מתני׳ הָרֵחַיִם שֶׁל פִּלְפְּלִין טְמֵאָה מִשּׁוּם שְׁלֹשָׁה כֵּלִים: מִשּׁוּם כְּלִי קִבּוּל, וּמִשּׁוּם כְּלִי מַתֶּכֶת, וּמִשּׁוּם כְּלִי כְּבָרָה.

The aforementioned pepper mill is a composite vessel, and each of its parts must be considered independently with respect to ritual impurity. It is susceptible to ritual impurity because of each of the three vessels of which it is comprised: It is susceptible to impurity because it is a wooden receptacle, it is susceptible to impurity because it is a metal vessel, and it is susceptible to impurity because it is a sieve.

גמ׳ תָּנָא: תַּחְתּוֹנָה – מִשּׁוּם כְּלִי קִבּוּל, אֶמְצָעִית – מִשּׁוּם כְּלִי כְּבָרָה, עֶלְיוֹנָה – מִשּׁוּם כְּלִי מַתֶּכֶת.

A Sage taught: The lower section of the mill is susceptible to impurity because it is viewed as a receptacle, since the ground pepper descends into it. The middle section is susceptible to impurity because it is a sieve, as it serves to filter the pepper. Finally, the upper part, in which the pepper is actually ground, is susceptible to impurity because it is a metal vessel. Although it is not a receptacle, it is nevertheless susceptible to impurity, since it is made of metal.

מתני׳ עֲגָלָה שֶׁל קָטָן טְמֵאָה מִדְרָס, וְנִטֶּלֶת בַּשַּׁבָּת, וְאֵינָהּ נִגְרֶרֶת אֶלָּא עַל גַּבֵּי כֵּלִים.

A child’s wagon, with which he plays and upon which he also sits, is susceptible to ritual impurity imparted by treading. It is considered a fixed seat of the child, so that if the child is a zav and he sits on the wagon, it contracts the ritual impurity imparted by the treading of a zav . And this wagon may be handled on Shabbat, as it is considered a vessel. And it may be dragged on the ground on Shabbat only upon cloth, a stone pavement, or the like, as otherwise it would create a furrow when dragged, and one would be liable due to the prohibited labor of plowing.

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כָּל הַכֵּלִים אֵין נִגְרָרִין, חוּץ מִן הָעֲגָלָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא כּוֹבֶשֶׁת.

Rabbi Yehuda says: For this reason, no vessels may be dragged on the ground on Shabbat except for a wagon, which is permitted because its wheels do not make a furrow in the ground but merely press the earth down. Since no earth is moved from its place, this is not considered digging or plowing on Shabbat.

גמ׳ עֲגָלָה שֶׁל קָטָן טְמֵאָה מִדְרָס – דְּהָא סָמֵיךְ עִלָּוֵיהּ. ״וְנִטֶּלֶת בַּשַּׁבָּת״ – מִשּׁוּם דְּאִיכָּא תּוֹרַת כְּלִי עֲלָהּ.

It is taught in the mishna that a child’s wagon is susceptible to ritual impurity imparted by treading. Why? It is because he leans on it. The mishna also teaches that this wagon may be handled on Shabbat. Why? It is because it has the status of a vessel, and one may handle a vessel on Shabbat.

״וְאֵינָהּ נִגְרֶרֶת אֶלָּא עַל גַּבֵּי כֵּלִים״. עַל גַּבֵּי כֵּלִים – אִין, עַל גַּבֵּי קַרְקַע – לָא, מַאי טַעְמָא – דְּקָא עָבֵיד חָרִיץ. מַנִּי – רַבִּי יְהוּדָה הִיא, דְּאָמַר: דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין מִתְכַּוֵּין אָסוּר.

The mishna further teaches that a child’s wagon may be dragged on Shabbat only upon cloth. The Gemara infers: Upon cloth, yes, it is permitted; but directly on the ground, no, it is not permitted. What is the reason for this halakha ? It is because he creates a furrow in the ground when he drags the wagon across it. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is this mishna? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who said: An unintentional act, i.e., a permitted action from which an unintended prohibited labor ensues on Shabbat, is prohibited, even though the person performing it does not have the prohibited labor in mind.

דְּאִי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן – הָאָמַר: דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין מִתְכַּוֵּין מוּתָּר. (דִּתְנַן), רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: גּוֹרֵר אָדָם מִטָּה כִּסֵּא וְסַפְסָל, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יִתְכַּוֵּין לַעֲשׂוֹת חָרִיץ.

As, if it were in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, didn’t he say: An unintentional act is permitted, since there was no intention to perform the prohibited action? As we learned explicitly in a mishna that Rabbi Shimon says: A person may drag a bed, a chair, or a bench on the ground, provided that he does not intend to make a furrow. Even if one forms a furrow unwittingly, he need one need not be concerned, as this was not his intention.

אֵימָא סֵיפָא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אֵין הַכֹּל נִגְרָרִין בַּשַּׁבָּת חוּץ מִן הָעֲגָלָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא כּוֹבֶשֶׁת, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁכּוֹבֶשֶׁת – אִין, אֲבָל חָרִיץ – לָא עָבְדָא.

The Gemara raises a difficulty: If so, say the latter clause of the mishna as follows: Rabbi Yehuda says: No vessels may be dragged on the ground on Shabbat except for a wagon, because it merely presses the earth down. This is not prohibited as plowing because it does not create a furrow. This indicates that a wagon may be dragged on the ground on Shabbat because, yes, it presses the earth down, but it does not make a furrow. Since it has already been established that the first section of the mishna is also in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, and there it appears that a wagon dragged along the ground makes a furrow, Rabbi Yehuda seems to contradict himself.

תְּרֵי תַּנָּאֵי וְאַלִּיבָּא דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה. הדרן עלך יום טוב

The Gemara answers: It must be explained that this is a dispute between two tanna’im who hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda but differ with regard to the content of that opinion. The first tanna holds that even a wagon makes a furrow, whereas the other tanna maintains in the name of Rabbi Yehuda that a wagon does not make a furrow.

מתני׳ אֵין צָדִין דָּגִים מִן הַבֵּיבָרִים בְּיוֹם טוֹב, וְאֵין נוֹתְנִין לִפְנֵיהֶם מְזוֹנוֹת,

One may not trap fish from their ponds on a Festival even with the intention of eating them, as this falls into the category of hunting, a type of labor that is not permitted on a Festival. Nor may one place food before them, as it is not his duty to feed them; rather, they maintain themselves by eating smaller fish or different types of algae that grow in the water.

אֲבָל צָדִין חַיָּה וָעוֹף מִן הַבֵּיבָרִין וְנוֹתְנִין לִפְנֵיהֶם מְזוֹנוֹת.

However, one may trap an animal or a bird from their enclosures [ beivarim ], as they are viewed as already captured, and therefore the action is not considered an act of hunting. And one may also place food before them as one does for other household animals.

רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: לֹא כָּל הַבֵּיבָרִין שָׁוִין. זֶה הַכְּלָל: כָּל

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Not all enclosures are identical with respect to the halakhot of hunting. This is the principle: With regard to any animal