MISHNAH: All implements may be taken on the Sabbath and their doors with them, even if they were disassembled on the Sabbath¹. It is understood that tools are classified as implements for the Sabbath.; they are not similar to doors of a house because the latter are not prepared² since at the beginning of the Sabbath it was not prepared for its role as implement..

footnotes: ¹ Even if the lid was off the implement when the Sabbath started it does not lose its quality as part of a implement and is not muqṣeh ² The door of a building is part of the building. While it may be moved to be opened or closed, it cannot be removed since this would be tearing down a building. If for some reason the door becomes unhinged on the Sabbath, it is muqṣeh

HALAKHAH: “All implements may be taken on the Sabbath,” etc. There is spelled out more for doors of a house and there is spelled out more for doors of implements¹¹. There is spelled out more for doors of a house, for even if they were unhinged on Friday they may not be moved on the Sabbath. There is spelled out more for doors of implements, for even if they were unhinged on the Sabbath they may be used on the Sabbath¹².

footnotes: ¹¹ E. g., of a chest or a cupboard. ¹² Babli 122b.

“Because the latter are not prepared,” and they are used only connected to the ground¹³. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: ¹⁴“Originally all implements could be taken on the Sabbath. Because they were suspected of desecrating holidays and Sabbaths as it is written¹⁵. 13:15., at that time I saw in Jehudah that they were working wine presses on the Sabbath … and loading on donkeys, etc., they forbade them everything. After they were fenced¹⁶ in they continued to permit to them until they permitted them everything except the big saw and the blade of the plough⁶. Rebbi Yose said, also the engraver’s stylo¹⁷, s. v. צפורן. The root is Accadic ṣpr “to be pointed”.. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, also the anchor¹⁸.” ¹⁹“A mortar, if there is garlic in it one may take it, otherwise one may not take it; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, if it is a small mortar used at table then it is like a bowl and one moves it on the Sabbath.” Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, they formulated before implements were permitted²⁰.

footnotes: ¹³ House doors are used only in connection with the house; they cannot be removed and used for other purposes. ¹⁴ Tosephta 14:1 (ed. Liebermann), Babli 123b. ¹⁵ Neh ¹⁶ When the Sabbath was universally kept publicly by rabbinic standards. ⁶ Work tools which are expensive to replace cannot be taken for other uses. Since the intended use is forbidden on the Sabbath, they cannot be used on the Sabbath. ¹⁷ Definition of Arukh ¹⁸ Since a ship may not leave on the Sabbath. ¹⁹ Tosephta 13:17 (ed. Liebermann). Babli 123b. ²⁰ Tosephta 13:17 is not Halakhah; any mortar may be moved even though grinding in a mortar is biblically a Sabbath violation.

There, we have stated²¹ 11:4.: “A door-bolt²², n. “door bolt, bar”., Rebbi Joshua says one may slip it off one door and hang it on another on the Sabbath²³. Rebbi Tarphon says, it is like any other implement and may be moved in the courtyard²⁴ one may not carry from a house to the courtyard or from the courtyard to the house; but this does not limit one from carrying the bolt from one door to the next in the courtyard..” In the House of Rebbi Yannai they say, the Mishnah is about a courtyard without an eruv²⁵. If it is about a courtyard without an eruv, is that what we did state, “it is like any other implement and may be moved in the courtyard”²⁶ no implement can be moved from the house to the courtyard.? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥananiah reaches it in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: they formulated before implements were permitted. (If they formulated before implements were permitted,)²⁷ is that what we have stated: “it is like any other implement and may be moved in the courtyard”²⁸? Like the²⁹ “three implements which can be carried in a courtyard: a small knife, the chopper of fig cake, and the soup ladle³⁰.”

