## Shabbat Daf 86a

###### Shabbat 86a:1
[Shabbat 86a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/86a:1)

כְּטַבְלָא מְרוּבַּעַת. כְּטַבְלָא הוּא דִּשְׁרֵי, הָא לָאו הָכִי — אָסוּר! הָתָם לְאַקּוֹלֵי בָּהּ קוּלָּא אַחֲרִינָא, לְהַתִּיר רֹאשׁ תּוֹר הַיּוֹצֵא הֵימֶנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**as a** square **board.** All of the *halakhot* of planting various species were stated with regard to a square-shaped garden bed. By inference: When it is **like a** square **board, it is permitted;** and **when that is not** the case, it is **prohibited.** Planting different species in horizontal and vertical rows without a space between the species is ineffective, even with circles. Rav Ashi replied: When the *baraita* says a square board, it does not mean that the only way to demarcate between different species is when the rows are in that configuration. Rather, it is **to introduce a different leniency.** The *baraita* came **to permit a triangular plot that protrudes from it** into another field. This means that a triangular protrusion into another field is considered a conspicuous demarcation only if the bed was square; in that case, no additional measures are necessary.


###### Shabbat 86a:2
[Shabbat 86a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/86a:2)

**מַתְנִי׳** מִנַּיִן לְפוֹלֶטֶת שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי שֶׁתְּהֵא טְמֵאָה? שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״הֱיוּ נְכֹנִים לִשְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים״. מִנַּיִן שֶׁמַּרְחִיצִין אֶת הַמִּילָה בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת? שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיְהִי בַיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי בִּהְיוֹתָם כֹּאֲבִים״. מִנַּיִן שֶׁקּוֹשְׁרִין לָשׁוֹן שֶׁל זְהוֹרִית בְּרֹאשׁ שָׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ? שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אִם יִהְיוּ חֲטָאֵיכֶם כַּשָּׁנִים כַּשֶּׁלֶג יַלְבִּינוּ״. מִנַּיִן לְסִיכָה שֶׁהִיא כִּשְׁתִיָּיה בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים? אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין רְאָיָה לַדָּבָר זֵכֶר לַדָּבָר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַתָּבֹא כַמַּיִם בְּקִרְבּוֹ וְכַשֶּׁמֶן בְּעַצְמוֹתָיו״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** The mishna continues to cite a series of unrelated *halakhot* based upon biblical allusions. **From where** is it derived **that** a woman who **discharges semen** even **on the third day** after relations **is ritually impure,** just like one who touches semen (see Leviticus 15:17)? Because the semen remains fit for insemination, it can transmit impurity, **as it is stated** prior to the revelation at Sinai: “And he said to the people, **prepare yourselves for three days,** do not approach a woman” (Exodus 19:15). This three-day separation period ensured that even a woman who discharged semen would be pure. The mishna cites another *halakha* based on a biblical allusion: **From where** is it derived **that one may wash the circumcision on the third day,** meaning the third day after the circumcision, even if **it occurs on Shabbat? As it is stated: “And it came to pass on the third day when they were in pain”** (Genesis 34:25). The pain of circumcision lasts at least three days, and as long as the child is in pain he is considered to be in danger. The mishna cites another *halakha* with an allusion in the Bible: **From where** is it derived **that one ties a scarlet strip** of wool **to the head of** the **scapegoat** that is dispatched to Azazel? **As it is stated: “If your sins be like scarlet, they will become white like snow”** (Isaiah 1:18). Since the goat is offered to atone for sins, red wool is tied to its horns. The mishna cites another allusion. **From where** is it derived **that smearing** oil on one’s body **is like drinking** and is similarly prohibited **on Yom Kippur? Although there is no proof for this, there is an allusion to it, as it is stated: “And it comes into his inward parts like water and like oil into his bones”** (Psalms 109:18). The verse appears to equate smearing oil on one’s body with drinking water.


###### Shabbat 86a:3
[Shabbat 86a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/86a:3)

**גְּמָ׳** רֵישָׁא דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, סֵיפָא כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה? דְּאִי כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה — טְהוֹרָה שְׁמַעְנָא לֵיהּ. מַאן דְּלָא מוֹקֵי כְּתַנָּאֵי, תָּנֵא רֵישָׁא ״טְהוֹרָה״, וּמוֹקֵי לַהּ לְכוּלַּהּ כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, וּמַאן דְּמוֹקֵים כְּתַנָּאֵי, רֵישָׁא רַבָּנַן וְסֵיפָא כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara comments on the *halakhot* cited in the mishna: **The first clause** in the mishna with regard to discharged semen **is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya. The latter clause** in the mishna with regard to circumcision **is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya. As, if** one was to assert that the first clause is also **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, we heard him** say that in that case the woman is **ritually pure.** The Gemara explains: **He who does not establish** the mishna as reflecting the opinions of two ***tanna’im*,** has a variant reading of the mishna; he **teaches** the *halakha* in **the first clause:** The woman is **ritually pure, and establishes the entire** mishna **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya. And he who establishes** the mishna as reflecting the opinions of two ***tanna’im*,** holds that the **first clause** is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis, and the latter clause is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya.**


