If one finds tefillin [in the field, in a place where they are not guarded (against defilement)], he brings them in, pair by pair, [one (phylactery) on his head and one on his arm, as he wears them during the week, this being a "pair." And he keeps on returning and bringing in pairs until he has brought them all in. He holds that the mitzvah of tefillin obtains on Shabbath, but that the sages decreed against it (wearing tefillin on Shabbath) lest the strap tear and he carry them (in a forbidden domain) in his hand. And if he wears more than one pair, he transgresses the prohibition of adding to the mitzvoth, so that they become like a (forbidden) burden.] R. Gamliel says: Two (pairs) by two. [R. Gamliel holds that the mitzvah of tefillin does not obtain on Shabbath, and that the rabbis permitted "rescuing" them, for they are regarded as ornaments. Therefore, two pairs at a time may be brought in, two pairs being ornamental. For we learned that there is room on the head for two phylacteries, and so long as it is ornamental it is permitted. And there is no transgression of the prohibition of adding to the mitzvoth here, for there is no mitzvah of tefillin at all (on Shabbath), but (they are regarded as) habiliments in general. The halachah is not in accordance with R. Gamliel.] When is this so? With old ones, [where the knot is recognizable as a tefillin knot, in which instance they are (known to be) holy objects, which may not be left in a place of (possible) defilement.], but with new ones, he is exempt. [He does not desecrate the Sabbath for their sake to bring them in, for they might only be an amulet. They possess holiness only when they are made according to the halachah for the sake of the mitzvah (of tefillin). If he found (many) coupled sets or [many (individual phylacteries)] together, he waits over them [guarding them] until it gets dark, when he brings [all of them] in [together. This, when they are so many that if he brought them in pair by pair he would not be able to bring all of them in by nightfall. (For if they could be brought in pair by pair by nightfall, that is what he does, as stated above)]. And in time of danger [i.e., when the ruling powers decreed against wearing tefillin], he covers them and goes on. [Our Mishnah is defective. This is what was taught: "When is this so? In a time of danger of shmad (religious persecution). But if he is afraid to stay there because of robbers, he carries them less than four cubits at a time."]

R. Shimon says: He gives them to his friend, and his friend to his friend until he reaches the outer courtyard (of the city), [and he does not carry them less than four cubits at a time when he is afraid of robbers — a decree lest he carry them from the beginning of four cubits to the end. The halachah is in accordance with R. Shimon.] And thus with his son, [whose mother bore him in the field on Shabbath — he gives him to his friend, etc. This is preferable to carrying him four cubits at a time.] He gives him to his friend, and his friend to his friend, even a hundred. R. Yehudah says: A man gives a jug to his friend, and his friend to his friend, even outside the tchum. [The jug in this instance is hefker (ownerless), for if it belonged to someone, the ruling is that a beast and vessels are "as the feet of the owners." And R. Yehudah holds that articles of hefker do not acquire "resting."] They said to him ["They" here refers to R. Yochanan b. Nuri, who says that articles of hefker acquire "resting" in their place]: This (the jug) may not travel farther than the feet of its owner. [That is, if it had an owner who did not make an eruv it could travel only two thousand cubits; so, now, too, it may travel only two thousand cubits from the place of its resting. The halachah is in accordance with R. Yehudah.]

If one were reading a scroll [(All of their books were rolled up like our Torah scrolls)] on the lower door-sill, [which is a karmelith], and it unraveled from his hand, he may roll it back to himself [since one end was in his hand]. If he were reading on top of a roof and the scroll unraveled from his hand — As long as it has not reached the ten [lower] tefachim [close to the ground of the public domain], he turns it over on the writing, [the letters facing the wall, so that it not be overtly demeaned, and he leaves it there until dark. For if the end were not in his hand, he would be in transgression of a Torah prohibition (if he picked it up), and "the end in his hand" is decreed against by reason of "the end not in his hand." The gemara asks: "But it did not come to rest!" That is, even though it reached the ten lower tefachim there is no Torah prohibition here, even if the end were not in his hand, for it did not come to rest in the public domain. And it answers: We are speaking of an instance in which the wall is slanted and the scroll came to rest upon the wall projection of the lower ten tefachim, which is tantamount to its resting in the public domain, so that if the end were not in his hand and he brought it back, he would be liable by Torah law.] R. Yehudah says: Even if it were only a needle's-distance from the ground, he rolls it back to himself. [Our Mishnah is defective. It was taught thus: If it reached ten tefachim from the ground, he turns it over on the writing. When is this so? With a slanted wall, where it has come to rest. But with a wall that is not slanted, he rolls it back. These are the word of R. Yehudah, who says that even if it is only a needle's-distance from the ground, he rolls it back to himself, resting on an object being required (for liability).] R. Shimon says: Even if it were on the ground itself, he rolls it back to himself, for nothing proscribed by reason of shvuth (Sabbath resting) overrides (the sanctity of) the holy scriptures, [as in this instance, when the end is in his hand and he transgresses only rabbinical "shvuth" if he comes to roll it back. For he is not liable by Torah law unless the scroll leaves his hand entirely and comes to rest in the public domain and he comes to remove it from the public domain and place it in the private domain. The halachah is not in accordance with R. Shimon.]

A ziz [stone or wood projecting from the wall over the public domain, higher than ten tefachim above the ground of the public domain] — they [those in the upper storey] may place (objects upon it) and take from it on Shabbath, [for the air (i.e., the atmosphere) of the public domain reaches only up to ten tefachim. And it is only breakable vessels, like cups and flasks, that may be placed there, but not unbreakable ones, lest they fall into the public domain and come to be retrieved.] One may stand in a private domain and move (an object) in the public domain, [i.e., He may stand in his house or on the roof and take an object in the public domain and put it down elsewhere in the public domain, even though his head and most of his body are not in the public domain in the place of the object, and we do not decree (against this) lest he come to take it in], and he may stand in the public domain and move (an object) in a private domain, so long as he does not remove it from the four cubits [in which it was lying.]

One may not stand in a private domain and urinate into the public domain, [for he thereby "carries" from the private domain to the public domain. And if he did so, he is liable for a sin-offering. And even though picking up (an object) from a place four by four tefachim is required (for liability), urine and spittle are regarded as resting in a place four by four.], (and one may not stand) in the public domain and urinate into a private domain. Likewise, he may not spit (from one domain to another). R. Yehudah says: Also, if his spittle become "dislodged" in his mouth, [i.e., if it became a bolus and turned about in his mouth], he may not walk four cubits without expectorating. [The halachah is not in accordance with R. Yehudah.]

One may not stand in a private domain and drink in the public domain, or in the public domain and drink in a private domain, unless he brings his head and most of his body into the place where he drinks. [This, when he drinks with vessels of which he has need — a decree lest he come to bring them in (to his domain). But with vessels which he has no need of, it is permitted, even if he does not bring his head and most of his body into the domain (of the water)]. Likewise, with a vat (for wine-pressing), [vis-à-vis the tithe (ma'aser). If his head and most of his body are in the vat, he drinks without tithing, this being "casual" (as opposed to "fixed") drinking, but outside the vat, he is not permitted to drink without tithing, this being "fixed" drinking.] One may receive (water) from a mazcheilah (a roof-gutter) [It is called "mazcheilah," for anything which "crawls" along a wall or on the ground is called "zochel," viz. (Deuteronomy 32:24): "zochalei afar" ("crawlers in the dust")] below ten tefachim [It is understood thus: One may stand in the public domain and receive (water) from the mazcheilah in a vessel (which is held) less than ten tefachim (from the ground of the public domain. ("receive":) specifically, as explained in the gemara. But he may not press his mouth or a vessel to a mazcheilah which is less than three tefachim from the roof, even if it is less than ten tefachim (from the ground of the public domain). For since it runs all along the wall and is less than three tefachim from the roof, it is regarded as the roof, and it ("pressing," etc.) would constitute carrying from the roof, a private domain, to the public domain.]; and he may drink from a pipe in any event. [That is, whether "receiving" or "pressing," for a pipe always projects out into the public domain. (The gemara qualifies this as referring to a pipe which is not four by four tefachim, and so, not a domain unto itself.)]

A well in the public domain and its chuliah (its surrounding diggings) ten tefachim high — it is permitted to draw (water) from it through a window overlooking it on Shabbath. [Since the chuliah is ten tefachim high, and it is ruled that higher than ten tefachim is not a public domain but a makom p'tur ("a place of exemption"), it is permitted to draw water from it through the window above it on Shabbath. For this constitutes taking from a private domain to a private domain through a makom p'tur. And even if the well is four tefachim removed from the wall of the window, it is permitted to draw water through it, for the public domain does not intervene between the well and the window when he draws water from it, but only a makom p'tur. [Likewise,] (a mound of) refuse in the public domain, ten tefachim high — it is permitted to spill water upon it through a window overlooking it on Shabbath. [For it (the refuse mound) is a private domain, and we do not fear lest the refuse mound be reduced to less than ten tefachim and he come to spill (water) upon it as before. This, only with a public refuse mound, which is not likely to be removed; but with a private mound, which is likely to be removed, it is forbidden to throw (refuse) there on Shabbath, for we fear that he might remove it and render it a public domain.]

A tree which bends over the ground, [i.e., whose boughs incline downwards all around] — if its boughs are not three tefachim above the ground, it is permitted to carry beneath if. [For since its boughs are not three tefachim above the ground, they are regarded as attached to the ground, and are, therefore, like partitions, for which reason it is permitted to carry beneath it. In any event, the space between the boughs and the ground must be filled with straw and stubble or the like, and the boughs must be tied so that they not be moved by the wind. For any partition that cannot withstand a normal wind is not a partition. And one may carry there only (the distance of) beth sa'atayim (seventy cubits and a remnant). For within any partition whose purpose is for "space" — that is, to guard the space of the fields and the vineyards, but not to dwell in — it is permitted to carry only beth sa'atayim.] If its roots are three tefachim above the ground, he may not sit upon them, [it being forbidden to make use of a tree (on Shabbath) — a decree, lest he come to tear from it. But if they are not three tefachim high, they are like the ground, and it is permitted to sit upon them.] The door of the muktzeh, [a space behind the houses, the door of which is not set in a socket, like other doors, but which stands against the opening, and is placed upon the ground when it is removed], and thorns in [i.e., filling] a breach, and [reed] mats — it is forbidden to close (the opening) with them unless they are above the ground. [All of these are not tied and not fixed in place, but when one comes to open (the enclosure), he places them on the ground. For this reason, he does not replace them, this giving the impression of "building" (a forbidden Sabbath labor) — unless they are above the ground, in which instance the impression of "building" is not given, and he may close (the space) with them.]

One may not stand in a private domain and open in the public domain [He may not stand in a private domain and take the key lying in the public domain and open the door of the shop situated in the public domain, even if there are not four cubits from the place of the key to the door — a decree, lest he take the key to himself (in the private domain)]; (he may not stand) in the public domain and open in a private domain, unless he makes a partition ten tefachim high [and stands within it and opens and closes.] These are the words of R. Meir. They said to him: Did it not happen in the market of the "fatters" [butchers who fatten animals for slaughtering] in Jerusalem that they would lock (the doors) and leave the key on the window over the door! [The rabbis understood R. Meir as saying that just as one may not stand in a private domain and open in the public domain, etc., so he may not stand in a karmelith and open in a private domain, or in a private domain and open in a karmelith. For this reason they query him from the (instance of) the market of the fatters" in Jerusalem, which was a karmelith. (Since its doors were locked at night, it is not called a public domain), and the window on which the key was placed was a private domain, notwithstanding which they stood in the karmelith and opened in the private domain. The halachah is not in accordance with R. Meir, neither in the public domain nor in a karmelith.] R. Yossi says: It was a market of wool-sellers.

A door-bolt [stuck into the walls or the door-sill to lock the door], on whose end there is a fastening contrivance [i.e., whose end is thick and round like a pomegranate and made like a pestle, suitable for pounding pepper] — R. Eliezer forbids (using) it (on Shabbath), and R. Yossi permits it. [Even though it has the status of a vessel, R. Eliezer forbids it unless it is tied and hanging on the door. The halachah is in accordance with R. Yossi.] R. Eliezer said: It happened in a synagogue in Tiberias that they treated it as permitted, until R. Gamliel and the elders came and forbade it to them. R. Yossi says: They treated it as forbidden, until R. Gamliel and the elders came and permitted it to them.

A "dragging" door-bolt [one which is tied to the door but which does not hang upon it, the rope which is tied to it being long, so that the door-bolt drags on the ground. We are speaking here of a door-bolt without a fastening contrivance on the end, for if it has such a contrivance, R. Yossi (above) permits it, even if it is not tied (to the door), and the halachah is in accordance with him] — it may be used for locking (doors) in the Temple, [for it (the prohibition) is one of shvuth alone. He does not "build" per se, since it is tied. But because it drags (and does not hang from the door), it seems like building, and there is no shvuth in the Temple.] And one that lies (on the ground), [not being tied at all], is forbidden in both places, [being "building" per se.] R. Yehudah says: One that lies (on the ground) is permitted in the Temple, [R. Yehudah holding that it is not "building" per se, but only gives the appearance of building, and in the Temple they did not decree by reason of shvuth], and a dragging one [is permitted even] outside the Temple, [since it is tied, though it does not hang (from the door). The halachah is in accordance with R. Yehudah.]

The lower pivot [of a door (of a chest)] may be returned in the Temple, [for so long as the upper did not come out, it is easy to return it and there is no "building."], but not outside the Temple, [a decree, lest he hammer it back, a (forbidden) labor.] But if the upper (also came out), it is forbidden in both places. [For when the upper comes out, it (the door) falls, and it (returning the pivot) is like building.] R. Yehudah says: The upper (may be returned even) in the Temple, [there being "no 'building' with vessels," and only shvuth obtaining, and shvuth not being decreed against in the Temple.], and the lower (may be returned even) outside the Temple. [The halachah is not in accordance with R. Yehudah.]

A retiyah (a poulticed bandage) is replaced in the Temple [If a Cohein had to minister on Shabbath, and he removed the retiyah covering a wound on his hand, so that it not intervene between his flesh and the (objects of his) ministration, he may return it to its place after the service. For if he were not permitted to do this, he would not minister], but not outside the Temple, [a decree lest he smear the poultice and be liable by reason of "scraping."] And, ab initio, [i.e., If it had not been tied on before, and the Cohein had not removed it for purposes of the service], it is forbidden in both places. [And we do not say in this instance that there is no shvuth in the Temple, for it does not serve a Higher need, but a personal need. And the rabbinical interdict against replacing the retiyah obtains only if it had been spread out on the ground. But if he took it in his hand, so long as it is in his hand, or even if he placed it atop a vessel and did not spread it out on the ground, he is permitted to replace it everywhere.] A string [of a lute for Levitical song, which broke on Shabbath] may be tied in the Temple, but not outside it. [He holds that mitzvah "enablers," which could not have been provided the day before (it having broken on Shabbath) override the Sabbath. This, only if it broke in the middle, in which instance only a temporary knot is made; but close to the bases, where the knot is permanent, it is forbidden.] And ab initio, [where it had never been there, when it could have been provided the day before], it is forbidden in both places. A wart may be cut in the Temple, but not outside it. And if with an instrument, it is forbidden in both places. [A wart is a blemish in kodshim (consecrations), viz. (Leviticus 22:22): "…or a wart, etc.", and it may be cut in the Temple by hand, this entailing only shvuth, it not being the normal manner (of removing it). But not with an instrument, this being a clear (forbidden) labor, it being the normal manner (of removal). And cutting a wart from an animal is a toldah (derivative labor) of shearing wool.]