footnotes: ²¹ Mishnah Kelim ²² Latin claustrum ²³ R. Joshua only allows drawing the bolt out, tying it to a string and drawing it on the string to another door opening to the same courtyard, since this is moving “as on the back of one’s hand”, unprofessional, and not biblically forbidden. If the bolt can be drawn out without using a tool, it cannot be destroying a building and is not forbidden. ²⁴ He holds that a courtyard always is a domain by itself. It may not be part of the private domains of the houses opening into it; then without an eruv ²⁵ Babli 124a. ²⁶ Since the door bolt was in the house, not in the courtyard, at the start of the Sabbath, the argument of R. Tarphon seems pointless since without an eruv ²⁷ The text in parentheses is a mistaken correction by the corrector; it should be deleted. ²⁸ The question raised (Note 26) has not been answered. ²⁹ Tosephta 14:1 (ed. Liebermann), Babli 123b. It is asserted that there never was a rabbinic prohibition even in the days of Nehemiah which would have inhibited moving these implements in the courtyard, even from the house. ³⁰ Greek ζωμήρυσις, -εως, ἡ.

The bugle, he blows a third time on the roof and puts it down at that spot³¹ clearly became obsolete with the permission to move all implements.. Is it not a implement? Rebbi Yudan said, they formulated before implements were permitted.

footnotes: ³¹ The public announcement of the start of the Sabbath by blowing a horn; an institution common to Palestine and Babylonia but which in detail is only known from the Babli, 35b. One cannot understand why the horn must be put away immediately with the start of the Sabbath since a Tosephta (13:16; quoted Chapter 6 Note 62) notes that it may be used on the Sabbath as a baby bottle. This baraita

Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Half-pipes³² 11:6 which separate between the loaves of the shew-bread, where it is mentioned that they cannot be removed or put in on the Sabbath. This clearly contradicts the Mishnah which declares that all implements may be moved on the Sabbath. and rods³³ 5:9 it is asserted by R. Eliezer that while on a weekday the Passover sacrifice is stripped of its hide while hanging on rods carried by two people, on the Sabbath one uses no sticks but two people stretch out their arms to replace the rods. In view of the Mishnah here there is no reason not to use the rods on the Sabbath. It would be easy to say that the practice does not follow R. Eliezer, but since he is a very reliable historical source there can be no doubt that he accurately reports Temple practice from his own experience. One has to conclude that the general permission to use all implements (with the exception of expensive tools of trade) has to be dated to the council of Jabneh after the destruction of the Second Temple. Babli 123b. were formulated before implements were permitted. One may not move planks³⁴ of a ship on the Sabbath. If they cover implements or food they are like covers of any implement and may be moved on the Sabbath. Rebbi La said, even although you are saying “like covers of implements”, this is only if they have the designation of an implement³⁵.

footnotes: ³² The half-pipes mentioned in Mishnah Menaḥot ³³ In Mishnah Pesaḥim ³⁴ Planks used to cover the holds of the ship. These are not shaped as implements; in other circumstances they could be used as building materials. ³⁵ The essence of an implement is that it is subject to impurity. Straight planks are impervious to impurity; they cannot be called “implements”.

