוּמָּנָא, דְּלָא חַזְיָא לֵיהּ. וְהָא קָא מְבַטֵּל כְּלִי מֵהֵיכֵנוֹ! בִּשְׁלִיפֵי זוּטְרֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **When Rav Huna stated** this *halakha*, he was referring **to the horns of a blood letter, which are not suitable** for any other purpose and are therefore set-aside on Shabbat due to prohibition and repulsiveness. The Gemara asks: **Isn’t he** thereby **negating a vessel’s preparedness?** Initially, the cushion was available for any use. Since it now has the set-aside vessels on it, the cushion, too, may no longer be moved. The Sages ruled that one may not place a vessel in a circumstance that will render it prohibited to move. The Gemara answers: This mishna is referring **to small bundles** of glass vessels that will not break if the cushions are subsequently removed from beneath them.


###### Shabbat 154b:5
[Shabbat 154b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:5)

מֵיתִיבִי: הָיְתָה בְּהֶמְתּוֹ טְעוּנָה טֶבֶל וַעֲשָׁשִׁיּוֹת — מַתִּיר אֶת הַחֲבָלִים וְהַשַּׂקִּין נוֹפְלִין, וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמִּשְׁתַּבְּרִין. הָתָם בְּכוּלְסָא. דַּיְקָא נָמֵי, דְּקָתָנֵי דּוּמְיָא דְּטֶבֶל. מָה טֶבֶל — דְּלָא חֲזֵי לֵיהּ, אַף הָכָא נָמֵי לָא חֲזֵי לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** based on that which was taught in a *baraita*: If **one’s animal was laden with untithed produce and chunks of** glass [*ashashiot*], **one unties the ropes and the bags fall** on their own, **even though they break.** Apparently, placing cushions beneath the animal is prohibited. The Gemara answers: **There,** the *baraita* is not referring to vessels but rather **to chunks [*kulsa*] of glass** that are designated to be broken so that they can be melted and crafted into vessels. The Gemara adds: The language of the *baraita* is **also precise, as it teaches** that chunks are **similar** to **untithed produce: Just as untithed produce is not fit for his** use, **here too,** the chunks **are also not fit for his** use.


###### Shabbat 154b:6
[Shabbat 154b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:6)

וּמַאי ״אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמִּשְׁתַּבְּרִין״ — מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא לְהֶפְסֵד מוּעָט נָמֵי חָשְׁשׁוּ, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **And what** is the meaning of the phrase: **Even though they break?** If the mishna is indeed referring to chunks of glass, they are designated to be broken. Rather, **lest you say** that the Sages **were also concerned** about a **minimal loss,** as certainly some small slivers of glass will be lost when the chunks fall and break, the *tanna* in the *baraita* **teaches us** that the Sages did not consider minimal loss a reason significant enough to permit carrying the prohibited glass.


###### Shabbat 154b:7
[Shabbat 154b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:7)

תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי אוֹמֵר: הָיְתָה בְּהֶמְתּוֹ טְעוּנָה שְׁלִיף שֶׁל תְּבוּאָה — מַנִּיחַ רֹאשׁוֹ תַּחְתֶּיהָ, וּמְסַלְּקוֹ לְצַד אַחֵר, וְהוּא נוֹפֵל מֵאֵלָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says:** If **one’s animal was loaded with a burden of** untithed **grain, he may place his head beneath** the pile **and move it to a different side** of the animal, **and it falls by itself.** The Sages prohibited moving set-aside objects in the typical manner, but there is no concern about doing so in an unusual manner.


###### Shabbat 154b:8
[Shabbat 154b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:8)

חֲמוֹרוֹ שֶׁל רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָיְתָה טְעוּנָה דְּבַשׁ וְלֹא רָצָה לְפוֹרְקָהּ עַד מוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת, לְמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת מֵתָה. וְהָאֲנַן תְּנַן נוֹטֵל כֵּלִים הַנִּיטָּלִין? כְּשֶׁהִדְבִּישׁ. הִדְבִּישׁ לְמַאי חֲזֵי? לִכְתִיתָא דְגַמְלֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **Rabban Gamliel’s donkey was laden with honey and he did not want to unload** the donkey **until the conclusion of Shabbat. At the conclusion of Shabbat,** the donkey **died** of fatigue. The Gemara asks: **Didn’t we learn** in the mishna: **He takes the vessels that may be moved** on Shabbat off the donkey? Why, then, did Rabban Gamliel not unload the honey? The Gemara answers: This is a case **where the honey had spoiled.** The Gemara asks: **For what** use **is spoiled honey suited?** Why did Rabban Gamliel bring it? The Gemara answers: It can be used **to** rub on **the wounds of camels.**


