דַּהֲוָה שָׁקֵיל שְׁמָא דְּלָא מְקַבֵּל שׁוּחֲדָא. בָּעוּ לְאַחוֹכֵי בֵּיהּ; אַעַיְילָא לֵיהּ שְׁרָגָא דְּדַהֲבָא, וְאַזּוּל לְקַמֵּיהּ, אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: בָּעֵינָא דְּנִיפְלְגִי לִי בְּנִכְסֵי דְּבֵי נַשֵּׁי. אֲמַר לְהוּ: פְּלוֹגוּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ, כְּתִיב לָן: בִּמְקוֹם בְּרָא בְּרַתָּא לָא תֵּירוּת. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִן יוֹמָא דִּגְלֵיתוּן מֵאַרְעֲכוֹן אִיתְנַטְלִית אוֹרַיְיתָא דְּמֹשֶׁה, וְאִיתְיְהִיבַתְּ עָווֹן גִּלְיוֹן, וּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ: בְּרָא וּבְרַתָּא כַּחֲדָא יִרְתוּן.

who disseminated about himself the reputation that he does not accept bribes. They wanted to mock him and reveal his true nature. She privately gave him a golden lamp, and she and her brother came before him, approaching him as if they were seeking judgment. She said to the philosopher: I want to share in the inheritance of my father’s estate. He said to them: Divide it. Rabban Gamliel said to him: It is written in our Torah: In a situation where there is a son, the daughter does not inherit. The philosopher said to him: Since the day you were exiled from your land, the Torah of Moses was taken away and the avon gilyon was given in its place. It is written in the avon gilyon : A son and a daughter shall inherit alike.

לְמָחָר הָדָר עַיֵּיל לֵיהּ אִיהוּ חֲמָרָא לוּבָא. אֲמַר לְהוּ: שְׁפֵילִית לְסֵיפֵיהּ דְּעָווֹן גִּלְיוֹן וְכָתַב בֵּיהּ: אֲנָא לָא לְמִיפְחַת מִן אוֹרַיְיתָא דְּמֹשֶׁה אֲתִיתֵי [וְלָא] לְאוֹסְפֵי עַל אוֹרַיְיתָא דְּמֹשֶׁה אֲתִיתֵי. וּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ: בִּמְקוֹם בְּרָא בְּרַתָּא לָא תֵּירוּת. אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: נְהוֹר נְהוֹרִיךְ כִּשְׁרָגָא! אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: אֲתָא חֲמָרָא וּבָטַשׁ לִשְׁרָגָא.

The next day Rabban Gamliel brought the philosopher a Libyan donkey. Afterward, Rabban Gamliel and his sister came before the philosopher for a judgment. He said to them: I proceeded to the end of the avon gilayon , and it is written: I, avon gilayon , did not come to subtract from the Torah of Moses, and I did not come to add to the Torah of Moses. And it is written there: In a situation where there is a son, the daughter does not inherit. She said to him: May your light shine like a lamp, alluding to the lamp she had given him. Rabban Gamliel said to him: The donkey came and kicked the lamp, thereby revealing the entire episode.

“וּמִפְּנֵי מָה אֵין קוֹרִין כו׳״. אָמַר רַב: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בִּזְמַן בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ, אֲבָל שֶׁלֹּא בִּזְמַן בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ – קוֹרִין. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ שֶׁלֹּא בִּזְמַן בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ אֵין קוֹרִין. אִינִי?! וְהָא נְהַרְדְּעָא אַתְרֵיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל הֲוָה, וּבִנְהַרְדְּעָא פִּסְקֵי סִידְרָא בִּכְתוּבִים בְּמִנְחֲתָא דְּשַׁבְּתָא! אֶלָּא, אִי אִיתְּמַר הָכִי אִיתְּמַר; אָמַר רַב: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בִּמְקוֹם בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ, אֲבָל שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹם בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ – קוֹרִין.

We learned in the mishna: And why does one not read the Writings on Shabbat? Due to suspension of Torah study in the study hall. Rav said: They only taught that it is prohibited to read from the Writings on Shabbat during the hours of study in the study hall; but when it is not during the hours of study in the study hall, one may read them. And Shmuel said: Even when it is not the hours of study in the study hall one may not read from the Writings on Shabbat. The Gemara asks: Is that so? Wasn’t Neharde’a Shmuel’s place where he was the rabbi of the town, and in Neharde’a they concluded their regular weekly discourse with Writings on Shabbat afternoon. Rather, if a dispute was stated in this matter, it was stated as follows: Rav said: It was only taught that there is a prohibition in a place where there is a study hall nearby that people can attend; but not in a place where there is a study hall, one may read Writings.

וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: בֵּין בִּמְקוֹם בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא בִּמְקוֹם בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ, בִּזְמַן בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ – אֵין קוֹרִין, שֶׁלֹּא בִּזְמַן בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ – קוֹרִין. וְאָזְדָא שְׁמוּאֵל לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּבִנְהַרְדְּעָא פָּסְקִי סִידְרָא דִּכְתוּבִים בְּמִנְחֲתָא דְּשַׁבְּתָא.

And Shmuel said: Whether it is in the place of the study hall or it is not the place of the study hall, one may not read anywhere when it is during the hours of study in the study hall; but when it is not during the hours of study in the study hall, one may read. And Shmuel follows his line of reasoning stated elsewhere, as in Neharde’a they would conclude their studies with Writings on Shabbat afternoon.

רַב אַשִׁי אָמַר: לְעוֹלָם כְּדַאֲמַרַן מֵעִיקָּרָא, וּשְׁמוּאֵל כְּרַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה. דְּתַנְיָא: אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ אֵין קוֹרִין בָּהֶן – אֲבָל שׁוֹנִין בָּהֶן וְדוֹרְשִׁין בָּהֶן, נִצְרַךְ לְפָסוּק – מֵבִיא וְרוֹאֶה בּוֹ. אָמַר רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה: מִפְּנֵי מָה אָמְרוּ, כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ אֵין קוֹרִין בָּהֶן – כְּדֵי שֶׁיֹּאמְרוּ: בְּכִתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ אֵין קוֹרִין, וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן בְּשִׁטְרֵי הֶדְיוֹטוֹת.

Rav Ashi said: Actually, the dispute is as we stated initially, and Shmuel said what he said in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya. As it was taught in a baraita : Although the Sages said with regard to sacred writings that they may not be read on Shabbat, one may study the midrash on them and teach them before the congregation; if one requires a verse that is written in the Writings, he brings a book and looks in it. Rabbi Neḥemya said: Why did they say that sacred writings are not read on Shabbat? So that people will say: Sacred writings may not be read, all the more so that is the case with ordinary documents, i.e., contracts and letters. If so, according to Rabbi Neḥemya, reading any sacred writings on Shabbat is prohibited so that people will refrain from reading non-sacred documents on Shabbat. It was not prohibited to encourage attendance the study hall. Shmuel himself does not hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya.

מתני׳ מַצִּילִין תִּיק הַסֵּפֶר עִם הַסֵּפֶר. וְתִיק הַתְּפִילִּין עִם הַתְּפִילִּין, וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּתוֹכָן מָעוֹת. וּלְהֵיכָן מַצִּילִין אוֹתָן? לְמָבוֹי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְפוּלָּשׁ, בֶּן בְּתֵירָא אוֹמֵר: אַף לַמְּפוּלָּשׁ.

One may rescue the casing of a Torah scroll from a fire on Shabbat together with the Torah scroll, and the casing of phylacteries along with the phylacteries, even if they have money inside them. And to where may one rescue them? Into an alley that is closed, which, if it is surrounded on three sides, is considered to be a private domain by Torah law. Ben Beteira says: Even into an open alley.

גמ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בַּשַּׁבָּת מַפְשִׁיטִין אֶת הַפֶּסַח עַד הֶחָזֶה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: מַפְשִׁיטִין אֶת כּוּלּוֹ. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה – דְּהָא אִיתְעַבִיד לֵיהּ צוֹרֶךְ גָּבוֹהַּ. אֶלָּא לְרַבָּנַן – מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: דְּאָמַר קְרָא “כֹּל פָּעַל ה׳ לַמַּעֲנֵהוּ״. וְהָכָא, מַאי ‘לַמַּעֲנֵהוּ׳ אִיכָּא? רַב יוֹסֵף אָמַר: שֶׁלֹּא יַסְרִיחַ. רָבָא אָמַר: שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ קָדְשֵׁי שָׁמַיִם מוּטָּלִין כִּנְבֵלָה.