Anything which may be moved by two people may be moved by two; by four or five it is forbidden³⁷ 121b, ed. M. Herschler col. 406) reads: “Anything which may be moved by two people may be moved by three; by four or five it is forbidden.” Meïri(Commentary ad 123b, ed. I.S. Lange p. 484) reads as our text. Rashba (Novellae ad 123b) reads: “Anything which may be moved by two people may be moved by two; by three or five it is forbidden.” Ritba (Novellae ad 122a, ed. M. Goldstein col. 776) paraphrases the text but it seems that he reads with Rashba, “by three or four or five it is forbidden.” A connected text is Tosephta 14:3: “One does not carry on a yoke on the Sabbath, but two may carry together; three or four are forbidden.” “Forbidden” as always means rabbinically forbidden, not liable for a Sabbath violation.. Rebbi Zeˋira said, since you are saying that by two it is permitted, even by four or five it is permitted³⁸ 102a.. That is what Rebbi Mana said, in the days of Rebbi Yose children were carrying Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi’s bench³⁹, -ii, n. and old men were helping them. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: It happened that they moved the carriage of Rebbi’s house on the Sabbath. Is that not an implement? Lest you say that because one used only its place one could not move it on the Sabbath⁴⁰. Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel: Big boxes and big pails⁴¹ 16:3: “large containers, at least one seah large.” Maimonides: “Large pails to transport wheat and flour.” may be moved on the Sabbath, lest you say because they are used only at their place one could not move them on the Sabbath⁴².. Rebbi Abba in the name of Samuel: A bed press one may move on the Sabbath⁴³ With which one presses the logs to equalize them. Qorban haEdah seems to read מוֹטוֹת “yokes” or מַטּוֹת “staffs” for מִטּוֹת “beds” and declares it an appurtenance of the loom.. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav: One may move the upper and lower cross-beams but not the vertical [beams]⁴⁴. Rebbi Abba said, this refers to installed vertical [beams]; but the vertical [beams] at rest⁴⁵ are permitted. Rods and ropes of the loom⁴⁶, corium “leather, leather strap” (following Theodor) is inappropriate here, as are the additional meanings “upper surface (of a building), layer, stratum of earth”. one may move on the Sabbath; this is what Rebbi Yose said: Rebbi Joḥanan asked Rebbi Jehudah ben Levi, may one move appurtenances of a loom on the Sabbath? He told him, one may move. Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi did not say so but: Rebbi Joḥanan asked Rebbi Jehudah ben Levi, may one move appurtenances of a loom on the Sabbath? He told him, one may not move. He asked him, why? He answered, because one may not move⁴⁷ 60a..

footnotes: ³⁷ In this version nothing is said about moving by three people. Naḥmanides (Novellae ad ³⁸ Babli Eruvin ³⁹ Latin subsellium ⁴⁰ Even though the carriage may not be used on the Sabbath to transport anything, if the place where it is parked is needed it may be moved on the Sabbath. Babli 124a. ⁴¹ Geonic commentary to Mishnah Kelim ⁴² Even if usually they are transported only using machinery, this does not make them muqṣeh ⁴³ I do not know what this expression means. Pene Mosheḥ: ⁴⁴ Parts of the loom. A working loom may not be taken apart on the Sabbath by biblical standards but parts of a defective one may be moved even by rabbinic standards since the notions of building and tearing down do not apply to implements. Babli 113a. ⁴⁵ Reading בן as equal to Arabic بنّ “to rest at a place”. ⁴⁶ This seems to be Greek καῖρος, ὁ “weaving”, short for קורייס כְּלֵי “instruments needed for weave” used in the next sentence, for any implements needed for the manufacture of textiles. Jastrow’s identification as Latin corius ⁴⁷ It is a tradition. This answer is typical of R. Jehudah ben Levi, Babli Niddah

MISHNAH: A person may take a hammer to crack nuts, an axe to cut the fig cake, a saw to shave cheese with³, a rake to rake with it dried figs, a spade or a pitchfork⁴ to feed a child, a spindle or a spinning top to stick into something, a sewing needle to remove a thorn, and one of sack-clothiers to open a door.

footnotes: ³ A very hard cheese like Parmesan. In all cases of the Mishnah the use of the implement is inappropriate; this is no reason to exclude their use on the Sabbath. ⁴ This also is the reading of the Mishnah in the Babli. In many Mishnah mss., including Maimonides’s autograph, the reading is מַזְלֵג “fork”. This is an acceptable reading since in Antiquity forks were not used at meals but in the kitchen; it still describes inappropriate use.

HALAKHAH: “A person may take a hammer to crack nuts.” Therefore not to open nuts not⁴⁷ 60a.. Is the Mishnah Rebbi Nehemiah’s, since Rebbi Nehemiah says, they may be taken only for a need? ⁴⁸ 1:5 (69c l.50, י), which also exists in a Genizah text edited by Ginzberg (p. 169,G) where the text is in better shape.

footnotes: ⁴⁷ It is a tradition. This answer is typical of R. Jehudah ben Levi, Babli Niddah ⁴⁸ The following sentences are also found in Beṣah

