## Shabbat Daf 57a

###### Shabbat 57a:1
[Shabbat 57a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:1)

מַתְנִי׳ **בַּמָּה אִשָּׁה** יוֹצְאָה, וּבַמָּה אֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna lists items that a woman may or may not carry into, or wear in the public domain on Shabbat. This depends on whether the particular object is considered an ornament, which she may wear, or merely a burden for the woman, which she may not. Even if it is considered an ornament, there is still concern that she might remove it and carry it in her hand in the public domain, which is prohibited by Torah law.

**MISHNA:** **With what** items may **a woman go out** into the public domain on Shabbat **and with what** items may **she not go out?**


###### Shabbat 57a:2
[Shabbat 57a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:2)

לֹא תֵּצֵא אִשָּׁה לֹא בְּחוּטֵי צֶמֶר וְלֹא בְּחוּטֵי פִּשְׁתָּן וְלֹא בִּרְצוּעוֹת שֶׁבְּרֹאשָׁהּ. וְלֹא תִּטְבּוֹל בָּהֶן, עַד שֶׁתְּרַפֵּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A woman may neither go out with strings of wool, nor with strings of flax, nor with strips** of any other materials that a woman braids **in** the hair of **her head. And** a woman **may not immerse** in a ritual bath **with them** in her hair **until she loosens them.** When the strings or strips are tight, the water cannot reach her hair unobstructed, invalidating her immersion.


###### Shabbat 57a:3
[Shabbat 57a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:3)

וְלֹא בְּ״טוֹטֶפֶת״ וְלֹא בְּסַרְבִּיטִין בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵינָן תְּפוּרִים. וְלֹא בְּכָבוּל לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And,** likewise, a woman may **neither** go out **with** the ornament called ***totefet*, nor with *sarvitin* that are not sewn** into her head covering, **nor with a *kavul* into the public domain.**


###### Shabbat 57a:4
[Shabbat 57a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:4)

וְלֹא בְּעִיר שֶׁל זָהָב וְלֹא בְּקַטְלָא וְלֹא בִּנְזָמִים וְלֹא בְּטַבַּעַת שֶׁאֵין עָלֶיהָ חוֹתָם וְלֹא בְּמַחַט שֶׁאֵינָהּ נְקוּבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And,** likewise, a woman may **neither** go out **with a city of gold** ornament, **nor with a *katla*** ornament, **nor with nose rings, nor with a ring that has no seal on it, nor with a needle that is not perforated,** which are merely for decorative purposes.


###### Shabbat 57a:5
[Shabbat 57a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:5)

וְאִם יָצָאת אֵינָהּ חַיֶּיבֶת חַטָּאת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if she** unwittingly **went out** wearing any of these, **she is not liable** to bring **a sin-offering.** According to Torah law, a woman is permitted to go out into the public domain wearing ornaments. However, the Sages decreed that a woman may not go out wearing certain ornaments, lest she remove them to show them to another and inadvertently carry them four cubits in the public domain.


###### Shabbat 57a:6
[Shabbat 57a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:6)

**גְּמָ׳** טְבִילָה מַאן דְּכַר שְׁמַהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: **Immersion, who mentioned** anything about **that?** The mishna is dealing with the *halakhot* of Shabbat, so why did it mention the *halakhot* of immersion?


