מְשַׁלְּחִין כֵּלִים בְּיוֹם טוֹב, בֵּין תְּפוּרִין בֵּין שֶׁאֵינָן תְּפוּרִין אֲבָל לֹא סַנְדָּל הַמְסוּמָּר, וְלֹא מִנְעָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ תָּפוּר (בְּיוֹם טוֹב).

One may send garments as a gift on a Festival, whether they are sewn or whether they are not sewn, because any object fit for any use on a Festival may be sent as a gift. However, one may neither send a spiked sandal nor an unsewn shoe on a Festival, since using them is prohibited. Apparently, one may not wear a spiked sandal on a Festival.

בַּשַּׁבָּת מַאי טַעְמָא – דְּאִיכָּא כִּינוּפְיָא, בְּיוֹם טוֹב נַמִי – אִיכָּא כִּינוּפְיָא. תַּעֲנִית צִבּוּר אִיכָּא כִּינוּפְיָא, לִיתַּסַר! מַעֲשֶׂה כִּי הֲוָה – בְּכִינוּפְיָא דְּאִיסּוּרָא, הָכָא – כִּינוּפְיָא דְּהֶתֵּירָא הֲוָה.

The Gemara explains: What is the reason that The Sages prohibited wearing a spiked sandal on Shabbat? It is because there is an assemblage of people. On a Festival too, there is an assemblage of people. The Gemara asks: On a communal fast day, there is an assemblage of people; wearing a spiked sandal should be prohibited then, as well. The Gemara answers: When this incident occurred, it was on a day when there was an assemblage of prohibition, i.e., a day on which performing labor is prohibited. Here, a fast day, is a day when there is an assemblage of permission, a day on which performing labor is permitted, and the two are not comparable. However, extending the scope of commemorative decrees to apply to comparable situations, e.g., from Shabbat to the Festivals, is acceptable.

וַאֲפִילּוּ לְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶּן עֲקִיבָא דְּאָמַר: “לֹא אָסְרוּ אֶלָּא בַּיַּרְדֵּן, וּבַסְּפִינָה, וּכְמַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָיָה״, הָנֵי מִילֵּי – יַרְדֵּן, דְּשָׁאנֵי מִשְּׁאָר נְהָרוֹת, אֲבָל יוֹם טוֹב וְשַׁבָּת – כִּי הֲדָדֵי נִינְהוּ, דִּתְנַן: אֵין בֵּין יוֹם טוֹב לְשַׁבָּת אֶלָּא אוֹכֶל נֶפֶשׁ בִּלְבַד.

And this is true even according to the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Akiva, who said in the following case that a decree issued due to a specific set of circumstances is applied only to those specific circumstances. The ashes of the red heifer were once transported across the Jordan River in a boat. They only prohibited transporting the ashes of a red heifer in the Jordan River and in a boat, and like the incident that occurred. However, even according to this approach, which limits restriction, that applies only to the Jordan River and not to other rivers. This is because it is different from other rivers in several respects, e.g., width and depth. However, a Festival and Shabbat are similar to one another, as it was taught in the mishna: The halakhic difference between a Festival and Shabbat is only with regard to preparation of food.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא לְחַזֵּק, אֲבָל לְנוֹי – מוּתָּר. וְכַמָּה לְנוֹי? רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: חָמֵשׁ בָּזֶה וְחָמֵשׁ בָּזֶה, וְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא אָמַר: שֶׁבַע בָּזֶה וְשֶׁבַע בָּזֶה.

Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The Sages taught that a spiked sandal is prohibited only when the nails were placed in the sandal to strengthen its form; however, if they were placed in the sandal for beauty, it is permitted. The Gemara asks: And with how many nails is it considered to be for beauty? Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Five on this sandal and five on that one. And Rabbi Ḥanina said: Seven on this one and seven on that one.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְרַב שֶׁמֶן בַּר אַבָּא: אַסְבְּרָא לָךְ, לְדִידִי – שְׁתַּיִם מִכָּאן וּשְׁתַּיִם מִכָּאן וְאַחַת בְּתַרְסִיּוֹתָיו, לְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא – שָׁלֹשׁ מִכָּאן וְשָׁלֹשׁ מִכָּאן וְאַחַת בְּתַרְסִיּוֹתָיו.