Rebbi Abba (Rebbi Judah, Rebbi)⁴⁹. The title of Ḥinena bar Shelemiah was Rav, not Rebbi. Ḥinena bar Shelemiah in the name of Rav: The Sages agree with Rebbi Neḥemiah about the press, the plank, and the mace; the press with which he presses, the plank on which one beats them, the mace with which he smashes them⁵⁰. An implement dedicated to a forbidden use may be moved only for a need; one for permitted use both with and without a need⁵¹.

footnotes: ⁴⁹ These words should be deleted with both witnesses from Beṣah ⁵⁰ The items mentioned all belong to the wine press and represent considerable investment. The mace (in Babylonian form called בּוּכְנָה in י) is used to mash grapes on the plank put over the vat in the wine press. ⁵¹ Babli 124a. The definition of “need” will be taken up later.

Rebbi Yose said, look how lenient they were on the Sabbath, that even things which are not to be used on the Sabbath they permitted for use on the Sabbath. As Rebbi Eleazar said, why is a tripod⁵² [scil.mensa]. This is a wooden tripod on which a wooden plate is laid to serve as table top. Since no volume is enclosed by any of its parts, one would have expected the tripod to be impervious to impurity. (A tripod used as a chair can become impure as a chair.) impure? Because the waiter eats on it. Why is its base impure? Because the waiter stands on it. Look how stringent they were in impurity, that even things which are not used as a table they declared impure as a table⁵³.

footnotes: ⁵² Greek δελφική, ἡ “Delphian”, adjective used as a noun, Latin delphica ⁵³ In impurity an improvised table is treated as table; in the rules of the Sabbath, after the permission to use all kinds of implements, even tools of trade can be used for Sabbath purposes.

“A spade or a pitchfork to feed a child, a spindle or a spinning top to stick into something.” Rebbi Simon said, Rebbi Abbahu permitted me to apply eye salve⁵⁴, -i, n. on the Sabbath⁵⁵. Rebbi Abba bar Cohen in the name of Rav Sheshet: The Mishnah implies this, “a sewing needle to remove a thorn,” since what would be the difference between this and a thorn? Rebbi Abba asked before Rebbi Mana, may one compound it on a holiday? He told him, it is not food⁵⁶ 1:5). Compounding lotions for external use is forbidden..

footnotes: ⁵⁴ Greek κολλύριον, τό, “salve”, Latin collyrium ⁵⁵ While compounding the salve on the Sabbath is a biblical violation, applying it externally is permitted. ⁵⁶ The only actions prohibited on the Sabbath but permitted on a holiday are those needed to prepare food (Mishnah Megillah

MISHNAH: If a stick used to stir olives⁵ has a knot at its top it is an object of impurity, otherwise it is impervious to impurity. In any case it may be used on the Sabbath.

footnotes: ⁵ Before being taken to the olive press the olives were kept in vats to soften. The rods with which they were stirred were then examined for signs of oil sticking to them. If the rod simply is straight, it is an implement for the rules of the Sabbath but not for those of impurity. If the top has some outcropping and holes, looking like a knot, to collect the oil drops, it is a implement both for the Sabbath and because of impurity.

HALAKHAH: ⁵⁷ In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said, a stick which he prepared in order to check the olives. How did he know? If it was dirtied by fluid it was proof that the work of loading was completed; otherwise it was proof that the work of loading was not completed⁵. Rebbi Mana said to him, Samuel only stated that he was fishing out olives with it⁵⁸. A stick which one prepared to close the window, should we say that he closes with it if it was tied and hanging, otherwise he may not close with it⁵⁹? “Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, if it is prepared even if it is neither tied nor hanging.” Did not Rebbi Joḥanan say, Ḥilfai pulled me and showed me a bolt of the House of Rebbi tied but not hanging⁶⁰ 10 (Note 131).? Rebbi Yudan said, since he removed it and took it into his hand it becomes similar to a key⁶¹.

