## Shabbat Daf 52a

###### Shabbat 52a:1
[Shabbat 52a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:1)

דְּתִיתּוֹתַב דַּעְתֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: חֲמוֹר שֶׁעֲסָקָיו רָעִים כְּגוֹן זֶה, מַהוּ לָצֵאת בִּפְרוּמְבְּיָא בְּשַׁבָּת? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָכִי אֲמַר אֲבוּךְ מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל: הֲלָכָה כַּחֲנַנְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**he will be placated** and will understand that it was not my intention to disrespect him. **He said to him: An** undisciplined **donkey whose conduct is wicked like this** one that I am riding, **what** is the ruling with regard **to** having it **go out with a halter on Shabbat?** Typically, in order to secure a donkey, a bit suffices and it does not require a halter. A halter constitutes excessive security. However, the question is whether or not a halter that provides excessive security for a wild donkey like this one is considered a burden with which it is prohibited to go out to the public domain on Shabbat. Rabba bar Rav Huna **said to him**: Even if the security is considered extraneous, **your father said the following in the name of Shmuel: The *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Ḥananya,** who said that a device that provides excessive security is not considered a burden.


###### Shabbat 52a:2
[Shabbat 52a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:2)

תָּנָא דְּבֵי מְנַשְּׁיָא: עֵז שֶׁחָקַק לָהּ בֵּין קַרְנֶיהָ יוֹצְאָה בְּאַפְסָר בְּשַׁבָּת. בָּעֵי רַב יוֹסֵף: תָּחַב לָהּ בִּזְקָנָהּ מַהוּ? כֵּיוָן דְּאִי מְנַתַּח לַהּ כָּאֵיב לַהּ לָא אָתְיָא לְנַתּוֹחֵהּ, אוֹ דִילְמָא זִימְנִין דְּרָפֵי וְנָפֵיל, וְאָתֵי לְאֵתוּיֵי אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים. תֵּיקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
A Sage **of the school of Menashiya taught** a *baraita*: **A goat in which one carved out** a hole **between its horns may go out with a bit on Shabbat.** Because the bit is inserted through the hole, it will not become detached. **Rav Yosef raised a dilemma: What** is the ruling in a case where **one inserted** the bit **through** the goat’s **beard?** The Gemara explains the dilemma: Is the *halakha* that **since, if** the goat attempts to **sever** itself **from** the bit, it **would** cause it **pain** because the bit is attached to its beard, and therefore **it will not come** to **sever** it and the bit will remain in place? **Or perhaps** is the *halakha* that **sometimes** the knot **will loosen and** the bit **will fall, and** the goat’s owner **will come to bring** the bit and carry it **four cubits in the public domain?** No resolution was found to this dilemma. **Let it stand** unresolved.


###### Shabbat 52a:3
[Shabbat 52a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:3)

תְּנַן הָתָם: וְלֹא בִּרְצוּעָה שֶׁבֵּין קַרְנֶיהָ. אָמַר (לֵיהּ) רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בַּר אַבָּא: פְּלִיגִי בַּהּ רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל. חַד אָמַר: בֵּין לְנוֹי בֵּין לְשַׁמֵּר — אָסוּר. וְחַד אָמַר: לְנוֹי — אָסוּר, וּלְשַׁמֵּר — מוּתָּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**We learned there** in a mishna: **And neither** may a cow go out **with a strap between its horns. Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said: Rav and Shmuel disagreed about this: One said: Whether** it was placed **for beauty,** as an ornament, or **whether** it was placed **to secure** the cow, it is **prohibited** for the cow to go out with the strap between its horns. **And** the other **one said: For beauty,** it is **prohibited; however,** if it was placed **to secure** the cow, it is **permitted.**


###### Shabbat 52a:4
[Shabbat 52a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:4)

אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: תִּסְתַּיֵּים דִּשְׁמוּאֵל הוּא דְּאָמַר לְנוֹי אָסוּר, לְשַׁמֵּר מוּתָּר. דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא בַּר חִיָּיא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הֲלָכָה כַּחֲנַנְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yosef said: Conclude that Shmuel** is the **one who said** that if the strap was placed **for beauty it is prohibited; however,** if it was placed **to secure** the cow **it is permitted. As Rav Huna bar Ḥiyya said** that **Shmuel said: The *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Ḥananya:** A device that provides excessive security is not considered a burden. Therefore, an animal may go out on Shabbat with straps that provide excessive security.


