אוֹכְלֵי בְּהֵמָה אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם תִּקּוּן כְּלִי.

Animal fodder, such as straw and reed branches, does not have any associated prohibition due to the preparing of a vessel. One may therefore trim it on Shabbat and use it as one wishes.

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַב כָּהֲנָא לְרַב יְהוּדָה: מְטַלְטְלִין עֲצֵי בְּשָׂמִים לְהָרִיחַ בָּהֶן, וּלְהָנִיף בָּהֶן לְחוֹלֶה, וּמוֹלְלוֹ וּמֵרִיחַ בּוֹ. וְלֹא יִקְטְמֶנּוּ לְהָרִיחַ בּוֹ, וְאִם קְטָמוֹ – פָּטוּר אֲבָל אָסוּר. לַחֲצוֹץ בּוֹ שִׁינָּיו – לֹא יִקְטְמֶנּוּ, וְאִם קְטָמוֹ – חַיָּיב חַטָּאת.

Rav Kahana raised an objection to Rav Yehuda from the following baraita : One may handle wood of a spice tree on Shabbat in order to smell them and to wave them before a sick person to fan him. And he may crush it between his fingers to release its fragrance, and he may smell it. However, he may not cut it from the branch in order to produce a moist spot on the branch that will emit a strong fragrance, so as to smell it; and if he did cut it, he is exempt from punishment according to Torah law, but it is prohibited to do so. If he intends to clean his teeth with it, he may not cut it, and if he did cut it, he is liable to bring a sin-offering for transgressing a prohibited labor on Shabbat. This indicates that although some wood of a spice tree was used as animal fodder, it is nevertheless prohibited to cut it. This appears to contradict Rav Yehuda.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָשְׁתָּא ״פָּטוּר אֲבָל אָסוּר״ קָא קַשְׁיָא לִי, חַיָּיב חַטָּאת מִבַּעֲיָא? אֶלָּא, כִּי תַּנְיָא הַהִיא – בְּקָשִׁין. קָשִׁין בְּנֵי מְלִילָה נִינְהוּ?

Rav Yehuda said to Rav Kahana: Now, even the statement exempt but prohibited poses a difficulty to my opinion, and it is not reasonable. Is it required to say the opposite, i.e., liable to bring a sin-offering? This teaching cannot be understood at face value; rather, it must be understood as follows: When that baraita was taught, it was referring to hard pieces of wood such as beams, with regard to which there is a concern that one might perform a prohibited labor. The Gemara questions this: And can hard branches be crushed by hand?

חַסּוּרֵי מְחַסְּרָא וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי: מוֹלְלוֹ וּמֵרִיחַ בּוֹ, קוֹטְמוֹ וּמֵרִיחַ בּוֹ. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים – בְּרַכִּין, אֲבָל בְּקָשִׁין – לֹא יִקְטְמֶנּוּ, וְאִם קְטָמוֹ – פָּטוּר אֲבָל אָסוּר. לַחֲצוֹץ בּוֹ שִׁינָּיו – לֹא יִקְטְמֶנּוּ, וְאִם קְטָמוֹ – חַיָּיב חַטָּאת.

The Gemara replies: The baraita is incomplete and is teaching the following: With regard to wood of a spice tree, one may crush it and smell it and cut it and smell it. In what case is this statement said? With regard to soft pieces of wood, but with regard to hard ones, one may not cut them. And if he did cut it he is exempt, but it is prohibited to do so. If he intended to clean his teeth with it, he may not cut it, and if he did cut it, he is liable to bring a sin-offering.

תָּנֵי חֲדָא: קוֹטְמוֹ וּמֵרִיחַ בּוֹ, תַּנְיָא אִידָךְ: לֹא יִקְטְמֶנּוּ לְהָרִיחַ בּוֹ. אֲמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא אֲמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: לָא קַשְׁיָא; הָא – בְּרַכִּין, הָא – בְּקָשִׁין.

Similarly, it is taught in one baraita : One may cut it and smell it, and it is taught in another baraita : One may not cut it to smell it. Rabbi Zeira said that Rav Ḥisda said: This is not difficult. In this case, when it is permitted, it is referring to soft wood. In that case, where the baraita prohibits it, it is referring to hard pieces of wood.

מַתְקִיף לָהּ רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב: בְּקָשִׁין אַמַּאי לָא? מַאי שְׁנָא מֵהָא דִּתְנַן: שׁוֹבֵר אָדָם אֶת הֶחָבִית לֶאֱכוֹל מִמֶּנָּה גְּרוֹגָרוֹת, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יִתְכַּוֵּין לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּלִי. וְעוֹד, הָא רָבָא בַּר רַב אַדָּא וְרָבִין בַּר רַב אַדָּא דְּאָמְרִי תַּרְוַיְיהוּ: כִּי הָוֵינַן בֵּי רַב יְהוּדָה, הֲוָה מְפַשַּׁח וְיָהֵיב לָן אַלְוָתָא אַלְוָתָא, אַף עַל גַּב דְּחַזְיָא לְקַתָּתָא דְּנַרְגֵי וַחֲצִינֵי.

With regard to the halakha itself, Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov strongly objects to this: With hard ones, why not? In what way is this case different from that which we learned in a mishna: A person may break a barrel in order to eat dried figs from it, provided that he does not thereby intend to make a vessel, and he may use the barrel afterward. Breaking off wood in order to smell it is certainly not more of a prohibited labor than breaking a barrel. And furthermore, it is Rava bar Rav Adda and Ravin bar Rav Adda, who both say: When we were at the house of Rav Yehuda, he would break and give us many sticks of wood of a spice tree, although they were hard enough to be fit for handles of axes and hatches.