###### Shabbat 57a:7
[Shabbat 57a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:7)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ — מַה טַּעַם קָאָמַר: מַה טַּעַם לֹא תֵּצֵא אִשָּׁה לֹא בְּחוּטֵי צֶמֶר וְלֹא בְּחוּטֵי פִּשְׁתָּן — מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים בַּחוֹל לָא תִּטְבּוֹל בָּהֶן עַד שֶׁתְּרַפֵּם. וְכֵיוָן דִּבְחוֹל לָא תִּטְבּוֹל בָּהֶן עַד שֶׁתְּרַפֵּם, בְּשַׁבָּת לֹא תֵּצֵא, דִּילְמָא מִיתְרְמֵי לַהּ טְבִילָה שֶׁל מִצְוָה וְשָׁרְיָא לְהוּ, וְאָתֵי לְאֵתוֹיִינְהוּ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said** that **Rabba bar Avuh** said: When the mishna **states** the *halakha*, it employs the style known as: **What is the reason.** The mention of immersion is an explanation, not a superfluous addition. The mishna should be understood as follows: **What is the reason** that **a woman may neither go out with strings of wool nor with strings of flax?** It is **because the Sages said** that **on weekdays she may not immerse with them until she loosens them. And since on weekdays she may not immerse with them until she loosens them, on Shabbat she may not go out** with them, **lest** a situation requiring **immersion** for the purpose of a **mitzva come about, and she untie them, and come to carry them four cubits in the public domain.**


###### Shabbat 57a:8
[Shabbat 57a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:8)

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב כָּהֲנָא מֵרַב: תִּיכֵי חֲלִילָתָא מַאי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אָרִיג קָאָמְרַתְּ? כׇּל שֶׁהוּא אָרִיג לֹא גָּזְרוּ. אִיתְּמַר נָמֵי, אָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: כׇּל שֶׁהוּא אָרִיג לֹא גָּזְרוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Kahana raised a dilemma before Rav:** With regard to strings made into **hollow chains, what is** the *halakha*? Is it permissible for women to go out into the public domain with them on Shabbat or not? It depends on whether they are considered an interposition to immersion. Rav **said to him: Woven, you say?** With regard to **anything woven, the Sages did not issue a decree.** Because water reaches the hair unobstructed, there is no need to loosen the hollow chain and there is no concern lest she carry it in the public domain. **It was also stated** that **Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said:** With regard to **anything woven, the Sages did not issue a decree.**


###### Shabbat 57a:9
[Shabbat 57a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:9)

וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: חֲזֵינָא לְאַחְווֹתִי דְּלָא קָפְדָן עֲלַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And some say** that **Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: I saw that my sisters are not particular about** removing **them,** and they bathe even with woven chains tied in their hair. Apparently, water reaches the hair. Therefore, the chain is not an interposition with regard to immersion.


###### Shabbat 57a:10
[Shabbat 57a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:10)

מַאי אִיכָּא בֵּין הַךְ לִישָּׁנָא וּבֵין הַךְ לִישָּׁנָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** practical difference **is there between this version and that version** of the resolution of the dilemma?


###### Shabbat 57a:11
[Shabbat 57a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:11)

אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ דִּטְנִיפָן. לְהַךְ לִישָּׁנָא דְּאָמַר כׇּל שֶׁהוּא אָרִיג לֹא גָּזְרוּ — הָנֵי נָמֵי אָרִיג נִינְהוּ, וּלְהַךְ לִישָּׁנָא דְּאָמְרַתְּ מִשּׁוּם קְפִידָא — כֵּיוָן דִּטְנִיפָא מִקְפָּד קָפְדָא עֲלַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **There is** a practical difference **between them** in a case **where** the chains **are dirty. According to this version,** in **which you said:** With regard to **anything woven, the Sages did not issue a decree, these too are woven. And according to that version,** in **which you said** that it is **due to** the fact that his sisters were not **particular;** in this case, **since they are dirty, she is particular about them** and will certainly remove them when she washes. Therefore, she is required to do so when immersing in a ritual bath as well.