Apropos the mishna, the Gemara cites that which the Sages taught in a baraita : If the fourteenth of Nissan occurs on Shabbat, and the Paschal lamb is offered but not roasted until Shabbat ends, one flays the Paschal lamb up to the breast to enable removal of the parts of the animal that are offered on the altar on Shabbat. One flays the rest of the animal after Shabbat. Further skinning is only to facilitate eating the animal, therefore, it does not override Shabbat; this is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka. And the Rabbis say: One flays it in its entirety. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, who said one may flay only part of the animal, the halakha is understandable. Since it has already been used for its divine purpose of having its blood sprinkled on the altar, the animal no longer should be flayed. But according to the Rabbis, what is the reason for their opinion? Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The verse states, “All that the Lord has made is for His sake” (Proverbs 16:4), meaning that a prohibited action is only permitted if its performance honors God. The Gemara asks: And here, what manifestation of for His sake is there in flaying the remaining hide from the Paschal lamb? Rav Yosef said: The Rabbis permitted removing the entire hide so that the sacrifice will not putrefy. Rava said: The Rabbis permitted removing the entire hide so that the sacred sacrifices will not be left in disgrace like a half-stripped animal carcass left unattended.

מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ: דְּמַנַּח אַפְּתוֹרָא דְּדַהֲבָא, אִי נַמִי – יוֹמָא דְּאָסְתָנָא. וְרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה, הַאי “פָּעַל ה׳ לַמַּעֲנֵהוּ״ מַאי עָבֵיד לֵיהּ? שֶׁלֹּא יוֹצִיא אֶת הָאֵימוּרִין קוֹדֶם הַפְשָׁטַת הָעוֹר. מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב נָתָן: מִשּׁוּם נִימִין.

The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between them? The Gemara answers: There is a practical difference between them when the Paschal lamb is laid on a golden table. In this case, there is indeed a concern that the carcass will putrefy, although there is no element of disgrace. Alternatively, there is a practical difference on a day with a cold northern wind. In this case, there is no concern that it will putrefy but there is a concern of disgracing the sacrifice. The Gemara asks: And what does Rabbi Yishamel, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, do with the verse, “All that the Lord has made is for His sake”? The Gemara answers: He uses it to permit removing part of the hide, as if it was not for this verse, it would have been possible to remove the sacrificial parts offered on the altar before removing the hide by puncturing the hide of the animal and removing the fats through the opening. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that the Torah prohibited doing so? Rav Huna, son of Rav Natan, said: Because of the hairs, so that they do not become entangled in the sacrificial parts and distort them.

אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר מָר עוּקְבָא: מַאי אֲהַדַרוּ לֵיהּ חַבְרַיָּיא לְרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה – הָכִי קָאָמְרִי לֵיהּ: אִם מַצִּילִין תִּיק הַסֵּפֶר עִם הַסֵּפֶר – לֹא נַפְשִׁיט אֶת הַפֶּסַח מֵעוֹרוֹ? מִי דָּמֵי? הָתָם – טִלְטוּל, הָכָא – מְלָאכָה! אָמַר רַב אַשִׁי: בְּתַרְתֵּי פְּלִיגִי; פְּלִיגִי בְּטִלְטוּל, וּפְלִיגִי בִּמְלָאכָה. וְהָכִי קָאָמְרִי לֵיהּ: אִם מַצִּילִין תִּיק הַסֵּפֶר עִם הַסֵּפֶר – לֹא נְטַלְטֵל עוֹר אַגַּב בָּשָׂר?!

Rav Ḥisda said that Mar Ukva said: How did the members of the group respond to Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka? This is what they said to him: If one may save the casing of a Torah scroll along with the Torah scroll, why may one not strip the Paschal lamb of its skin? Here too, in the case of skinning the Paschal lamb, once part of the action is permitted one should be able to perform the entire act. The Gemara is surprised at this: Are they comparable? There, in rescuing the casing of the scroll, only moving is involved, which is prohibited by rabbinic law; whereas here, in the case of the Paschal lamb, the act of flaying is a prohibited labor by Torah law. Rav Ashi said: They are disagreeing with regard to two issues: They disagree with regard to moving the hide along with the flesh, and they disagree with regard to the labor of flaying the animal. And this is what they said to him: If one may rescue the casing of the Torah scroll along with the Torah scroll, will we not move the hide of the Paschal lamb together with the flesh of the sacrifice? The sacrifice should be moved with its skin so it does not putrefy.