Rabbi Yoḥanan said to Rav Shemen bar Abba: I will explain it to you: According to my opinion, when inserting nails for beauty, two are inserted from here, its outer side, one near the toes and one near the heel, and two are inserted from there, its inner side, one near the toes and one near the heel, and one is inserted on its straps; and for Rabbi Ḥanina, three from here, and three from there, and one on its straps.

מֵיתִיבֵי: סַנְדָּל הַנּוֹטֶה עוֹשֶׂה לוֹ שֶׁבַע, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי נָתָן. וְרַבִּי מַתִּיר בִּשְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֶה.

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita : For an uneven sandal, whose soles are not straight, one makes seven nails on the bottom to straighten it, and it is then permitted for use on Shabbat; that is the statement of Rabbi Natan. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits straightening the sandal with thirteen nails.

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא – הוּא דְּאָמַר כְּרַבִּי נָתָן, אֶלָּא רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּאָמַר כְּמַאן? הוּא דְּאָמַר כְּרַבִּי נְהוֹרַאי; דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי נְהוֹרַאי אוֹמֵר: חָמֵשׁ מוּתָּר, וְשֶׁבַע אָסוּר.

The Gemara notes: Granted, according to Rabbi Ḥanina, there is no problem, as he stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Natan. However, Rabbi Yoḥanan, in accordance with whose opinion did he state his opinion? Neither of the tanna’im agrees with his opinion. The Gemara answers: He stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Nehorai, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Nehorai says: With five nails inserted into the sole, it is permitted to go out into the public domain on Shabbat; and with seven nails, it is prohibited to go out into the public domain on Shabbat.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִיפָה לְרַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה: אַתּוּן תַּלְמִידֵי רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן – עֲבִידוּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, אֲנַן נַעֲבֵיד כְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא.

The Sage, Ifa, said to Rabba bar bar Ḥana: You, who are students of Rabbi Yoḥanan, act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan. We will act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina.

בְּעָא מִינֵיהּ רַב הוּנָא מֵרַב אַשִׁי: חָמֵשׁ מַהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲפִילּוּ שֶׁבַע מֻתָּר. תֵּשַׁע מַאי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲפִילּוּ שְׁמוֹנֶה אָסוּר.

Rav Huna raised a dilemma before Rav Ashi: With a sandal that has five nails inserted into the sole, what is the halakha with regard to going out into the public domain? He said to him: Even with seven nails it is permitted. He asked further: With nine, what is the halakha ? He said to him: Even with eight it is prohibited.

בְּעָא מִינֵיהּ הַהוּא רַצְעָנָא מֵרַבִּי אַמִי: תְּפָרוֹ מִבִּפְנִים מַהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מוּתָּר, וְלָא יְדַעֲנָא מַאי טַעְמָא.

That shoemaker raised a dilemma before Rabbi Ami: If one sewed the sole and attached it to the sandal from within, what is the halakha ? May he go out into the public domain after inserting nails into it? Rabbi Ami said to him: It is permitted, and I do not know the reason.

אָמַר רַב אַשִׁי: וְלֹא יָדַע מָר מַאי טַעְמָא? כֵּיוָן דִּתְפָרוֹ מִבִּפְנִים – הָוֵי לֵיהּ מִנְעָל. בְּסַנְדָּל – גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן, בְּמִנְעָל – לֹא גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן.

Rav Ashi said: And does the Master not know the reason? It is obvious. Since he sewed it from within, it is no longer a sandal, it is a shoe. With regard to a sandal, the Sages issued a decree; with regard to a shoe, the Sages did not issue a decree.

בְּעָא מִינֵיהּ רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר זַבְדָּא מֵרַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר אֲבִינָא: עֲשָׂאוֹ כְּמִין כְּלַבוּס מַהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מוּתָּר. אִיתְּמַר נַמִי, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: עֲשָׂאוֹ כְּמִין כְּלַבוּס – מוּתָּר.

Rabbi Abba bar Zavda raised a dilemma before Rabbi Abba bar Avina: If he shaped the nail like tongs [ kelavus ] by bending a nail with two sharp ends and sticking both ends into the sandal, what is the halakha ? May he go out into the public domain with it on Shabbat? He said to him: It is permitted. It was also stated that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: If he shaped it like tongs it is permitted.

אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: חִיפָּהוּ כֻּלּוֹ בְּמַסְמְרוֹת, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא קַרְקַע אוֹכַלְתּוֹ – מוּתָּר.

Rav Sheshet said: If he covered the entire sole in nails, so that contact with the ground will not wear it away, it is permitted to go out with that sandal on Shabbat, since it is no longer the spiked sandal with regard to which they issued a decree.

תַּנְיָא כְּוָותֵיהּ דְּרַב שֵׁשֶׁת: “לֹא יֵצֵא הָאִישׁ בְּסַנְדָּל הַמְסוּמָּר, וְלֹא יְטַיֵּיל מִבַּיִת לְבַיִת, אֲפִלּוּ מִמִּטָּה לְמִטָּה. אֲבָל מְטַלְטְלִין אוֹתוֹ לְכַסּוֹת בּוֹ אֶת הַכְּלִי וְלִסְמוֹךְ בּוֹ כַּרְעֵי הַמִּטָּה, וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹסֵר. נָשְׁרוּ רֹב מִמַּסְמְרוֹתָיו, וְנִשְׁתַּיֵּיר בּוֹ אַרְבַּע אוֹ חָמֵשׁ – מוּתָּר, וְרַבִּי מַתִּיר עַד שֶׁבַע. חִיפָּהוּ בְּעוֹר מִלְּמַטָּה וְקָבַע לוֹ מַסְמְרוֹת מִלְּמַעְלָה – מוּתָּר. עֲשָׂאוֹ כְּמִין כְּלַבוּס, אוֹ כְּמִין טַס, אוֹ כְּמִין יָתֵד, אוֹ שֶׁחִיפָּהוּ כּוּלּוֹ בְּמַסְמְרוֹת כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא קַרְקַע אוֹכַלְתּוֹ – מוּתָּר״.

It was taught in the Tosefta in accordance with the opinion of Rav Sheshet: A man may not go out with a spiked sandal, and may not walk with it even from house to house within his courtyard, and may not even walk from bed to bed within his house. However, since the decree was issued with regard to circumstances identical to a specific incident, it only applies to wearing the sandal. Therefore, one may carry the sandal to cover a vessel with it and to support the legs of the bed with it. And Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, prohibits using it for other purposes as well. If most of its nails fell out, and four or five remain in it, it is permitted to go out with it. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits going out into the public domain with the sandal, even if up to seven nails remain in it. If he covered it with leather from beneath the wood frame of the sandal and inserted nails into it from above, it is permitted. If he made the nail like a tong, or made one end flat like a platter [ tas ], or sharpened it like a peg, or covered it entirely with nails so that contact with the ground will not wear it away, it is permitted to go out with it.

הָא גּוּפָהּ קַשְׁיָא; אָמְרַתְּ “נָשְׁרוּ רֹב מַסְמְרוֹתָיו״ – אַף עַל גַּב דְּנִשְׁתַּיְּירוּ בֵּיהּ טוּבָא, וַהֲדַר תָּנֵי: “אַרְבַּע אוֹ חָמֵשׁ״ – אִין, טְפֵי – לָא!

The Gemara analyzes the Tosefta cited in support of Rav Sheshet’s opinion. This Tosefta itself is difficult, as it is self-contradictory. On the one hand you said: If most of its nails fell out it is permitted; apparently, that is the halakha even though many nails remain in the sole. And, however, subsequently it was taught in the Tosefta, without specifying the number of nails that were there from the outset: With four or five nails, yes, going out is permitted; however, with more nails, no, it is prohibited.

אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: לָא קַשְׁיָא; כָּאן – שֶׁנִּגְמְמוּ, כָּאן – שֶׁנֶּעֶקְרוּ.

Rav Sheshet said: This is not difficult, and it can be resolved as follows: Here, where it was permitted to go out wearing the sandal if the majority of nails fell out, it is referring to a case where they were broken, i.e., the heads of the nails were broken off while most of the nail remained embedded in the sole. In that case, it is clearly evident that most of the nails fell out. Here, where it was permitted only if four or five nails remain, it is referring to a case where they were totally removed and only the nails that remain in the shoe are visible.