footnotes: ⁵⁷ This paragraph refers to Mishnah 3. ⁵ Before being taken to the olive press the olives were kept in vats to soften. The rods with which they were stirred were then examined for signs of oil sticking to them. If the rod simply is straight, it is an implement for the rules of the Sabbath but not for those of impurity. If the top has some outcropping and holes, looking like a knot, to collect the oil drops, it is a implement both for the Sabbath and because of impurity. ⁵⁸ The modified rod is a implement, usable on the Sabbath and subject to impurity, if used for any purpose, not necessarily checking for softness. ⁵⁹ Probably this is a text which appears in Babylonian sources (Babli 126a, Tosephta 14:3) as: “A stick which the home owner prepared to open or lock with, he uses to lock if it was tied and hanging (cf. Note 9), otherwise he may not use it. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, if it is prepared even if it is neither tied nor hanging.” ⁶⁰ Therefore certainly not both requirements are necessary. The same text appears again in the discussion of Mishnah 7 and in Eruvin ⁶¹ Which routinely is removed from the door. Therefore practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel.

MISHNAH: All implements may be taken on the Sabbath except for the large saw and the blade of the plough⁶. All implements may be taken whether for a need or not for a need; Rebbi Nehemiah says, they may be taken only for a need⁷.

footnotes: ⁶ Work tools which are expensive to replace cannot be taken for other uses. Since the intended use is forbidden on the Sabbath, they cannot be used on the Sabbath. ⁷ They can be moved either because the implement is needed or because it stands at a place which is needed for other things.

HALAKHAH: Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Nehemiah who said, “they may be taken only for a need.⁶²” Rebbi Joḥanan and the rabbis there. One said, for a need, for a need of itself; not for a need, not for a need of itself. Rebbi Nehemiah says, they may be taken only for a need of itself. But the other said, for a need, for a need of itself or of its place; not for a need, not for a need of itself or of its place. Rebbi Nehemiah says, they may be taken only for a need of itself or of its place⁶³. It was stated⁶⁴ 1:11, but where it is only agreed that full containers can be moved for a need.: Rebbi Jehudah said, the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel did not disagree that one moves full [containers] for no need and about empty [containers] which he intended to fill. Where did they disagree? About those which he has no intention to fill, where the House of Shammai prohibit and the House of Hillel permit. Does the House of Shammai come to parallel Rebbi Nehemiah? You say, practice follows Rebbi Nehemiah, but practice does not follow the House of Shammai⁶⁵.

footnotes: ⁶² Since the discussion in the Babli 124a concentrates on interpreting R. Nehemiah’s opinion, it seems that the Babli agrees with this Babylonian statement. ⁶³ Babli 124a. ⁶⁴ A similar statement (by Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel instead of R. Jehudah) is in Tosefta Yom Ṭov ⁶⁵ If the “need” referred to by R. Nehemiah were only the use of the object itself then one would have to conclude that R. Nehemiah follows the teachings of the House of Shammai, which could not define practice in the presence of a contrary statement of the House of Hillel. It follows that R. Nehemiah accepts moving implements not only for a need of themselves but also to remove any item, which in itself could not be moved, if the place where it was standing was needed.

MISHNAH: Of all implements which may be taken on the Sabbath their breakage also may be taken as long as they are for some use: pieces from a trough to cover the top of an amphora, and of glass to cover the mouth of a phial. Rebbi Jehudah says, only if they can be used similarly to their original use: pieces from a trough to pour pap into them, and of glass to pour olive oil into them.

HALAKHAH: ⁶⁶“Glass to scrape the head of the weaver’s beam.” And here, you are saying so? Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Maisha, Rebbi Cohen in the name of the rabbis of Caesarea: Here if it is thick, there if it is sharp. Some want to say, here about moving, there about bringing out.

footnotes: ⁶⁶ This is from Chapter 8, Notes 108–110.

MISHNAH: If the stone in a gourd-bottle⁸ on the Sabbath, it may be used only if the stone becomes part of the gourd as implement that in normal use will not fall from the gourd. does not fall out when used to fill, one may fill with it; otherwise one may not fill with it. If a piece of vine is tied to a pail⁹ one may use it to draw water on the Sabbath.

footnotes: ⁸ A large gourd which has been hollowed out and is used to draw water from a cistern. Since the gourd is light, it cannot be lowered into the water without ballast. If the ballast is a stone, which is not an implement and in itself would be muqṣeh ⁹ The window is a narrow cleft through which the wind blows. R. Eliezer considers the shutters as part of the house; he requires them to be part of the house at the beginning of the Sabbath. “Hanging” means that when not used as shutters they do not touch the ground. The anonymous majority considers them to be implements, not parts of the building.

HALAKHAH: We have stated⁶⁷: “and a stone contained in it.” In the House of Rebbi it was stated, “and food and a stone contained in it⁶⁸.” Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph and Rebbi Joḥanan disagreed. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph as our Mishnah, Rebbi Joḥanan as stated by the House of Rebbi⁶⁹. The Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “If the stone in a gourd-bottle⁸ on the Sabbath, it may be used only if the stone becomes part of the gourd as implement that in normal use will not fall from the gourd. does not fall out when used to fill, one may fill with it.⁷⁰” Since it is squeezed in it it is like its body⁷¹ bottle.. The final clause disagrees with Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph: “otherwise one may not fill with it.⁷²” Rebbi Yudan said, since it is used as ballast, one carries the gourd on the stone. What does Rebbi Joḥanan do with this? He carries the gourd itself⁷¹ bottle.. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “A person may carry his son with a stone in his hand, a basket and a stone in it,⁷³” and in the House of Rebbi it was stated, “and food and a stone contained in it.” Rebbi Cohen in the name of the rabbis there: they treated a baby like food⁷⁴. There they are saying: they made the stone in the hand of the baby like an expert amulet in the hand of the baby⁷⁵.

footnotes: ⁶⁷ As explained later, this is a quote from Mishnah 21:1. One may move a basket even though it only contains a stone which in itself could not be moved. ⁶⁸ They disagree and hold that a stone in a basket makes the basket like a stone. Only if the basket contains something which may be moved then the stone may be disregarded. ⁶⁹ This also is reported in the Babli 142a as R. Joḥanan’s opinion. ⁸ A large gourd which has been hollowed out and is used to draw water from a cistern. Since the gourd is light, it cannot be lowered into the water without ballast. If the ballast is a stone, which is not an implement and in itself would be muqṣeh ⁷⁰ Mishnah 6. Since the gourd may be moved when it is empty except for the stone in it, why may one not move a basket with only a stone in it? ⁷¹ If the stone does not fall out when the gourd is tilted to be filled with water it is safely lodged in the gourd’s wall and is part of the gourd qua ⁷² Mishnah 17:5 seems to contradict Mishnah 21:1. ⁷¹ If the stone does not fall out when the gourd is tilted to be filled with water it is safely lodged in the gourd’s wall and is part of the gourd qua ⁷³ Mishnah 21:1. It now becomes a problem, why do the rabbis of the House of Rebbi permit a baby to be carried with a stone in his hand but not a basket containing only a stone? ⁷⁴ Since one may move a loaf of bread with a stone placed on it, one also may move a baby with a stone in his hand. ⁷⁵ The stone is necessary to act as a pacifier; it is no different from a toy or a charm.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Eliezer says, if the window plug⁹ is connected and hanging one may plug with it, otherwise one may not plug with it. But the Sages say, in any case one may plug with it. All implement covers which have handles may be taken on the Sabbath. Rebbi Yose said, when has this been said? Covers of the ground¹⁰. But covers of implements in any case may be taken on the Sabbath.

footnotes: ⁹ The window is a narrow cleft through which the wind blows. R. Eliezer considers the shutters as part of the house; he requires them to be part of the house at the beginning of the Sabbath. “Hanging” means that when not used as shutters they do not touch the ground. The anonymous majority considers them to be implements, not parts of the building. ¹⁰ If produce is stored underground, it can be accessed on the Sabbath only if its cover is made for easy removal; otherwise the cover would become part of the soil and the removal would be digging. But covers of implements certainly are more usable than broken implements; if broken implements can be used then so much more whole covers.