###### Shabbat 57a:12
[Shabbat 57a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:12)

תְּנַן הָתָם: וְאֵלּוּ חוֹצְצִין בָּאָדָם: חוּטֵי צֶמֶר וְחוּטֵי פִּשְׁתָּן וְהָרְצוּעוֹת שֶׁבְּרָאשֵׁי הַבָּנוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: שֶׁל צֶמֶר וְשֶׁל שֵׂעָר אֵין חוֹצְצִין מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַמַּיִם בָּאִין בָּהֶן. אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: וְכוּלָּן, בְּרָאשֵׁי הַבָּנוֹת שָׁנִינוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**We learned** in a mishna in tractate *Mikvaot*: **And these** are the objects that **interpose for a person: Strings of wool, and strings of flax, and the straps that are on the girls’ heads. Rabbi Yehuda says:** Strings **of wool and** strands **of hair do not interpose because the water reaches** the hair **through them. Rav Huna said: And we learned all these,** strings of wool and flax, in a case where they are used to tie the hair **on the girls’ heads.**


###### Shabbat 57a:13
[Shabbat 57a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:13)

מַתְקִיף לַהּ רַב יוֹסֵף: לְמַעוֹטֵי מַאי? אִילֵּימָא לְמַעוֹטֵי דְּצַוָּאר, וּדְמַאי: אִילֵּימָא לְמַעוֹטֵי דְּצֶמֶר — הַשְׁתָּא רַךְ עַל גַּבֵּי קָשֶׁה חוֹצֵץ, רַךְ עַל גַּבֵּי רַךְ מִיבַּעְיָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yosef strongly objects to** this *halakha* of Rav Huna: **To exclude what** other places in the body did Rav Huna say this? **If you say** that it comes **to exclude** strings tied **to the neck, and** then, strings made **of what** material does it exclude? **If you say** that it comes **to exclude** strings **of wool, now,** the mishna stated that **soft** strings of wool **on top of** hair, which is relatively **hard, interpose** and invalidates the immersion. With regard to **soft** strings **on top of** the **soft** flesh of the neck, **is it necessary** to say that they interpose?


###### Shabbat 57a:14
[Shabbat 57a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:14)

וְאֶלָּא לְמַעוֹטֵי דְּחוּטֵי פִשְׁתָּן. הַשְׁתָּא קָשֶׁה עַל גַּבֵּי קָשֶׁה חוֹצֵץ, קָשֶׁה עַל גַּבֵּי רַךְ מִיבַּעְיָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** say that Rav Huna’s statement came **to exclude strings of flax.** A similar difficulty arises: **Now** the mishna stated that **hard** strings of wool **on top of** hair, which is **hard, interposes** and invalidates the immersion. If so, with regard to **hard** strings **on top of** the **soft** flesh of the neck, **is it necessary** to say that they interpose?


###### Shabbat 57a:15
[Shabbat 57a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:15)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף, הַיְינוּ טַעְמָא דְּרַב הוּנָא: לְפִי שֶׁאֵין אִשָּׁה חוֹנֶקֶת אֶת עַצְמָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rav Yosef said, this is the reason that Rav Huna** restricts the concern for interposition to strings tied in her hair and not around her neck: **Because a woman does not strangle herself** when adorning herself with a string or straps around her neck. Therefore, she never tightens the strings or straps to the extent that water cannot reach the skin.


###### Shabbat 57a:16
[Shabbat 57a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:16)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: הַבָּנוֹת יוֹצְאוֹת בְּחוּטִין שֶׁבְּאׇזְנֵיהֶן, אֲבָל לֹא בַּחֲבָקִין שֶׁבְּצַוְּארֵיהֶן. וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ אֵין אִשָּׁה חוֹנֶקֶת עַצְמָהּ, חֲבָקִין שֶׁבְּצַוְּארֵיהֶן אַמַּאי לָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye raised an objection to** the explanation of Rav Yosef from a *baraita*: **The girls** may **go out** into the public domain on Shabbat **with strings in their ears.** Young girls would have their ears pierced, but earrings were not placed in their ears until they were older. Instead, they inserted strings so that the holes would not close. **However,** they may **not** go out **with straps** around **their necks. And if you say** that the principle: **A woman does not strangle herself,** is halakhically valid, **why** may they **not** go out into the public domain with **straps around their necks?** They are not tied tight and do not constitute an interposition that invalidates immersion.


###### Shabbat 57a:17
[Shabbat 57a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/57a:17)

אָמַר רָבִינָא:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Ravina said: