תלמוד על שבת 21:1

“And are lifted by one and 100”. How do you treat it, as beginning of separation or end of separation²⁰Does it follow the rules of separation of heave (Terumot Chapter 1) or more lenient ones?? If you say as beginning of separation, no minor may lift²¹Mishnah Terumot 1:1., no unrelated person may lift²¹Mishnah Terumot 1:1., and it does not push away the Sabbath²²Mishnah Šabbat 2:6.. If you treat it as end of separation, a minor may lift, an unrelated person may lift, and it does push away the Sabbath. There we have stated²³Mishnah Šabbat 21:1. In Tosephta Šabbat 15:5, but not in the quote Babli Šabbat 142b, this is an anonymous statement.: “Rebbi Jehudah says, also one may lift dema‘ by one in a hundred.” On that, it was stated²⁴Tosephta Šabbat 15:5. There, and in the quote of the Tosephta in the Babli Šabbat 142b, the clause “if he wishes” is missing. In that version, R. Simeon ben Eleazar forbids lifting heave from dema‘ on the Sabbath except by mentally designating the part where the heave has to be lifted and eating the remainder, leaving the actual lifting to the time after the Sabbath.: “Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, if he wishes he earmarks part of it and eats the remainder.” Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Judah treated it as end of separation and Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar treated it as beginning of separation²⁵He holds with the Babli that R. Simeon ben Eleazar is restrictive where R. Jehudah is permissive.. Rebbi Yose said, even Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar treated it as end of separation²⁶He reads the Yerushalmi text of the Tosephta as not prescriptive.. Does not Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar agree that it is forbidden to do so with certain [produce]²⁷Since untithed produce is not legally edible, it cannot be used on the Sabbath and cannot be made usable on the Sabbath.? How is that? He should never do it on the Sabbath the way he does it on a weekday²⁸R. Simeon ben Eleazar does not disagree with R. Jehudah. R. Jehudah does not tell how dema‘ can be lifted on the Sabbath; R. Simeon suggests a way in which it can be done legally..

Where are we at? If he says it beforehand, the drink is mixed³⁶Since fluids move, if he declares the place of the heave at one moment, its molecules will have wandered away by the time he drinks, and he also drank of the heave, a deadly sin.. If he says, when I shall have drunk, before that he drank ṭevel³⁷If he declares after he drank, he drank only ṭevel.. What we are dealing with is that he says beforehand: When I shall have drunk³⁸He must make the declaration beforehand in order to avoid drinking ṭevel. On the other hand, he cannot designate heave before he finished, in order to avoid drinking heave. Hence, he has to designate heave on Friday to be separated after he finished drinking.. But does he then not move impure heave on the Sabbath³⁹Since he is eating at an am haäreẓ’s, all the food is considered impure. Hence, the heave also is impure and must be destroyed. But this cannot be done on the Sabbath; the impure heave is therefore of no use on the Sabbath and under the rules of muqẓeh cannot be moved.? Rebbi Eleazar said, he leaves some profane⁴⁰When he declares that the wine near the designated tithe should be tithe, he really does not want it to be all tithe but some drops of profane non-tithe must also remain. Since the profane wine may be moved, and since we have a principle that anything usable may be moved, the impure heave also can be moved., as what we have stated there⁴¹Mishnah Šabbat 21:1: “One moves impure heave with pure and with profane food.” It seems that the switch impure/pure in our text is a scribal error since the following argument requires the order of subjects in the Mishnah. In the parallel Pesaḥim 3:3 (fol. 30a), the quote of the Mishnah is correct. {Because of that switch, successive editors have mutilated the text in newer editions.}: “One moves pure heave with impure one and with profane food.” But that does not compare. There, the impure is for the needs of the pure⁴²There is no Yerushalmi on the Mishnah, and a parallel quote in Pesaḥim3:3 (fol. 30a) has exactly the same text. The explanation of the Yerushalmi seems to be the same as that of the Babli (Šabbat 142a), that impure heave can be moved on the Sabbath only if it is necessary to remove it in order to get at usable food, be it pure heave or profane., but here the profane is for the needs of the impure⁴³Hence, there is no need to move the impure heave and it should not be permitted.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, when he sets down the cup it will be holy⁴⁴Since we have to stipulate from the start that wine should become heave only when the guest has finished drinking, one may also stipulate that this should happen only when the guest has put down the cup and does not move it again. Then the question does not arise..

In Rebbi Eliezer’s opinion, should he not give it its name and then take it down⁸⁰Why does R. Eliezer require that the ḥallah remain in the oven (Note 67)?? It will be forbidden to move it⁸¹Since it is neither food nor implement, it is muqṣeh.. Then should he not take it down and then give it its name? Maybe he would forget and eat it. Should he not take it down, then give it its name, and with another piece put it in an isolated corner, following what we did state there, “one may move impure heave together with pure one or with profane food⁸²Mishnah Šabbat 21:1.”? It cannot be compared; there impure for the needs of pure⁸³It is permitted to move impure heave on the Sabbath only if this is needed to allow access to permitted items (Babli Šabbat 142a.), but here profane for the needs of impure. The colleagues asked, could he not throw it onto the garbage heap and then dedicate it⁸⁴Could one not remove some raw dough, throw in on the garbage heap (where it is abandoned and may be taken by scavengers). Since it no longer is his possession, he should not be concerned about it fermenting.? May a person dedicate what is not his⁸⁵If it is abandoned and no longer his property, it is not his dough anymore and cannot be declared as ḥallah.? Then could he not dedicate it and throw it on the garbage heap? Can a person declare ownerless something that is not his⁸⁶Since ḥallah is the Cohen’s property, he cannot declare it ownerless; even on the garbage heap it remains his property and he has sinned if it ferments there.?