###### Shabbat 154b:9
[Shabbat 154b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:9)

וְיַתִּיר חֲבָלִים וְיִפְּלוּ שַׂקִּין! מִיצְטְרוּ זִיקֵי. וְיָבִיא כָּרִים וּכְסָתוֹת וְיַנִּיחַ תַּחְתֵּיהֶן! מִטַּנְּפִי, וְקָמְבַטֵּל כְּלִי מֵהֵיכָנוֹ. וְהָאִיכָּא צַעַר בַּעֲלֵי חַיִּים! קָסָבַר: צַעַר בַּעֲלֵי חַיִּים דְּרַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** let Rabban Gamliel **untie** the **ropes and** the **bags will fall** on their own. The Gemara answers: It was due to the concern that **the jugs** containing the honey would **crack.** The Gemara asks: **And** let **him bring cushions and blankets and place them beneath** the jugs. The Gemara answers: He was concerned lest **they become soiled and he** would thereby **negate the vessel’s preparedness,** i.e., the cushions and blankets would be rendered unusable. The Gemara asks: **Isn’t there** the matter of **the suffering of a living creature?** He should suffer monetary loss rather than cause the animal to suffer. The Gemara answers: Rabban Gamliel **holds** that causing **a living creature to suffer** is prohibited not by Torah law but rather **by rabbinic law.** Therefore, he need not suffer monetary loss due to the rabbinic prohibition (Ramban).


###### Shabbat 154b:10
[Shabbat 154b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:10)

אַבָּיֵי אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ לֵיהּ לְרַבָּה דְּקָא מְשַׁפְשֵׁף לֵיהּ לִבְרֵיהּ אַגַּבָּא דְחַמְרָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: קָא מִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ מָר בְּבַעֲלֵי חַיִּים! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: צְדָדִין הֵן, וּצְדָדִין לָא גְּזַרוּ בְּהוּ רַבָּנַן. מְנָא תֵּימְרָא — דִּתְנַן: מַתִּיר חֲבָלִים וְהַשַּׂקִּין נוֹפְלִין. מַאי לָאו — בְּחֶבֶר גְּווֹלְקֵי, דְּהָווּ לְהוּ צְדָדִין וּצְדָדִין, לָא גְזַרוּ בְּהוּ רַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **Abaye found Rabba sliding his son on the back of a donkey** on Shabbat to entertain him. **He said to him: The Master is making use of living creatures** on Shabbat, and the Sages prohibited doing so. Rabba **said to him:** I placed my son on the side of the donkey, and as **they are sides, the Sages did not issue a decree** prohibiting making use of **them. From where do you say** that this is so? **As we learned** in the mishna: **One may untie** the **ropes and the bags fall** on their own. What, **is it not** referring to a case **where one attached** the bags by means of ***guvalaki*,** where the bags are strapped to the animal and the only way to loosen them involves leaning against the sides of animal in order to unstrap them? **That is** because it is a case of making use of the **sides, and the Sages did not issue a decree prohibiting making use** of an animal’s **sides.**


###### Shabbat 154b:11
[Shabbat 154b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:11)

לָא — בְּאֵבֶר גְּווֹלְקֵי, דְּלָא הֲווֹ צְדָדִין. אִי נָמֵי, בְּלַכְתָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye answered: **No,** this is a case **where one attached** the bags by means of ***agalavki*,** i.e., where the bags were not tightly strapped to the animal, but rather attached by means of a hook. In such a case, **there is** no need to make use of **the sides** of the animal in order to unhook the strap. **Alternatively,** the bags were tied to the sides of the animal **with a rope,** which could likewise be untied with ease and without leaning against the animal.


###### Shabbat 154b:12
[Shabbat 154b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:12)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ: שְׁתַּיִם בִּידֵי אָדָם, וְאַחַת בְּאִילָן — כְּשֵׁרָה, וְאֵין עוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. מַאי לָאו, דְּחַק בֵּיהּ בְּאִילָן [וְסַכֵּיךְ בֵּיהּ] דְּהָווּ לְהוּ צְדָדִין, וּצְדָדִין אֲסוּרִין!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye **raised an objection to** Rabba’s opinion based on that which was taught in a mishna: A *sukka* that had **two** of its walls on the ground, built **by a person, and one** wall **on a tree** is **valid** and can be used to fulfill the mitzva of *sukka*. **However, one may not enter it on the festival** day of *Sukkot* because it is prohibited to use trees rooted in the ground on Shabbat or a Festival. **What,** is this **not** referring to a case **where one carved** a hole **in the tree** and inserted a beam into the hole for support, in which case **these are sides** of the tree that are being used, and apparently, using the **sides** of the tree is **prohibited?**