###### Shabbat 86a:4
[Shabbat 86a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/86a:4)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: פּוֹלֶטֶת שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע בְּיוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי טְהוֹרָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה. רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: פְּעָמִים שֶׁהֵן אַרְבַּע עוֹנוֹת, פְּעָמִים שֶׁהֵן חָמֵשׁ עוֹנוֹת, פְּעָמִים שֶׁהֵן שֵׁשׁ עוֹנוֹת. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: לְעוֹלָם חָמֵשׁ, וְאִם יָצָאתָה מִקְצָת עוֹנָה רִאשׁוֹנָה, נוֹתְנִין לָהּ מִקְצָת עוֹנָה שִׁשִּׁית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates on the matter of a woman who discharges semen, citing that which **the Sages taught** in a *baraita*: A woman who **discharges semen** at any point **on the third day is ritually pure;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya. Rabbi Yishmael says:** Even on the third day she is ritually impure. In addition, the only relevant tally is the number of days. The number of twelve-hour periods of night and day that passed is not relevant. **Sometimes there are four** twelve-hour **periods** that elapsed between cohabitation and discharge. If she had relations just before nightfall on Wednesday and discharged on Friday night at the beginning of Shabbat, it is considered as if three days passed, meaning Wednesday, Thursday and Friday; and four twelve-hour periods, meaning Wednesday night, Thursday day, Thursday night and Friday day. **Sometimes there are five** twelve-hour **periods** that elapsed, in a case where she discharged semen at the end of Friday night. **Sometimes there are six** twelve-hour **periods** that elapsed, if she had relations at the beginning of Tuesday night and discharged at the end of the third day. **Rabbi Akiva says:** The *halakha* is that it is **always five** twelve-hour **periods. And if** she had relations after **part of the first period passed, she is given part of the sixth period** to complete the requisite five twelve-hour periods, so that sixty hours will have elapsed between cohabitation and discharge.


###### Shabbat 86a:5
[Shabbat 86a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/86a:5)

אַמְרוּהָ רַבָּנַן קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב פָּפָּא, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ רַב פָּפָּא לְרָבָא: בִּשְׁלָמָא רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה כְּרַבָּנַן — דְּאָמְרִי בְּחַמְשָׁא עֲבוּד פְּרִישָׁה, וְרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי — דְּאָמַר בְּאַרְבְּעָה עֲבוּד פְּרִישָׁה, אֶלָּא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא כְּמַאן? לְעוֹלָם כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, כִּדְאָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: מֹשֶׁה בְּהַשְׁכָּמָה עָלָה וּבְהַשְׁכָּמָה יָרַד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Rabbis said this before Rav Pappa, and some say** that **Rav Pappa** said this **to Rava: Granted, Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya** holds **in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis, who say** with regard to the revelation at Sinai that Moses **instituted separation** between husbands and wives **on** the **fifth** day of the week. Since everyone agrees that the Torah was given on Shabbat, husbands and wives were separated for two days. **And Rabbi Yishmael** holds **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei,** who **said** that Moses **instituted separation on** the **fourth** day of the week, meaning that husbands and wives were separated for three days. **However, in accordance with whose** opinion did **Rabbi Akiva** state his opinion? Ritual impurity, in this case, is not based on the passage of days but on the passage of twelve-hour periods, which do not correspond to either opinion mentioned with regard to the revelation at Sinai. The Gemara answers: **Actually,** Rabbi Akiva holds **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei.** However, his understanding is based on that which **Rav Adda bar Ahava said: Moses ascended** Mount Sinai **early in the morning, and he descended early in the morning** and related to them the mitzva of separation.


###### Shabbat 86a:6
[Shabbat 86a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/86a:6)

בְּהַשְׁכָּמָה עָלָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיַּשְׁכֵּם מֹשֶׁה בַבֹּקֶר וַיַּעַל אֶל הַר סִינַי״. בְּהַשְׁכָּמָה יָרַד, דִּכְתִיב: ״לֶךְ רֵד וְעָלִיתָ אַתָּה וְאַהֲרֹן עִמָּךְ״, מַקִּישׁ יְרִידָה לַעֲלִיָּיה: מָה עֲלִיָּיה בְּהַשְׁכָּמָה, אַף יְרִידָה בְּהַשְׁכָּמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains the source of this opinion: **He ascended** Mount Sinai **early in the morning, as it is written: “And Moses rose up early in the morning, and went up to Mount Sinai,** as the Lord had commanded him” (Exodus 34:4). And **he descended** the mountain **early in the morning, as it is written: “Go descend and you shall ascend together with Aaron”** (Exodus 19:24). The Torah **juxtaposes descent to ascent** to establish that **just as** Moses’ **ascent** was **early in the morning, so too,** his **descent** was **early in the morning.** Moses told the people to separate in the early morning so that there would be five complete periods of separation over the course of the three days.


###### Shabbat 86a:7
[Shabbat 86a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/86a:7)

לְמָה לֵיהּ לְמֵימְרָא לְהוּ, וְהָא אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: יִשְׂרָאֵל קְדוֹשִׁים הֵן וְאֵין מְשַׁמְּשִׁין מִטּוֹתֵיהֶן בַּיּוֹם! הָא אָמַר רָבָא: אִם הָיָה בַּיִת אָפֵל — מוּתָּר. וְאָמַר רָבָא וְאִיתֵּימָא רַב פָּפָּא: תַּלְמִיד חָכָם מַאֲפִיל בְּטַלִּיתוֹ, וּמוּתָּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Why did he need to tell them** to separate during the morning hours? **Didn’t Rav Huna say: The Jewish people are holy and do not have relations during the day?** It was not necessary to command them until night. The Gemara replies: It was necessary to tell them in the morning, **as Rava said: If it was a dark house, it is permitted** to have relations during the day. **And** similarly, **Rava said,** and **some say** that **Rav Pappa** said: **A Torah scholar obscures** the light in the room **with his cloak and is** thereby **permitted** to have relations during the day. Therefore, it was necessary to command the people to separate even during the daytime hours.