###### Shabbat 52a:5
[Shabbat 52a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:5)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: אַדְּרַבָּה, תִּסְתַּיֵּים דִּשְׁמוּאֵל הוּא דְּאָמַר בֵּין לְנוֹי בֵּין לְשַׁמֵּר — אָסוּר. דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מַחְלִיפִין לִפְנֵי רַבִּי, שֶׁל זוֹ בְּזוֹ מַהוּ? אָמַר לְפָנָיו רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, כָּךְ אָמַר אַבָּא: אַרְבַּע בְּהֵמוֹת יוֹצְאוֹת בְּאַפְסָר — הַסּוּס הַפֶּרֶד וְהַגָּמָל וְהַחֲמוֹר. לָאו לְמַעוֹטֵי גָּמָל בַּחֲטָם? סָמִי הָא מִקַּמֵּי הָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to him: On the contrary**, **conclude that Shmuel** is the **one who said** that **whether** it was placed **for beauty,** as an ornament, or **whether** it was placed **to secure** the cow, **it is prohibited**. **As Rav Yehuda said** that **Shmuel said:** The students **exchanged** the details in the mishna **before Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi and asked: **What is** the *halakha* with regard to **this** animal going out into the public domain **with** that which is permitted **for that** animal? And **Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said before** Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: **So said father,** Rabbi Yosei: **Four animals** may **go out with a bit: The horse, the mule, and the camel, and the donkey.** Does this list **not** come **to exclude a camel** going out **with a nose ring,** as a nose ring provides excessive security beyond that required for a camel? Apparently, according to Shmuel, an animal may not go out on Shabbat with a device that provides excessive security, as it is considered a burden. Rav Yosef said to him: **Delete this** latter statement of Shmuel **due to that** first one.


###### Shabbat 52a:6
[Shabbat 52a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:6)

וּמַאי חֲזֵית דִּמְסַמֵּית הָא מִקַּמֵּי הָא? סָמִי הָא מִקַּמֵּי הָא! (דְּאַשְׁכְּחַן שְׁמוּאֵל הוּא דְּאָמַר לְנוֹי אָסוּר לְשַׁמֵּר מוּתָּר. דְּאִתְּמַר:) רַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָשֵׁי אָמַר רַב: בֵּין לְנוֹי בֵּין לְשַׁמֵּר — אָסוּר. וְרַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לְנוֹי — אָסוּר, לְשַׁמֵּר — מוּתָּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And what did you see** that led you **to delete this** latter statement **due that** first one? **Delete that** first statement **due to this** latter one. The Gemara explains: The first statement is supported **as we find** that **Shmuel** is the **one who said : For beauty, it is prohibited; however,** if it was placed **to secure** the cow, **it is permitted, as it was stated** that **Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said** that **Rav said: Whether** the strap was placed **for beauty,** or **whether** it was placed **to secure** the cow, **it is prohibited. And Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin said** that **Shmuel said: For beauty,** it is **prohibited; however,** if it was placed **to secure** the cow, it is **permitted.**


###### Shabbat 52a:7
[Shabbat 52a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:7)

מֵיתִיבִי: קְשָׁרָהּ בְּעָלֶיהָ בְּמוֹסֵרָה — כְּשֵׁרָה. וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ מַשּׂאוֹי הוּא, ״אֲשֶׁר לֹא עָלָה עָלֶיהָ עוֹל״ אָמַר רַחֲמָנָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita*: If **its owner tied** a red heifer **with its reins** that are attached to the bit, **it** remains **fit** for use in the purification ritual. **And if it should enter your mind** to say that a bit **is** considered **a burden**, why does a red heifer remain fit for use? **The Torah** explicitly **stated:** “Speak to the children of Israel, that they bring you a red heifer without defect, in which there is no blemish, and **upon which never came a yoke”** (Numbers 19:2). A red heifer is disqualified by a burden.


###### Shabbat 52a:8
[Shabbat 52a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:8)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: בְּמוֹלִיכָהּ מֵעִיר לָעִיר. רָבָא אָמַר: שָׁאנֵי פָּרָה דְּדָמֶיהָ יְקָרִין. רָבִינָא אָמַר: בְּמוֹרֶדֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said:** There, the *baraita* is referring to the case of a red heifer whose owner **is leading it from city to city.** When the animal is removed from its habitat, it requires additional security. In that case, tying the heifer with its reins is conventional rather than excessive security. Therefore, the bit is not considered a burden. **Rava said: A** red **heifer, whose monetary** value **is high, is different** and therefore secured more carefully than other cows. **Ravina said**: The *baraita* is referring **to** a red heifer **that is rebellious** and headstrong. Therefore, it requires added security.


###### Shabbat 52a:9
[Shabbat 52a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:9)

הַסּוּס בְּשֵׁיר וְכוּ׳. מַאי ״יוֹצְאִין״? וּמַאי ״נִמְשָׁכִין״? אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: אוֹ יוֹצְאִין כְּרוּכִין, אוֹ נִמְשָׁכִין. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: יוֹצְאִין נִמְשָׁכִין, וְאֵין יוֹצְאִין כְּרוּכִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
We learned in the mishna: **A horse** may go out **with a chain** around its neck, and so too, all animals that typically have chains around their necks when they go out to the public domain may go out with chains on Shabbat and may be pulled by the chains. The Gemara asks: **What is** the meaning of: **May go out, and what is** the meaning of: **May be pulled? Rav Huna said:** These animals **may go out either** with the chain **wrapped** around their necks as an ornament, **or they may be pulled** by the chain. **And Shmuel said:** These animals **may go out pulled** by the chain; **however, they may not go out** with the chain **wrapped** around their necks as an ornament.


###### Shabbat 52a:10
[Shabbat 52a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:10)

בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: יוֹצְאִין כְּרוּכִין לִימָּשֵׁךְ. אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: חֲזֵינָא לְהוּ לְעִיגְלֵי דְּבֵי רַב הוּנָא יוֹצְאִין בְּאַפְסְרֵיהֶן כְּרוּכִין בְּשַׁבָּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was taught in a *baraita*: They may go out** with the chains loosely **wrapped** around their necks, so that if the need arises, the animals will be able **to be pulled** by their chains. **Rav Yosef said: I saw the calves of the house of Rav Huna go out** into the public domain **on Shabbat with their bits** and with the reins **wrapped around** their necks.


###### Shabbat 52a:11
[Shabbat 52a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:11)

כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: מוּלָאוֹת שֶׁל בֵּית רַבִּי יוֹצְאוֹת בְּאַפְסְרֵיהֶן בְּשַׁבָּת. אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: כְּרוּכִין אוֹ נִמְשָׁכִין?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that **Rabbi Ḥanina said: The mules of the house of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **go out** into the public domain **with their bits on Shabbat. A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: Does this mean that the mules went out with their bits and reins **wrapped** around their necks; **or,** does it mean that they were **pulled** by the reins?


###### Shabbat 52a:12
[Shabbat 52a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:12)

תָּא שְׁמַע, כִּי אֲתָא רַב שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר יְהוּדָה אֲמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: מוּלָאוֹת שֶׁל בֵּית רַבִּי יוֹצְאוֹת בְּאַפְסְרֵיהֶן כְּרוּכִים בְּשַׁבָּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear** a resolution to this dilemma from the following incident: **When Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that **Rabbi Ḥanina said:** The **mules [*molaot*] of the house of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **went out on Shabbat with their bits** with the reins **wrapped** around their necks.


###### Shabbat 52a:13
[Shabbat 52a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:13)

אַמְרוּהָ רַבָּנַן קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב אַסִּי: הָא דְּרַב שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר יְהוּדָה לָא צְרִיכָא, מִדְּרַב דִּימִי נָפְקָא. דְּאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ דְּרַב דִּימִי ״נִמְשָׁכִין״ קָאָמַר, מִדְּרַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל נָפְקָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Sages said before Rav Asi: That** statement **of Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda is not necessary. It** may be **derived from the** statement **of Rav Dimi. As, if it would enter your mind** to say **that Rav Dimi said** that the mules of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi went out on Shabbat **pulled** by their bits, it is difficult. There is nothing novel in that statement, **as it** may be **derived from the** statement **that Rav Yehuda** said that **Shmuel said.**


###### Shabbat 52a:14
[Shabbat 52a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:14)

דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מַחְלִיפִין הָיוּ לִפְנֵי רַבִּי, שֶׁל זוֹ בָּזוֹ מַהוּ? אָמַר לְפָנָיו רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, כָּךְ אָמַר אַבָּא: אַרְבַּע בְּהֵמוֹת יוֹצֵאת בָּאַפְסָר, הַסּוּס וְהַפֶּרֶד וְהַגָּמָל וְהַחֲמוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As Rav Yehuda said** that **Shmuel said:** The students **switched** the details in the mishna **before Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, and asked: **What is** the *halakha* with regard to **this** animal going out into the public domain **with** that which is permitted **for that** animal? And **Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said before** Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: **So said father, four animals** may **go out with a bit: The horse, and the mule, and the camel, and the donkey.** Apparently, according to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, a mule may go out on Shabbat pulled by its bit.


###### Shabbat 52a:15
[Shabbat 52a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:15)

אֲמַר לְהוּ רַב אַסִּי: אִיצְטְרִיךְ לְהוּ. דְּאִי מִדְּרַב יְהוּדָה נָפְקָא, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: אָמַר לְפָנָיו וְלָא קַיבְּלַהּ מִינֵּיהּ. קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּרַב דִּימִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Asi said to them:** This statement of Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda **is necessary, as if** it **were derived from** the statement of **Rav Yehuda,** who related that which Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, **I would have said** that Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, **said** that **before him, and** Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi **did not accept it from him**. Therefore, **that** statement **of Rav Dimi teaches us** that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi indeed accepted it from Rabbi Yishmael and his mules went out with their bits on Shabbat.


###### Shabbat 52a:16
[Shabbat 52a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:16)

וְאִי דְּרַב דִּימִי, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: הָנֵי מִילֵּי נִמְשָׁכִין, אֲבָל כְּרוּכִין — לָא, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּרַב שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if** it had been derived only from the statement **of Rav Dimi, I would have said that this applies only** when the mule is **pulled** by its bit; **however,** if the reins **are** merely **wrapped** around the animal’s neck, **no,** the animal may not go out with it. Therefore, **that** statement **of Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yehuda teaches us** that the mules of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi went out on Shabbat with their reins wrapped around their necks.


###### Shabbat 52a:17
[Shabbat 52a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/52a:17)

וּמַזִּין עֲלֵיהֶן וְטוֹבְלָן בִּמְקוֹמָן. לְמֵימְרָא דִּבְנֵי קַבּוֹלֵי טוּמְאָה נִינְהוּ? וְהָתְנַן: טַבַּעַת אָדָם — טְמֵאָה, וְטַבַּעַת בְּהֵמָה וְכֵלִים וּשְׁאָר כׇּל הַטַּבָּעוֹת —

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It was further taught in our mishna: If these chains contracted ritual impurity, **one may sprinkle** water of purification **on them and immerse them in their place** on the animal. The Gemara asks: **Is that to say that** these chains **are fit to contract ritual impurity? Didn’t we learn** in a mishna: **A ring** worn by **a person is ritually impure. However, the ring of an animal, and** rings **of utensils, and all other rings** not worn by people