If a Cohein had a sore on his finger, he may wrap bast around it, [even though it heals the sore. Since at the moment it is a requirement for the service, it being unseemly for the sore to be visible during the service, it may be covered with bast.] (He may wrap bast around it) in the Temple, but not outside it, [healing on Shabbath being shvuth, and forbidden.] And if to remove blood, [i.e., tightening the bast to remove blood], it is forbidden in both places, [this being (the proto-labor) "chovel" (making a wound), and a proto-labor was not permitted in the Temple.] Salt may be crushed [and spread out] upon the ramp [leading up to the altar], so that they not slip, [for it was smooth, and sometimes they slipped and fell upon it.], but not outside it, [this constituting "repairing."] It is permitted to draw water on Shabbath from "the well of the exile" and from "the great well," [which were found in the chambers of the Temple court] with a wheel [made for raising the pail with ropes. It is only with these two wells that this was permitted, but with others, it was forbidden — a decree lest one draw water for his garden and for his dry land on Shabbath, the task being made easier (by the wheel). And in a place where there are no grounds for such a decree, it is permitted to draw water with a wheel. And we are not apprehensive as to the wheel's producing a sound, only musical sound production being forbidden (on Shabbath). Along the same lines, it is permitted to knock on the door or the gate on Shabbath.], and (it is permitted to draw water) from "the kar well" on a festival. [Because it was a spring-well, they called it "the kar well," as in "makor" ("source"). This well was needed by the men of the exile on a festival, and the prophets among them, Chaggai and Zechariah, permitted their drawing water from it by wheel. And their permit remained in effect, allowing them to do so even outside the Temple on a festival, as opposed to (the ruling for) other spring-wells.]

If a sheretz (an unclean creeping thing) were found in the Temple, the Cohein removes it with his belt [on Shabbath, without apprehension of tiltul (forbidden moving) on Shabbath, there being no shvuth in the Temple.], in order not to keep tumah (uncleanliness) in the Temple. These are the words of R. Yochanan b. B'roka. [Even though he thereby renders his belt, which is kodesh (consecrated) unclean, it is preferable to keeping the tumah in the Temple court while looking for wooden tongs. And the Cohein does not touch it with his hands, so that he himself does not become unclean. He holds it in his belt, not touching it. The sheretz does not render unclean the one who carries it; the belt, which becomes unclean through the sheretz, does not render the Cohein unclean when he holds it. For the belt is of first-degree uncleanliness, and men and vessels acquire uncleanliness only through av hatumah (proto-uncleanliness)]. R. Yehudah says: (He removes it) with wooden tongs, [flat wooden vessels, which do not acquire uncleanliness] in order not to increase tumah, [i.e., (in order not) to render unclean the belt, which is clean. It is better to keep the sheretz there and to look for the tongs than to increase uncleanliness. The halachah is in accordance with R. Yehudah.] From where is it taken out? From the heichal (the hall containing the golden altar), the ulam (the entrance hall), and between the ulam and the altar. These are the words of R. Shimon b. Naness. [But if he found it in the azarah (the Temple court), he covers it with a p'sachter (a large pot) and leaves it until dark.] R. Akiva says: Wherever he incurs kareth (cutting-off) for [entering] wittingly [in a state of tumah] and a sin-offering for [entering] unwittingly [i.e., in all of the azarah], from there, it is taken out; and in all other places, a p'sachter [a copper pot] is placed upon it. [(the targum of "its pots" (Exodus 27:3) is "p'sachtravatei") to cover it until dark. The halachah is in accordance with R. Akiva.] R. Shimon says: A place that the sages permitted to you, they gave you of what is yours; for they permitted to you only what is (interdicted) by reason of shvuth. [R. Shimon differs from the first tanna (10:13), who says that a string may be tied (with a knot) in the Temple. R. Shimon holds that the string of a lute that snapped may be tied only with a bow, which is (otherwise) forbidden only by reason of shvuth, and by which (mode of tying) one will not come to transgress a Torah prohibition. But it is forbidden to tie it with a knot, for that might lead one to transgression of a Torah interdict. R. Shimon says to the first tanna: Do not wonder that I am stringent here and relatively lenient with respect to tchumin, saying (4:11) that even if one went fifteen cubits outside the tchum he may re-enter. For in respect to tchumin, "they gave you of what is yours," knowing that those fifteen cubits are not really outside the tchum. For we know that the surveyors, who place signs for the end of the tchum do not do so exactly at the end of two thousand cubits (but within that distance), because of those who err, not recognizing the signs, and sometimes going a little beyond the tchum and returning — for which reason I am lenient in respect to tchumin. But, in respect to tying a knot in the Temple, (since they permitted in the Temple only shvuth interdicts, but not Torah interdicts) — there, I rule stringently and say that they permitted only the tying of a bow, a shvuth interdict, but they did not permit the tying of a knot, which, in some instances, is forbidden by the Torah. The halachah is not in accordance with R. Shimon.]