###### Shabbat 154b:13
[Shabbat 154b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:13)

לָא, דְּכַפְיֵיהּ לְאִילָן וְאַנַּח סִיכּוּךְ עִילָּוֵיהּ, דְּקָמִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בְּאִילָן. אִי הָכִי, אֵימָא סֵיפָא: שָׁלֹשׁ בִּידֵי אָדָם וְאַחַת בְּאִילָן כְּשֵׁרָה, וְעוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. וְאִי דְּכַפְיֵיהּ לְאִילָן — אַמַּאי עוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabba rejected this: **No,** it is referring to a case **where one bent the tree** over **and placed the roofing atop it, as** in that case, **he is making use of the tree** itself and not its sides. Abaye asked: **If so, say the latter clause** of the mishna: If there are **three** walls built **by a person and one on a tree,** it is a **valid** *sukka* **and one may enter it on a Festival. And if one bent a tree** and placed the roofing atop it, **why may one enter it on a Festival?**


###### Shabbat 154b:14
[Shabbat 154b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:14)

וְאֶלָּא מַאי, צְדָדִין אֲסוּרִין? סוֹף סוֹף אַמַּאי עוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב? אֶלָּא: הָתָם בִּגְוָאזָא פַּרְסִכְנָא, דְּאִילָן גּוּפֵיהּ דּוֹפֶן בְּעָלְמָא הוּא דְּשַׁוְּויֵהּ. דַּיְקָא נָמֵי — דְּקָתָנֵי: זֶה הַכְּלָל, כׇּל שֶׁאִילּוּ יִנָּטֵל הָאִילָן וִיכוֹלָה לַעֲמוֹד — עוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabba rejected this question: **Rather, what** would you say? Making use of **sides is prohibited.** If so, the same problem still exists, why is the *sukka* fit for use in the latter case? **Ultimately, why may one enter it on a Festival? Rather, there** it is referring to a case **where the branches [*gavaza*] are spread out and where one made the tree itself into a wall,** not where he leaned a wall against it. The language of the mishna **is also precise.** The wall may not be used if it is an integral part of the *sukka*, meaning that it is one of the three required walls. However, if it serves as a fourth wall, one may use the *sukka* on a Festival **as it is taught** that **this is the principle:** In **any** case where **if the tree was taken** the *sukka* would still **be able to stand, one may enter it on a Festival.** Then it is clear that the walls are not leaning against the tree; rather, the tree itself serves as a wall. The Gemara says in summary: **Learn from here** that this is so.


###### Shabbat 154b:15
[Shabbat 154b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:15)

לֵימָא כְתַנָּאֵי, אֵין עוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: עוֹלִין לָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב. מַאי לָאו, בְּהָא קָמִיפַּלְגִי: דְּמָר סָבַר צְדָדִין אֲסוּרִין, וּמָר סָבַר מוּתָּרִין?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Let us say** that these *amora’im* disagree in a dispute **parallel** to a dispute between ***tanna’im*** with regard to making use of the sides of a tree, as it was taught in the *Tosefta*: **One may not enter** a *sukka* whose walls are leaning against a tree **on a Festival. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says in the name of Rabbi Meir: One may enter it on a Festival. What, is it not that they are disagreeing about this** issue, **as this Master,** meaning the Rabbis, **holds** that making use of the **sides is prohibited, and this Master,** Rabbi Meir, **holds** that **they are permitted?**


###### Shabbat 154b:16
[Shabbat 154b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:16)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: לָא, דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא צְדָדִין אֲסוּרִין, וְהָכָא בְּצִדֵּי צְדָדִין קָמִיפַּלְגִי: מָר סָבַר צִדֵּי צְדָדִין אֲסוּרִין, וּמָר סָבַר צִדֵּי צְדָדִין מוּתָּרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said: No. Everyone agrees** that the **sides are prohibited, and it is** with regard to the **sides of the sides,** i.e., not a wall leaning against the tree itself, but a wall that is supported by a beam that is placed in the hole carved in the tree, that **they disagree. This Master,** meaning the Rabbis, **holds** that the **sides of the sides are prohibited, and this Master,** Rabbi Meir, **holds** that the **sides of the sides are permitted.**


###### Shabbat 154b:17
[Shabbat 154b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/154b:17)

רָבָא אָמַר: מַאן דְּאָסַר בִּצְדָדִין — אָסַר נָמֵי בְּצִדֵּי צְדָדִין, מַאן דְּשָׁרֵי בְּצִדֵּי צְדָדִין — שָׁרֵי נָמֵי בִּצְדָדִין. אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַב מְשַׁרְשְׁיָא לְרָבָא: נָעַץ

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: The one who prohibited** making use of the **sides also prohibited** making use of the **sides of the sides,** and **the one who permitted** making use of the **sides of the sides also permitted** making use of the **sides. Rav Mesharshiyya raised an objection** to the opinion of Rava: If one **drove**