HALAKHAH: ⁷⁶ 10 (ז), where it is the discussion of Mishnah 10 (in the independent Mishnah mss., Mishnah 11) that a “dragged bolt”, one which has no knob at the end which would turn it into a tool, may be used in the Temple on the Sabbath but not outside, but R. Jehudah says one lying on the ground, not connected to the door, may be used in the Temple and the dragged one everywhere. It is obvious that the prohibition is rabbinic. What is a dragged bolt? Rebbi Joḥanan said, tied but not hanging. Rebbi Joḥanan said, Ḥilfai pulled me and showed me a bolt of the House of Rebbi tied but not hanging⁶⁰ 10 (Note 131).. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the single opinion here is parallel to the anonymous one there, and the anonymous there to the individual here⁷⁷ parallels that of R. Eliezer in Mishnah 7 here; that of the Sages here corresponds to R. Jehudah’s opinion there. Since practice is supposed to follow the anonymous opinion in the Mishnah, Rebbi in formulating the Mishnah text intentionally refrained from defining practice.. Rebbi Yose asked before Rebbi Jeremiah: how does one act in actuality? He said to him, since Rebbi Joḥanan said, Ḥilfai pulled me and showed me a bolt of the House of Rebbi tied but not hanging, this implies that one acts following Rebbi Jehudah . There came Rebbi Huna in the name of Rebbi Samuel, practice follows Rebbi Jehudah⁷⁸ (nor in the text quoted by Raviah §390) and here is a marginal gloss by a different hand; it should be deleted since it interrupts R. Jeremiah’s statement., except that it be tied to the door⁷⁹.. Rebbi Yannai [the father-in-law of]⁸⁰; the addition is necessary since the R. Yannai lived two generations before R. Immi and cannot have spoken in the latter’s name. In the Babli 102a the statement appears in the name of Babylonian authorities. Rebbi Immi said, only if it is tied to the door by something which can fasten it. Rebbi Eleazar’s bolt was tied with bast⁸¹ 102a, Rashi explains following Rav Hai Gaon: “the bolt fell and stuck in the ground” (cf. Otzar ha-Gaonim, vol. 3, p. 103). It also is possible to read the word as Arabic قمز “to take something with one’s fingers”, that the bolt is removed from the door but still held in by the fingers and not deposited anywhere.. If it was detached it is forbidden; loose⁸¹ 102a, Rashi explains following Rav Hai Gaon: “the bolt fell and stuck in the ground” (cf. Otzar ha-Gaonim, vol. 3, p. 103). It also is possible to read the word as Arabic قمز “to take something with one’s fingers”, that the bolt is removed from the door but still held in by the fingers and not deposited anywhere.? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of the rabbis, he supports⁸² text. מדדה is what a woman does when she helps her toddler to learn how to walk. The word written here מדרה has no explanation. it with his finger tips.

footnotes: ⁷⁶ This paragraph is copied from Eruvin ⁶⁰ Therefore certainly not both requirements are necessary. The same text appears again in the discussion of Mishnah 7 and in Eruvin ⁷⁷ The anonymous opinion in Eruvin ⁷⁸ This sentence is not in Eruvin ⁷⁹ But it may lie on the ground. This can be read into R. Jehudah’s statement in Eruvin ⁸⁰ Added from Eruvin ⁸¹ The translation follows Liebermann, p. 202. In the parallel in the Babli, Eruvin ⁸¹ The translation follows Liebermann, p. 202. In the parallel in the Babli, Eruvin ⁸² The translation follows the Eruvin

“All implement covers,” etc.⁸³ is a copy from the text here even though the preceding paragraph clearly is copied from there. If the header is added in error then the reference is to the statement in Mishnah Eruvin 9(10), where R. Yose asserts that a key-bolt is a tool and may be moved on the Sabbath, a statement compatible with that of R. Jehudah in Mishnah 10(11). Abba bar Cahana, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav, practice follows Rebbi Yose.

footnotes: ⁸³ This header does not belong to the text of the mss. but is an added gloss. If it is genuine, the statement is about Mishnah 8 and the text in Eruvin