“אַרְבַּע אוֹ חָמֵשׁ״ מוּתָּר. הָשְׁתָּא חָמֵשׁ שְׁרֵי, אַרְבַּע מִיבָּעֲיָא?! אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: אַרְבַּע מִסַּנְדָּל קָטָן, וְחָמֵשׁ מִסַּנְדָּל גָּדוֹל.

The Gemara continues its detailed analysis of the Tosefta : It was taught that if most of the nails in the sandal came out and only four or five nails remain, it is permitted to go out wearing it. The Gemara asks: Now, if it was mentioned that when five nails remain, going out is permitted, is it necessary to mention four? Rav Ḥisda said that the Tosefta means: If four nails remain from the nails in a small sandal, and if five nails remain from the nails in a large sandal, going out is permitted.

וְרַבִּי מַתִּיר עַד שֶׁבַע. וְהָתַנְיָא: רַבִּי מַתִּיר עַד שְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֶה! נוֹטֶה שָׁאנֵי,

It was taught in the Tosefta : And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits up to seven. The Gemara asks: Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that for a sandal with an uneven sole, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permits up to thirteen? The Gemara answers: An uneven sole is different. Since the nails are inserted for the purpose of straightening the sole, it does not have the legal status of a spiked sandal.

הָשְׁתָּא דְּאָתֵית לְהָכִי – לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן נַמִי לָא קַשְׁיָא, נוֹטֶה שָׁאנֵי.

The Gemara notes: Now that you have arrived at this new explanation that a sandal with an uneven sole has a different legal status, for Rabbi Yoḥanan, who stated, contrary to the opinions of the tanna’im in this baraita , that the number of nails permitted in each sandal is five, this baraita is also not difficult. He could explain that a sandal with an uneven sole is different and requires additional nails. However, in the case of a sandal with an even sole, even the other tanna’im would not permit that many.

אָמַר רַב מַתָּנָה, וְאָמְרִי לָהּ אָמַר רַב אַחַדְבוֹי בַּר מַתָּנָה אָמַר רַב מַתָּנָה: אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. פְּשִׁיטָא, יָחִיד וְרַבִּים הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּים! מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: מִסְתַּבְּרָא טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּהָא, קָא מַשְׁמַע לָן.

Rav Mattana said, and some say Rav Aḥadvoi bar Mattana said that Rav Mattana said: The halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, who completely prohibited moving a spiked sandal. The Gemara asks: That is obvious. Isn’t there a halakhic principle that in a dispute between an individual and the many, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of the many? The Gemara answers: Lest you say that the rationale for the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, is more reasonable in this case, and therefore the halakha should be ruled in accordance with his opinion. Rav Mattana teaches us that that is not the halakha .

אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא אִי לָאו דְּקָרוּ לִי “בַּבְלָאי שָׁרֵי אִיסּוּרֵי״ שָׁרֵינָא בֵּיהּ טוּבָא. וְכַמָּה? בְּפוּמְבַּדִיתָא אָמְרִין: עֶשְׂרִין וְאַרְבַּע, בְּסוּרָא אָמְרִין: עֶשְׂרִין וְתַרְתֵּין. אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: וְסִימָנָיךְ – עַד דַּאֲתָא מִפּוּמְבַּדִיתָא לְסוּרָא, חֲסַר תַּרְתֵּי.

Rabbi Ḥiyya said: If not for the fact that they would call me: Babylonian who permits prohibitions, I would permit the insertion of many nails into a spiked sandal. The Gemara asks: And how many nails would he have permitted? In Pumbedita they said: Twenty-four nails. In Sura they said: Twenty-two. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: And this is your mnemonic to remember which opinion was stated in Sura and which opinion was stated in Pumbedita: Until Rabbi Ḥiyya came from Pumbedita to Sura he lost two nails from his shoe. Since the route that Rabbi Ḥiyya took from Pumbedita to Eretz Yisrael passed through Sura, one could say: Due to the rigors of the journey, two nails fell from the sandal of Rabbi Ḥiyya between Pumbedita and Sura.

“וְלֹא בַּיָּחִיד בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵין בְּרַגְלוֹ מַכָּה״.

It was taught in the mishna: And he may not go out with a single sandal when there is no wound on his foot.