לָא קַשְׁיָא; הָא – רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, הָא – רַבָּנַן. דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: נוֹטֵל אָדָם קֵיסָם מִשֶּׁלְּפָנָיו לַחֲצוֹץ בּוֹ שִׁינָּיו, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: לֹא יִטּוֹל אֶלָּא מֵאֵבוּס שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה. וְשָׁוִין שֶׁלֹּא יִקְטְמֶנּוּ, וְאִם קְטָמוֹ לַחֲצוֹץ בּוֹ שִׁינָּיו וְלִפְתּוֹחַ בּוֹ הַדֶּלֶת, בְּשׁוֹגֵג בַּשַּׁבָּת – חַיָּיב חַטָּאת, בְּמֵזִיד בְּיוֹם טוֹב – סוֹפֵג אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר.

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; this case is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, whereas that case follows the Rabbis. As it is taught in a baraita : Rabbi Eliezer says: On Shabbat or a Festival, a person may take a sliver of wood from before him to clean his teeth with it, and the Rabbis say: One may take a toothpick only from an animal’s trough; since it is fit for animal fodder, it is considered prepared for all purposes. And they agree that he may not pluck it. And if he did pluck it to clean his teeth with it or to use it as a key and open a door with it, if he did so unwittingly on Shabbat, he is liable to bring a sin-offering. If he did so intentionally on a Festival, he receives the forty lashes administered to one who desecrates the Festival by performing labor. These are the words of Rabbi Eliezer.

וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר דְּקָאָמַר הָתָם חַיָּיב חַטָּאת – הָכָא פָּטוּר אֲבָל אָסוּר, רַבָּנַן דְּקָא אָמְרִי הָתָם פָּטוּר אֲבָל אָסוּר – הָכָא מוּתָּר לְכַתְּחִלָּה.

And the Rabbis say: Both this and this, whether one did so on Shabbat or a Festival, even if he plucked it by hand to use it as a key, it is prohibited only due to a rabbinic decree. Therefore, Rabbi Eliezer, who states there that one who plucks a toothpick on Shabbat unwittingly in order to make a vessel such as a key is liable to bring a sin-offering, then here, in the case of one who cuts a sliver of wood in order to smell it, he is exempt, but it is prohibited. However, the Rabbis who state there, in the case of plucking a toothpick, that he is exempt but it is prohibited, then here, when one cuts a sliver of wood for purposes of smelling, it is permitted ab initio .

וְלֵית לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר הָא דִּתְנַן: שׁוֹבֵר אָדָם אֶת הֶחָבִית לֶאֱכוֹל מִמֶּנָּה גְּרוֹגָרוֹת, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יִתְכַּוֵּין לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּלִי? אָמַר רַב אַשִׁי: כִּי תַּנְיָא הַהִיא – בְּמוּסְתַּקִי.

The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Eliezer not accept this halakha that we learned in a mishna: A person may break a barrel in order to eat dried figs from it, provided that he does not thereby intend to make a vessel? This shows that if one does not intend to make a vessel, it is permitted ab initio ; whereas Rabbi Eliezer maintains that he is exempt, but it is prohibited. The Gemara answers: Rav Ashi said: When that baraita was taught, its lenient ruling was with regard to a vessel patched with pitch [ mustaki ], meaning a vessel that had previously been broken and its pieces glued together with pitch. If one breaks it for his own needs, he does not smash a complete vessel, and he is therefore not considered to have fashioned a vessel.

״וּמְגַבֵּב מִן הֶחָצֵר״. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מְגַבֵּב מִן הֶחָצֵר וּמַדְלִיק, שֶׁכָּל מַה שֶּׁבֶּחָצֵר מוּכָן הוּא, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה צִבּוּרִין צִבּוּרִין, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַתִּיר. בְּמַאי קָא מִפַּלְגִי? מָר סָבַר: מֶחֱזִי דְּקָא מְכַנֵּיף לְמָחָר וּלְיוֹמָא אַחֲרִינָא, וּמָר סָבַר: קְדֵרָתוֹ מוֹכַחַת עָלָיו.

§ It is taught in the mishna: And one may collect straw from the courtyard on a Festival. The Sages taught: One may collect materials from a courtyard and kindle a fire because everything in a courtyard is considered prepared, provided he does not arrange it in piles, and Rabbi Shimon permits it even in such a manner. The Gemara asks: With regard to what do they disagree; what is the basis of their dispute? One Sage, i.e., the Rabbis, who are stringent, holds: It looks as though he is collecting for tomorrow and another day, and it is therefore prohibited, so that one will not be suspected of preparing from a Festival to a weekday. And one Sage, Rabbi Shimon, holds: His pot proves his intention. When onlookers see that he is using the straw for cooking, they will not suspect him of preparing for after the Festival.

״אֵין מוֹצִיאִין אֶת הָאוּר״ וכו׳. מַאי טַעְמָא – מִשּׁוּם דְּקָא מוֹלִיד בְּיוֹם טוֹב.

§ It is taught in the mishna that one may not produce new fire on a Festival in any manner. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara explains: Because he creates something new on a Festival. This is similar to an act of creation, and it is therefore prohibited.

״וְאֵין מְלַבְּנִין אֶת הָרְעָפִים״. מַאי קָא עָבֵיד? אֲמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אֲמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הָכָא בִּרְעָפִים חֲדָשִׁים עָסְקִינַן, מִפְּנֵי

§ The mishna states that one may not whiten tiles by heating them, in order to roast food on them. The Gemara asks: What does one thereby do; since his intention is to prepare food, how does this differ from any other manner of roasting? Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Here we are dealing with new tiles, and it is prohibited because